Jim Phipps on Facebook

[Kev Gee]

So has WHF ignored everyone who has a different viewpoint to him on this thread yet?

Maybe if he ignores enough, he might actually believe that hes right all the time?

 

[Bartleby]

Try typing this in the Search bar at the top and then press the magnifying glass.

View attachment 14246

or use this url https://www.facebook.com/jimphipps and click the Follow,Follow,Follow button to keep abreast of his postings

 

[Revolution]

I suppose the remedy if a company looks remotely dodgy is to demand payment before you supply them with anything.

There is also legislation in the insolvency act to prevent abuse of the "phoenix company" procedure.

 

[Bladesway]

Clough did get a fair bit right, unfortunately his biggest hurdle was that he's a colossal bell-end.

Was he?

 

[Rodders]

Was he?

He wasn't?

 

[Sean Thornton]

McCabe has lost over £50m. The value of the club when the prince got involved may have been £20m at best. KM has GIVEN half the club to the prince in return from the prince investing over a period and developing the club from thereon in.

If the prince buys out KM before he achieves success then he will make more in due course.

Some think KM will hang in there until the prince multiplies his share and then he will sell. Chicken and the egg. Surely KM will just be tempted to bail out after all the abuse we see on here each day.

McCabe has written down

In my opinion woody the shares are worth whatever Mccabe and the prince agreed upon ,having put so much in I don't think the Mccabes
will have given up 50% cheaply.with the majority of shares in there hands the real value is not known.I have still got my shares in the club
but of no real value as basically Mccabe can name his own price I will keep them for the time being.

Sheffield United Ltd, formerly the Plc, has written down the value of Blades Leisure Ltd to £1 in the 2014 accounts. Looking at that balance sheet you are correct in saying your shares are currently of no real value. Although it owns the ground it also has outstanding debts of a similar value and during 2014 it's only income was rents and interest. The Prince has nothing to do with this company or its shareholding. Sheffield United Ltd is effectively owned by the Scarborough Group.

Blades Leisure ltd owns Sheffield United Football Club Limited lock stock and barrel. The Prince has paid £10 million for his shares so McCabe has "given" him nothing. What he's done is write down £37 million quids worth of debt to £10 million quids worth of shares and the balance put to a share premium account. Blades Leisure Ltd is owned 50/50 by SU Ltd and one of the Princes companies.

 

[PeteBlade]

He wasn't?

I'm sure he was.

 

[Balham]

A superficial reading of this would be that if you only spend 60% and don't spend 40% then that 60% becomes 100% doesn't it?

Genuine question.

Not for the first time I may have missed something.

Nope. If you don't spend the 40% then it goes towards your profit.

Take the following example (numbers made up but roughly based on United):

Turnover (income from gate receipts, sponsorship etc): £10m
Wages: £(6m)
Other operating expenses (utilities, rents): £(5m)
Operating loss: £(1m)

We'd only be spending 60% of turnover on wages but still losing money. The reality is that the gap at the bottom is actually £5m and that has to be filled somehow - this is where the Prince comes in.

Player sales are a little more complicated than you'd think. Every player we spend money on creates an asset with a value on the balance sheet. That balance is written off over the course of their contract: if we assume that Jamie Murphy cost £400k and signed a 4 year deal then every year they'll take an amortisation charge of £100k. Basically, that means that when we sold him [3 years later, for £1.75m] he was valued at £100k on the accounts so we'll recognised a "profit on disposal" of £1.65m.

My guess is that youth team players are held at nominal values, if you're interested.

 

[bricktop]

So if we are paying £5M a year in rent, which is pretty much half our turnover, who are we paying that £5m a year too?

Sounds like someone, somewhere is making a few bob out of us.

 

[Barney]

So if we are paying £5M a year in rent, which is pretty much half our turnover, who are we paying that £5m a year too?

Sounds like someone, somewhere is making a few bob out of us.

Does it begin with an M and end in an E?

 

[bricktop]

Does it begin with an M and end in an E?

Maybe William Henry Foulkes and Silent Blade will be along shortly to tell us........

 

[Barney]

Maybe William Henry Foulkes and Silent Blade will be along shortly to tell us........

You can be damn sure Sean Thornton won't be missing out either.

 

[Finnieston]

Give it a rest . the manager has been here 150 days, were sixth in the table.
what do you honestly want.....Weve all been in new jobs. 150 days to turn a complete staff around and win all the time ...........Come on..... i think your having a laugh.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Nope. If you don't spend the 40% then it goes towards your profit.

Take the following example (numbers made up but roughly based on United):

Turnover (income from gate receipts, sponsorship etc): £10m
Wages: £(6m)
Other operating expenses (utilities, rents): £(5m)
Operating loss: £(1m)

We'd only be spending 60% of turnover on wages but still losing money. The reality is that the gap at the bottom is actually £5m and that has to be filled somehow - this is where the Prince comes in.

Player sales are a little more complicated than you'd think. Every player we spend money on creates an asset with a value on the balance sheet. That balance is written off over the course of their contract: if we assume that Jamie Murphy cost £400k and signed a 4 year deal then every year they'll take an amortisation charge of £100k. Basically, that means that when we sold him [3 years later, for £1.75m] he was valued at £100k on the accounts so we'll recognised a "profit on disposal" of £1.65m.

My guess is that youth team players are held at nominal values, if you're interested.

Ok Ta

 

[alcoblade]

So if we are paying £5M a year in rent, which is pretty much half our turnover, who are we paying that £5m a year too?

Sounds like someone, somewhere is making a few bob out of us.

What about the "numbers are made up, but for example....." bit?

UTB

 

[Top Cat]

Got to love how "Other operating expenses (utilities, rents): £(5m)" they only see one word.

Can't cost much to heat, light and water Bramall Lane and Shirecliffe, can it?

 

[Silent Blade]

Maybe William Henry Foulkes and Silent Blade will be along shortly to tell us........

Tell you what? dont have a clue what you and Barny are on?

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Whenever the team isn't doing well discussion descends into this boring dross. I don't give two shits for a shite what the club's expenditure is and where it goes.

Just give me a winning football team ffs. How long have people been analsying the running of the club for now? I'm sick of hearing McCabe's name.

If people are talking about the boardroom it means the team are dog shit. Nothing worth looking at on the pitch so eyes look elsewhere. Boring!.....this club will never change.

 

[Sean Thornton]

You can be damn sure Sean Thornton won't be missing out either.

Im not going to apologise for pointing out the rather obvious fact that despite your laughable claim of insight into all aspects of the club you know virtually nothing, and continually seek to rely on "misunderstandings" of the subject matter when various posters highlight that ignorance.

£288k in rent in the last accounts turning into £5 million being the latest example of stupidity on here with you frotting round the poster claiming it just to blame McCabe. You really need to grow up.