For the absence of doubt, it is up to £500k, not £500k. World of difference. These things are nearly always written at the highest credible figure that it could get to in the worst case.
the loan is secured against future earnings (effectively). No security over the ground. At the meeting it was confirmed that if deal goes through, it will be converted into equity. Notwithstanding the legalese, the unanswered question is if the deal doesn't go through, what would be repayment terms then. Obviously we don't know whether this is a short term cash blip or a long term structural issue either.
The £700k debt re ibe is an intercompany debt between two trust owned entities - there is nothing owed by Liverpool or other third party as far as we can tell.
"Facility up to..." especially if its the one announced earlier isn't so alarming but is still a bad idea in my opinion. Can probably put this down to people involved thinking this would all have been settled by now.
If you have a situation where suppliers and staff are due more money than you have in the bank, @StrongestTeam, it doesn't strike me as a bad idea to borrow the money you need. What alternative would you suggest?
Indeed, as Stroud told you for a minimal fee. In the circumstances I cant tell whether that was the right thing to do or not. Seems like a red herring in the ownership debate though.
I'm not disputing we need finance, just we should all be mindful this is the exact same way Hayes got control, and the fact they have now a registered charge on the football club is a genuine cause for concern.
@DevC said:
How many alternative lenders do you think a loss making indebted football club has?
The same ones that did last year and the year before maybe. Id certainly look at cutting my cloth accordingly first, maybe having a four or five plan to get to break even, requesting volunteers, donations and the local people of the town , i had a thought that some group was offering that before asking me for money several times.
I dislike most of the Marlow lead sniping about character and intent but this loan is bad pr at best, potentially worse. One step from "its my money , don't worry about it".
@DevC said:
How many alternative lenders do you think a loss making indebted football club has?
The same ones that did last year and the year before maybe. Id certainly look at cutting my cloth accordingly first, maybe having a four or five plan to get to break even, requesting volunteers, donations and the local people of the town , i had a thought that some group was offering that before asking me for money several times.
I dislike most of the Marlow lead sniping about character and intent but this loan is bad pr at best, potentially worse. One step from "its my money , don't worry about it".
Have we not been doing precisely this for the last few years? Cutting to the bone, requesting volunteers, seeking donations from locals such as fans and local entrepreneurs. It's not working group is the general message I'm picking up.
Thats rather what I'm aluding to @EwanHoosaami , where did that go, hope it hasn't been ditched for a sniff of outside cash. It really wasn't long ago we were being told we were nearly there.
that was Andrew Howard as I understand it @StrongestTeam . he has decided enough is enough.
I agree it would be better if this wasn't required, for PR if nothing else. The Trust board arent stupid. I am sure they were not unaware that this would be used against them. it obviously was needed. Sometimes needs must.
@DevC said:
that was Andrew Howard as I understand it @StrongestTeam . he has decided enough is enough.
I agree it would be better if this wasn't required, for PR if nothing else. The Trust board arent stupid. I am sure they were not unaware that this would be used against them. it obviously was needed. Sometimes needs must.
You don't know that though. We should really be told if the budget is increasing significantly.
I really hope they haven't paid for the new rail seats that have just turned up on the website, great testing them in place of all seater stadiums but its not better than a terrace.
Extremely disappointing that we still haven't learned we cannot spend cash that we don't have.
And that the trust are trying to engineer any potential vote in their favour, whilst keeping the fans in the dark by using 'undisclosed' transfer fees.
I've decided not to read anything else on this thread until we see what is finally proposed. Pointless arguing and speculating about the detail upon which we are supposed to vote until it turns up.
basically we either vote it in or we don't have a club in the EFL. Its that black and white and anybody who was at Sunderland will realise this club and manager belong in the Football League, so lets stop sniping at the club as we obviously needed to pay the players etc and this was the only option.
oh dear...a long post from richie who makes his first ever positive post about the team and manager but follows up with support for the new owners as 'the only option'. It's that 'black and white' folks.
@Keith_Allens_Wig said:
Extremely disappointing that we still haven't learned we cannot spend cash that we don't have.
And that the trust are trying to engineer any potential vote in their favour, whilst keeping the fans in the dark by using 'undisclosed' transfer fees.
What is extremely disappointing is that people are so quick to criticise the club without first checking the facts.
It states quite clearly on the relevant thread that these seats aren’t costing the club anything and that the idea was discussed by the fans’ council before being implemented. It is also common practice for most clubs not to disclose transfer fees and even if WWFC did publish this information I fail to see what difference it would make to the fans. And don’t forget that the Trust board are also Wycombe fans.
