Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Nothing like the Glazers.If you'd read my post you might have noticed that they funded £16m to buy the club and put in £14m+ of equity-none of this involves borrowing against the assets of the club.As far as the loans go,of course they would hope to get that money back eventually,just as they would hope to get back (at least) the purchase price and equity. I'm afraid I don't buy your bit about common business practice.Name me the clubs that declare dividends-try the NPC and go back as far as you like.Your comment appeared to be specific to our club-if you could provide evidence to back up your claims,then you would be entitled to make them.In any event they would be more likely (in my opinion) to call for part loan repayment in preference to dividends,as the latter has tax implications. Thanks for the explanation. Can you direct me to the accounts thread you previously mentioned? + Are you arguing that it is not common business practice to pay ''salaries'' (I stated wages by mistake) and dividends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornwallRam Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Thanks for the explanation. Can you direct me to the accounts thread you previously mentioned? + Are you arguing that it is not common business practice to pay ''salaries'' (I stated wages by mistake) and dividends? [url= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Thanks for the explanation. Can you direct me to the accounts thread you previously mentioned? + Are you arguing that it is not common business practice to pay ''salaries'' (I stated wages by mistake) and dividends? I would,but poor Daveo would have kittens if you brought that thread back onto the front page.There is a search facility,as I recently found out. The contention I had was over the fact that you attached plurality to the statement on paid board members,and as I pointed out,we only had 1 paid director in 10/11.It may be common business practice to pay dividends (normally where profits-do you notice that word-allow),but football isn't a sector where this happens very often,so you could hardly say that the payment of dividends is common practice in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 [url= Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 I would,but poor Daveo would have kittens if you brought that thread back onto the front page.There is a search facility,as I recently found out. The contention I had was over the fact that you attached plurality to the statement on paid board members,and as I pointed out,we only had 1 paid director in 10/11.It may be common business practice to pay dividends (normally where profits-do you notice that word-allow),but football isn't a sector where this happens very often,so you could hardly say that the payment of dividends is common practice in this area. I by no means have read all the thread but this was interesting. ''Derby's wage bill for all members of the club's staff was reduced from £14.5m to £11.6m.'' Would it not be reasonable to assume that some (club staff) were directors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 ''Chief executive Tom Glick said: "We are in the same place in terms of third-party debt, which is a loan on the stadium and the property of £15m, and we have a season-ticket facility that has been in place for a number of years now. So between the two that puts us at £19m.'' Borrowing against assets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Because as shareholders and board members they are entitled to. Different shareholders have different intentions in which to seek a return on their investment. I would imagine that the capital was used to reduce or pay off certain loans that of course came with interest. The loan does not have to come from all investors/shareholders but does benefit all. There is a big difference to being entitled to wages/dividends and actually taking them as you stated in your opening post. Is it common practice? There have to be distributable reserves for shareholders to take dividends and as most clubs it would appear are loss making that would make it illegal for shareholders to take dividends. To compare our situation to the Glazers is the most ridiculous comment so far and doesn't even really even merit a response. Don't mean to sound rude but I think you should do at least a little bit of research before making such damning comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 I by no means have read all the thread but this was interesting. ''Derby's wage bill for all members of the club's staff was reduced from £14.5m to £11.6m.'' Would it not be reasonable to assume that some (club staff) were directors? Directors wages are stated separatley via note in the financial statements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 ''Chief executive Tom Glick said: "We are in the same place in terms of third-party debt, which is a loan on the stadium and the property of £15m, and we have a season-ticket facility that has been in place for a number of years now. So between the two that puts us at £19m.'' Borrowing against assets? The mortgage was already there on the ground before the owners/board came here, they have not re-mortgaged to finance the purchase which is what you were insinuating by comparing us to the Man Utd situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 I by no means have read all the thread but this was interesting. ''Derby's wage bill for all members of the club's staff was reduced from £14.5m to £11.6m.'' Would it not be reasonable to assume that some (club staff) were directors? As Ramblur pointed out the amount paid Directors (in the accounts for 10/11) was the same as the highest paid director so we had one paid director and seperated in the accoutns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 I by no means have read all the thread but this was interesting. ''Derby's wage bill for all members of the club's staff was reduced from £14.5m to £11.6m.'' Would it not be reasonable to assume that some (club staff) were directors? I concur with a reply already given. Having read a little of the thread myself,I'm relieved to say that I did mention the GSE management fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 There is a big difference to being entitled to wages/dividends and actually taking them as you stated in your opening post. Is it common practice? There have to be distributable reserves for shareholders to take dividends and as most clubs it would appear are loss making that would make it illegal for shareholders to take dividends. To compare our situation to the Glazers is the most ridiculous comment so far and doesn't even really even merit a response. Don't mean to sound rude but I think you should do at least a little bit of research before making such damning comments. LOL. Thanks for copying and pasting information about dividends from the web and slightly adjusting said information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 LOL. Thanks for copying and pasting information about dividends from the web and slightly adjusting said information. I work in finance for a living so didn't need to look at the web... but hey ho even if it was from the web it would show easy it is to obtain such information... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 What are we actually arguing about? Also, can Ramblur and GStar see each others posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 I concur with a reply already given. Having read a little of the thread myself,I'm relieved to say that I did mention the GSE management fee. was it mine - please say it was mine 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 What are we actually arguing about? Also, can Ramblur and GStar see each others posts? Whether the takeover was funded by new debt/whether the owners have (or are likely to) taken dividends/whether we've more than 1 paid director. Unless I've been wasting my time completely 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':rolleyes:' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 What are we actually arguing about? Also, can Ramblur and GStar see each others posts? I'm not arguing about anything. Stated that the video was going to be a load of rubbish based on claims made in the first 2 minutes. Then just informing the OP that his claims re the owners/board are ridiculous and ill informed. I can see Ramblurs posts but it appears I have been typing has he has replied! I might take a step back and leave him to it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 was it mine - please say it was mine 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> I'll give you that,on the grounds that you showed just 1 paid director. 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 The mortgage was already there on the ground before the owners/board came here, they have not re-mortgaged to finance the purchase which is what you were insinuating by comparing us to the Man Utd situation Thanks for the clarification, I was not aware of that. If you stated this sooner this would have been easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 Not got a copy of the accounts handy but off the top of my head the debt is made up roughly of:- Mortgage (£15 million) Loan secured against future season ticket sales (£4 million) Interest free loan from investors (£7 million) Interest bearing loan from investors (£2 million) I know the figures are not spot on but think they give a reasonable idea of our debt structure, over to Ramblur if you require more accurate figures I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.