GSE and the Owners; where do you stand?

[ramblur]

I said 2011 and 2012 as I was making the point that I don't remember £4.1m being paid in any year. Nor do I even know when the £4.1m or £15m was ever mentioned.

 

Only comment I would make on the debt is that I imagine that they probably treat their loan as equity as they probably have no intention of taking it out. Very contentious I know and even Rush/Vicars did not have an answer when asked why the 'investment' had changed from equity to debt.

 

Rush doesn't strike me as knowing, nor caring, too much about the financial side. On several occasions he said that the owners had invested £50 to £60million in the club and I am surprised nobody picked him up on this.

 

I'm not alleging that Gadsby knew anything at takeover, all I am alleging is that I think anyone who claims to love the club so much and want to be the saviour of it would have asked a few more questions than Peter Gadsby appears to have done.

 

You've not really answered point 3, it's a yes no answer and doesn't really require anybody else bringing into the equation.

I'm sure a selective memory can be very handy.

 

It must be a strange sort of loan 'equity' we have,that's able to change form from year to year.You're suggesting that in 10/11 it was equity,yet the following year it seems to have changed to debt.

 

Being a successful businessman doesn't imply any financial acumen.Adam Pearson is well respected within the game for his financial/investment knowledge.Charging him with the task of assessing potential investors should be better than Gadsby (or any other of the LOG) attempting to do it himself,particularly as AP was to become part of the new ownership grouping and as such had an obvious vested interest in who was brought on board.Nobody knows what questions any of the LOG asked AP,or what answers he may have given. 

[AndyB]

Hi Ramblur, good to see you back and on form! I hope you're OK and recovering well.

[ramblur]

Hi Ramblur, good to see you back and on form! I hope you're OK and recovering well.

Thanks Andy.So far so good and I've my first outpatients assessment later this week.There are certain things you shouldn't do following a hip op,and unfortunately Rams' goals put me at great risk of transgression!

[ladyram]

Thats something I forgot...someone asked Rush why he went on the radio saying NC would always be welcome at Pride Park even after sending him a letter saying that he was banned from the ground.

Rush did not even acknowledge the question and moved straight on to someone else, the guy who has asked the question consequently left the building!

Mmmm, that's interesting - I'd put money on that being true.

If it was untrue, Rush would have jumped up straight away and been emphatic in his denial, surely?

[AndyB]

You'd better try and keep calm Saturday then Ramblur, everyone's predicting a rout!

[G STAR RAM]

I'm sure a selective memory can be very handy.

It must be a strange sort of loan 'equity' we have,that's able to change form from year to year.You're suggesting that in 10/11 it was equity,yet the following year it seems to have changed to debt.

Being a successful businessman doesn't imply any financial acumen.Adam Pearson is well respected within the game for his financial/investment knowledge.Charging him with the task of assessing potential investors should be better than Gadsby (or any other of the LOG) attempting to do it himself,particularly as AP was to become part of the new ownership grouping and as such had an obvious vested interest in who was brought on board.Nobody knows what questions any of the LOG asked AP,or what answers he may have given.

Some would call it a selective memory, some would just acknowledge it is acceptable to not memorise every quote made by our owners over the last 5 years!

As for the loan v equity bit please don't put words in my mouth, I am not suggesting it 'changes form' just suggesting that that in the back of the owners minds it is equity that has been treated in the form of debt in the accounts for whatever reason. I was only trying to add balance to your allegation that they were trying to mislead fans over what the club owed at a certain point in time.

You seem very keen to blame Adam Pearson for LOGs failure to carry out any due diligence on the new owners promises I notice. Also you say he is very well respected within the game, who by just out of interest?

[G STAR RAM]

Mmmm, that's interesting - I'd put money on that being true.

If it was untrue, Rush would have jumped up straight away and been emphatic in his denial, surely?

I thought the same to be honest, however I do know he was at the Ipswich match.

The only thing I could think was that if NC his started legal proceedings against us for compensation then Rush will have been advised not to comment on the matter.

Rush had very little to say about NC, Gemmill was the only person who really spoke about him to say he did a good job but we lacked in the coaching department.