@Wendoverman said:
oh dear...a long post from richie who makes his first ever positive post about the team and manager but follows up with support for the new owners as 'the only option'. It's that 'black and white' folks.
Comments
@StrongestTeam If the long link doesn't work, try this less direct one -
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05132509/filing-history
For the absence of doubt, it is up to £500k, not £500k. World of difference. These things are nearly always written at the highest credible figure that it could get to in the worst case.
the loan is secured against future earnings (effectively). No security over the ground. At the meeting it was confirmed that if deal goes through, it will be converted into equity. Notwithstanding the legalese, the unanswered question is if the deal doesn't go through, what would be repayment terms then. Obviously we don't know whether this is a short term cash blip or a long term structural issue either.
The £700k debt re ibe is an intercompany debt between two trust owned entities - there is nothing owed by Liverpool or other third party as far as we can tell.
@TrueBlu '£500k almost seems like a backhander or possibly bribery to me!!
You best all say yes. Then we aren’t saddled with another 500k of debt'
So you're saying...say yes to the blackmailer...or we'll owe them?
"Facility up to..." especially if its the one announced earlier isn't so alarming but is still a bad idea in my opinion. Can probably put this down to people involved thinking this would all have been settled by now.
If you have a situation where suppliers and staff are due more money than you have in the bank, @StrongestTeam, it doesn't strike me as a bad idea to borrow the money you need. What alternative would you suggest?
Not borrowing it from the "preferred" bidder.
This information definitely doesn't push me towards a yes vote.
How many alternative lenders do you think a loss making indebted football club has?
Sorry that went wrong - review spending Dev?
Indeed, as Stroud told you for a minimal fee. In the circumstances I cant tell whether that was the right thing to do or not. Seems like a red herring in the ownership debate though.
I'm not disputing we need finance, just we should all be mindful this is the exact same way Hayes got control, and the fact they have now a registered charge on the football club is a genuine cause for concern.
The same ones that did last year and the year before maybe. Id certainly look at cutting my cloth accordingly first, maybe having a four or five plan to get to break even, requesting volunteers, donations and the local people of the town , i had a thought that some group was offering that before asking me for money several times.
I dislike most of the Marlow lead sniping about character and intent but this loan is bad pr at best, potentially worse. One step from "its my money , don't worry about it".
Have we not been doing precisely this for the last few years? Cutting to the bone, requesting volunteers, seeking donations from locals such as fans and local entrepreneurs. It's not working group is the general message I'm picking up.
Thats rather what I'm aluding to @EwanHoosaami , where did that go, hope it hasn't been ditched for a sniff of outside cash. It really wasn't long ago we were being told we were nearly there.
Getting a loan from guys who "might" take over.
Seems legit
that was Andrew Howard as I understand it @StrongestTeam . he has decided enough is enough.
I agree it would be better if this wasn't required, for PR if nothing else. The Trust board arent stupid. I am sure they were not unaware that this would be used against them. it obviously was needed. Sometimes needs must.
You don't know that though. We should really be told if the budget is increasing significantly.
I really hope they haven't paid for the new rail seats that have just turned up on the website, great testing them in place of all seater stadiums but its not better than a terrace.
Extremely disappointing that we still haven't learned we cannot spend cash that we don't have.
And that the trust are trying to engineer any potential vote in their favour, whilst keeping the fans in the dark by using 'undisclosed' transfer fees.
The document tells us nothing we didn't already know, other than that the loan is less than or up to 500k
I've decided not to read anything else on this thread until we see what is finally proposed. Pointless arguing and speculating about the detail upon which we are supposed to vote until it turns up.
Not possibly bribery. Blatant bribery
basically we either vote it in or we don't have a club in the EFL. Its that black and white and anybody who was at Sunderland will realise this club and manager belong in the Football League, so lets stop sniping at the club as we obviously needed to pay the players etc and this was the only option.
oh dear...a long post from richie who makes his first ever positive post about the team and manager but follows up with support for the new owners as 'the only option'. It's that 'black and white' folks.
Black and White scarves out again on Saturday?
What is extremely disappointing is that people are so quick to criticise the club without first checking the facts.
It states quite clearly on the relevant thread that these seats aren’t costing the club anything and that the idea was discussed by the fans’ council before being implemented. It is also common practice for most clubs not to disclose transfer fees and even if WWFC did publish this information I fail to see what difference it would make to the fans. And don’t forget that the Trust board are also Wycombe fans.
What other options are there ???
There is no turning back from this. I encourage my sisters and brothers to think very carefullly.
1884
This is an excellent example of why Forum's and the majority of posters on them, don't run football league clubs.
most people on here couldn't run a bath !!!
you certainly can run amok