ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did someone just question Ramblur's view of the accounts? Meanwhile in other news, Bucko is a sunday league pub player and b4's spelling is awful Ah,a fine stir,utch.Seems to me it's not my view that's being questioned,but the FFP regulations (which seem pretty clear to me). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Ah,a fine stir,utch.Seems to me it's not my view that's being questioned,but the FFP regulations (which seem pretty clear to me). Just my way of saying "a up Ramb, hows it going mate" xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did someone just question Ramblur's view of the accounts? Meanwhile in other news, Bucko is a sunday league pub player and b4's spelling is awful Didn't question his view of the accounts. His analysis of historical information is second to none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 At this moment in time the Boards financially prudent approach has got to be seen as positive. IF we go up this season they will either be very lucky or very clever. If we don't go up lets see how they approach next year. Basically, to cover the losses like they have and to then convert loans into equity can only be applauded surely. Anything else would be churlish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Don't really see the point in speculating, in front of packed rooms John Vicars has said we are borderline and that is good enough for me. Without taking a dig if the board read your posts they could say that you are clever with things you don't say too, although you claim to be impartial there is a definite anti-board/investors agenda which is ocassionally watered down with a slight bit of praise. Not saying it is a bad thing disliking them because everyone is entitled to an opinion but at least most people hang their hat on theirs. I'm hardly asking you to speculate.The FFP rule on depreciation is clear cut,as is the figure extracted from the accounts.You talk of bias,so let's put your own stance under the microscope.It's quite clear that you don't want to address the depreciation issue,because in so doing you would be questioning Vicar's statement.But then when have you ever questioned anything about this administration? For my part,I've always been willing to verify their investment levels; I defended them against claims that they were taking out fortunes in management charges,and was the one who responded to an investor's complaint that fans didn't appreciate how much they'd spent on transfers-in other words the guy with the 'vendetta' could be bothered to take the time to back up the investor's claim,whilst the likes of you couldn't be assed.I also pointed out that the net assets position didn't give a fair view of the true position. I don't dislike our owners and have never called for their removal.However,I'm not going to allow the propaganda machine to go unquestioned,and wherever possible will try to come up with facts to allow fans to at least think for themselves.I seem to remember the Glick 'machine' telling us there was no difference between loan capital and equity,yet look what the new 'machine' now says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Just my way of saying "a up Ramb, hows it going mate" xx Hopping round the roost,mate.In hospital Thursday for more tests.I've noticed you're still putting in fine cameos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisse Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Hopping round the roost,mate.In hospital Thursday for more tests.I've noticed you're still putting in fine cameos Hang in there mate, speedy recovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 I'm hardly asking you to speculate.The FFP rule on depreciation is clear cut,as is the figure extracted from the accounts.You talk of bias,so let's put your own stance under the microscope.It's quite clear that you don't want to address the depreciation issue,because in so doing you would be questioning Vicar's statement.But then when have you ever questioned anything about this administration? For my part,I've always been willing to verify their investment levels; I defended them against claims that they were taking out fortunes in management charges,and was the one who responded to an investor's complaint that fans didn't appreciate how much they'd spent on transfers-in other words the guy with the 'vendetta' could be bothered to take the time to back up the investor's claim,whilst the likes of you couldn't be assed.I also pointed out that the net assets position didn't give a fair view of the true position. I don't dislike our owners and have never called for their removal.However,I'm not going to allow the propaganda machine to go unquestioned,and wherever possible will try to come up with facts to allow fans to at least think for themselves.I seem to remember the Glick 'machine' telling us there was no difference between loan capital and equity,yet look what the new 'machine' now says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Hang in there mate, speedy recovery. Thanks Cisse.I made the mistake of scouring the net to find out that in the case of infection,the components might be removed for over 6 weeks before being replaced.It was only when I realised where I'd be staying whilst all this happened that I regretted going online.Tbtg,infection looks unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisse Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Thanks Cisse.I made the mistake of scouring the net to find out that in the case of infection,the components might be removed for over 6 weeks before being replaced.It was only when I realised where I'd be staying whilst all this happened that I regretted going online.Tbtg,infection looks unlikely. I've made a couple of internet search myself and last time I was unfortunately right in self diagnosing, but hey what doesn't kill you just makes you stronger, right. Hope you got a chance to watch the last Forest game when it really gets irritating to be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 I've made a couple of internet search myself and last time I was unfortunately right in self diagnosing, but hey what doesn't kill you just makes you stronger, right. Hope you got a chance to watch the last Forest game when it really gets irritating to be there. My wretched 'broadband' speed only allowed me to capture a few seconds at a time,but my God there were some great 5 second snatches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jourdan Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 