[ramblur]

Some would call it a selective memory, some would just acknowledge it is acceptable to not memorise every quote made by our owners over the last 5 years!

As for the loan v equity bit please don't put words in my mouth, I am not suggesting it 'changes form' just suggesting that that in the back of the owners minds it is equity that has been treated in the form of debt in the accounts for whatever reason. I was only trying to add balance to your allegation that they were trying to mislead fans over what the club owed at a certain point in time.

You seem very keen to blame Adam Pearson for LOGs failure to carry out any due diligence on the new owners promises I notice. Also you say he is very well respected within the game, who by just out of interest?

I wasn't putting words into your mouth at all.You put forward the suggestion,on behalf of the owners,that in 10/11 they were perhaps treating loan capital as equity when giving out debt figures.The following year,however,the figure given by Glick included loan capital as debt,thus if your suggestion were correct,it must have changed form (from perceived equity to perceived debt)in the administration's eyes.Or maybe it's just the case that if you were to add the £1.7m to the £15.5m,and then add on the £4.1m claimed to have been repaid off the revolving loan,you have more debt than shown at the close of the 9/10 accounts (which show the £1.7m as debt).

 

I believe AP gained respect for his initial work in transforming Hull City,on and off the pitch-I can't say who by,because it's one of those general feeling kind of things.

 

I don't think you quite get this.AP was the one who was supposed to be carrying out due dilligence on behalf of the LOG,as bringing on board suitable investors (his brief) implies checking out their,erm,suitability.You seem to be implying that Gadsby ,whose expertise lies in the construction industry,should double check the work of Pearson,whose expertise lies in finance and investment.What the hell was the point in bringing AP on board in the first place?

 

As it happens,the investment is shown to be there and it would appear (though I don't know) that Gadsby may now be happy as he appears to be forming a relationship with the club.

[ramblur]

You'd better try and keep calm Saturday then Ramblur, everyone's predicting a rout!

Have to strap my thighs together then!

[G STAR RAM]

I wasn't putting words into your mouth at all.You put forward the suggestion,on behalf of the owners,that in 10/11 they were perhaps treating loan capital as equity when giving out debt figures.The following year,however,the figure given by Glick included loan capital as debt,thus if your suggestion were correct,it must have changed form (from perceived equity to perceived debt)in the administration's eyes.Or maybe it's just the case that if you were to add the £1.7m to the £15.5m,and then add on the £4.1m claimed to have been repaid off the revolving loan,you have more debt than shown at the close of the 9/10 accounts (which show the £1.7m as debt).

 

I believe AP gained respect for his initial work in transforming Hull City,on and off the pitch-I can't say who by,because it's one of those general feeling kind of things.

 

I don't think you quite get this.AP was the one who was supposed to be carrying out due dilligence on behalf of the LOG,as bringing on board suitable investors (his brief) implies checking out their,erm,suitability.You seem to be implying that Gadsby ,whose expertise lies in the construction industry,should double check the work of Pearson,whose expertise lies in finance and investment.What the hell was the point in bringing AP on board in the first place?

 

As it happens,the investment is shown to be there and it would appear (though I don't know) that Gadsby may now be happy as he appears to be forming a relationship with the club.

 

No, I get it perfectly well.

 

Just don't understand why Gadsby was not aiming his rage at Pearson though as it must have been him that has failed to deliver on his promises, after all the new owners can't have promised Gadsby anything if he didn't know their identities.

 

Also just going  back to his interview it wasn't just the investment that was annoying about the owners remember, it was the other things too that were bad for the fans like the early bird scheme (still in place now) and the contract catering (still in place now).

 

So despite the fact that they have failed to correct any of the things that Gadsby was moaning about, and despite the fact that the investment was 5 years later than Gadsby claims was promised, he still is more than happy to go into business with them on Pride Plaza.

 

Yes I get it all perfectly well.

[AccountantRam]

Whoa, hold on there, G STAR RAM !

 

I used this name intially to try and provide some facts re DCFC's accounts - to try and help in a discussion when one party was clearly devoid of certain facts .... not to simply "big" myself up. Not everyone has access to the accounts or the ability to interpret them correctly.