So from my limited understanding, the £28.5m loan that has been changed to equity is either adding £££ to the purchase price for prospective new owners, or at worst a non-repayable cash injection by the current owners to keep the club afloat in recent years. Can anyone estimate the owners' total investment from January 2008-June 2013, if you take into account the £28.5 million equity? I must admit I'm not particularly clued up on the financial ongoings at the club. I wouldn't even dare hazard a guess. But from what I can gather, the owners are fighting a losing battle to recoup even a fraction of their investment. After all, they will have to invest further to ensure several years of sustained growth and income in the Premier League. This would surely make the club a more attractive proposition for a potential buyer, but the expense of putting us in that position would surely be too much to recoup through a sale, given all that they have invested up to this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoollyJumper Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Thats the sort of question that makes me want to shrivel up and die. May I ask why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Assuming all loan capital has now been converted to equity ,I make the overall investment to be as follows:- £16m total acquisition +£14.4m equity previously injected + £28.5m converted to equity = £58.9m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Assuming all loan capital has now been converted to capital,I make the overall investment to be as follows:- £16m total acquisition +£14.4m equity previously injected + £28.5m converted to equity = £58.9m Is that all? Boooooo #GSEout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 If only they hadn't let P0rnatar p1ss a chunk of it up against the wall..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Not forgetting the bit that was p1ssed out of the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macisback Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 Tom went for the very best of reasons. It was a huge step up and a prestigious job at a huge (now) club. He still loves DCFC and was in no way pushed. That, as they say, is a FACT. Tom went because they wanted rid of him, basically he did a pretty dire job in every respect at Derby. You only have to look at the changes made since he was moved to see that, in every area of the club. He wasn't highly regarded inside the club either, he was a total 100% failiure financial, football, management. Man City is not and never will be a huge club, actually for the 1 billion plus pumped in they are under performing, if Liverpool beat them they won't win the league this year either. Not a huge job a total bobbies job, their income the vast majority is given them, not earned. All they are doing is blatantly trying to bluff their round the new FFP rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 Tom went because they wanted rid of him, basically he did a pretty dire job in every respect at Derby. You only have to look at the changes made since he was moved to see that, in every area of the club. He wasn't highly regarded inside the club either, he was a total 100% failiure financial, football, management. Man City is not and never will be a huge club, actually for the 1 billion plus pumped in they are under performing, if Liverpool beat them they won't win the league this year either. Not a huge job a total bobbies job, their income the vast majority is given them, not earned. All they are doing is blatantly trying to bluff their round the new FFP rules. Where are you getting this from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 I'm hardly asking you to speculate.The FFP rule on depreciation is clear cut,as is the figure extracted from the accounts.You talk of bias,so let's put your own stance under the microscope.It's quite clear that you don't want to address the depreciation issue,because in so doing you would be questioning Vicar's statement.But then when have you ever questioned anything about this administration? For my part,I've always been willing to verify their investment levels; I defended them against claims that they were taking out fortunes in management charges,and was the one who responded to an investor's complaint that fans didn't appreciate how much they'd spent on transfers-in other words the guy with the 'vendetta' could be bothered to take the time to back up the investor's claim,whilst the likes of you couldn't be assed.I also pointed out that the net assets position didn't give a fair view of the true position. I don't dislike our owners and have never called for their removal.However,I'm not going to allow the propaganda machine to go unquestioned,and wherever possible will try to come up with facts to allow fans to at least think for themselves.I seem to remember the Glick 'machine' telling us there was no difference between loan capital and equity,yet look what the new 'machine' now says. The best accounting and financial management academics in the world will argue the differences that capital structure have on a business with no end result haha its how you choose to look at it. Debt capital - cheaper than equity capital as there is much less uncertainty regarding payment...there is a legal obligation to pay interest on loans. (therefore interest rates are lower than return required by equity holders) Equity capital - usually more expensive than debt capital as there is a risk of not being paid due to companies only paying a dividends when making a profit. But back on this topic.... it is probably seen as being beneficial in the long run if they plan on selling the club for profit (I'm not convinced all of the shareholders will sell but I do believe some will want to if we were to get to the promised land). It is much easier to command an inflated price for a club if it is a clean slate ie debt free than a club where the owners are then asked to take on previous debt. So they can either keep the loans and get the new ownership to pay off the loans (to them) OR they can change the debt into equity and receive a higher capital gain when selling the club to new owners. I doubt very much that these astute business men will lose out in the long run but it is another sign of a risk they are taking for the benefit of the club as we would much rather reduce debt as debt capital is only really useful for an organisation making a profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.