 

Please note I do have copies of the statutory accounts and annual returns etc going back several years to refer to, and for your information I am a qualified Accountant and have prepared accounts for companies a lot bigger than DCFC !

 

NB : I'm also a season ticket holder ( not that it's got anything to do with it specifically - but just saying if you cut me open I'd bleed black & white ! ).

 

PS : Get well soon Ramblur.

[Martyn]

The 2011-2012 accounts have been published now haven't they?  I've just realised I don't have a copy, if someone could share them please PM me...

[Mostyn6]

Whoa, hold on there, G STAR RAM !

 

I used this name intially to try and provide some facts re DCFC's accounts - to try and help in a discussion when one party was clearly devoid of certain facts .... not to simply "big" myself up. Not everyone has access to the accounts or the ability to interpret them correctly.

 

Please note I do have copies of the statutory accounts and annual returns etc going back several years to refer to, and for your information I am a qualified Accountant and have prepared accounts for companies a lot bigger than DCFC !

 

NB : I'm also a season ticket holder ( not that it's got anything to do with it specifically - but just saying if you cut me open I'd bleed black & white ! ).

 

PS : Get well soon Ramblur.

 

liar!

[AccountantRam]

liar!

OK - it's a fair cop guv ...... but my "heart" is black & white !

[Mostyn6]

OK - it's a fair cop guv ...... but my "heart" is black & white !

 

 

er.... you just can't help yourself can you!??

[G STAR RAM]

Whoa, hold on there, G STAR RAM !

I used this name intially to try and provide some facts re DCFC's accounts - to try and help in a discussion when one party was clearly devoid of certain facts .... not to simply "big" myself up. Not everyone has access to the accounts or the ability to interpret them correctly.

Please note I do have copies of the statutory accounts and annual returns etc going back several years to refer to, and for your information I am a qualified Accountant and have prepared accounts for companies a lot bigger than DCFC !

NB : I'm also a season ticket holder ( not that it's got anything to do with it specifically - but just saying if you cut me open I'd bleed black & white ! ).

PS : Get well soon Ramblur.

Chill your beans man (or woman) I was only messing!

[davenportram]

interesting thing ive just noticed

Both our last two managers have been accused in roundabout ways of not wanting to spend to money that has been made available to them by the club, neither manager complained about lack of funds. Maybe there has been money available all along.

[G STAR RAM]

interesting thing ive just noticed

Both our last two managers have been accused in roundabout ways of not wanting to spend to money that has been made available to them by the club, neither manager complained about lack of funds. Maybe there has been money available all along.

My guess (and I have nothing to back this theory up) is that the owners would be happy spending £2 or £3million per season.

I think it is the wages that have been the problem because they appear to have stuck to a pretty rigid budget.

Why did they not significantly increase the wage budget? I understand the board were not too pleased by a large chunk of the current budget being taken up by players that were not even.making matchday squads.

From what I understand this figure may have been between £1 or £2miilion or 10 and 20% of our budget.

[RodleyRam]

Why did they not significantly increase the wage budget? I understand the board were not too pleased by a large chunk of the current budget being taken up by players that were not even.making matchday squads.

.

If that's the case then it shows that they dont really have a adequate grasp of football, given that you can only have x amount of players involved on any given saturday. Not like we have an especially large squad either so it would seem unlikely if they genuinely were concerned about wasted wages (tyson possibly aside but he wasn't fit often enough imo). We must have one of the leanest squads in the league and most uninvolved players Were given opportunities on loan.

[G STAR RAM]

If that's the case then it shows that they dont really have a adequate grasp of football, given that you can only have x amount of players involved on any given saturday. Not like we have an especially large squad either so it would seem unlikely if they genuinely were concerned about wasted wages (tyson possibly aside but he wasn't fit often enough imo). We must have one of the leanest squads in the league and most uninvolved players Were given opportunities on loan.

Yes I agree it does show a bit of naivety in football terms.

In business terms though I understand where they are coming from.

Having your highest paid employee playing no part in your business is ridiculous.

If he had become surplus to requirements than he should have been offloaded at the earliest opportunity. How do you do this? Get him in the shop window.

To just cast him aside and expect a higher wage budget is poor management .

Tyson is the obvious example but there were a few more decently paid players as well as him from what I understand.