Rams post latest accounts

[RamNut]

The LOG would only have had to put in £21m if they'd replicated what's been done by the current administration since 1/1/08.

....but they'd never have done that.

[Guest]

Investment within General Sports Derby Partners LLC (where the rest of the investors reside),either as an original or subsequent investor.There are several groupings he could appear in,such as GS Capital,GS Soccer Partners,GSE-DCFC,GSE,GS Partners.

Not certain on this but pretty sure he said he had invested money in the club, hence why I said about directors loan.

Will try and find the interview to see his exact words.

[Guest]

Not certain on this but pretty sure he said he had invested money in the club, hence why I said about directors loan.

Will try and find the interview to see his exact words.

'Have you put money in personally to Derby County?'

I have done yes.

[ramblur]

Not certain on this but pretty sure he said he had invested money in the club, hence why I said about directors loan.

Will try and find the interview to see his exact words.

In answer to this and your subsequent post :-several of our investors are club directors.When they all say they've invested in the club,does that mean they've all granted directors' loans to the club?Why should Glick's revelation that he's an investor prompt you to automatically class this as a director's loan?

[Guest]

In answer to this and your subsequent post :-several of our investors are club directors.When they all say they've invested in the club,does that mean they've all granted directors' loans to the club?Why should Glick's revelation that he's an investor prompt you to automatically class this as a director's loan?

Have not classed it as anything, was just backing up my original point that you could not prove whether he has or not.

[ramblur]

Have not classed it as anything, was just backing up my original point that you could not prove whether he has or not.

On the previous page of the thread you asked me what else it could be -obviously implying that you thought it could only be a director's loan.

I'm sure that if he had loaned the club money,as an accountant you'd be able to tell all our readers the various places it would appear in the DCFC accounts (to prove whether he had or not).

[Guest]

On the previous page of the thread you asked me what else it could be -obviously implying that you thought it could only be a director's loan.

I'm sure that if he had loaned the club money,as an accountant you'd be able to tell all our readers the various places it would appear in the DCFC accounts (to prove whether he had or not).

Yes I could do but as most people would not understand I don't really see the point.

I have also sat enough exams to not be set tests anymore.

[ramblur]

Yes I could do but as most people would not understand I don't really see the point.

I have also sat enough exams to not be set tests anymore.

It was supposed to be a statement of fact,not a 'test'.If you're able to tell us the various places(but don't see the point),this implies that if such a loan had been made,I too would be able to look in these various places to confirm same.

[Guest]

It was supposed to be a statement of fact,not a 'test'.If you're able to tell us the various places(but don't see the point),this implies that if such a loan had been made,I too would be able to look in these various places to confirm same.

The term 'other loans' could cover a wide range of sources.

Do not know when he claims to have put money into the club so would not even know what year to look in.

[Guest]

The term 'other loans' could cover a wide range of sources.

Do not know when he claims to have put money into the club so would not even know what year to look in.

Have just read the directors report and now realise it is possible to work out what is in other loans - I apologise and retract what I said.

[ramblur]

The term 'other loans' could cover a wide range of sources.

Do not know when he claims to have put money into the club so would not even know what year to look in.

Well,"other loans" for 09/10 quite clearly represents the c£3m revolving loan secured against S/T income,together with the c£1.7m loan capital from GSE.I'm quite sure that any future flow of funds into the club will show up in,err,the cash flow statement (amongst other things).

You don't seem to have answered the "what else could it be" question-obviously an oversight.

Having now seen your post,apology accepted

[kaber]

Hi folks - first post on here - and this is my take on things.

The accounts up to June 30th 2010 show that the current owners have put £19.8m into the club - all apart from a £1.7m outstanding loan being capital investment - with a further £5.6m apparently put in since this date.

However we must also consider that they had to pay a substantial amount of money to gain control of the club, through Gellaw 101 Limited, from Mr Gadsby and co. There was an initial payment of £11.088m followed by a defered payment of £3.72m (total £14.8m*) and then a payment of £1.115 to acquire the remaining minority interest shareholding. (A further £1.86m is payable if the club achieve promotion before the 2013/14 season.

Together this makes a total investment of £35.8m - plus the £5.6m put in since and more promised this summer.

In the two financial years to June 2010 there was a a net payment of £9.2m on transfer fees (some of which would presumably have been payments due on signings made in 2007/08 ) and a £21.2m reduction in liabilities.

*(In one of the earlier posts a figure of £9m was quoted as being the amount Mr Gadsby and co had put into the club)

[Boycie]

I feel better for that.

[ramblur]

Hi folks - first post on here - and this is my take on things.

The accounts up to June 30th 2010 show that the current owners have put £19.8m into the club - all apart from a £1.7m outstanding loan being capital investment - with a further £5.6m apparently put in since this date.

However we must also consider that they had to pay a substantial amount of money to gain control of the club, through Gellaw 101 Limited, from Mr Gadsby and co. There was an initial payment of £11.088m followed by a defered payment of £3.72m (total £14.8m*) and then a payment of £1.115 to acquire the remaining minority interest shareholding. (A further £1.86m is payable if the club achieve promotion before the 2013/14 season.

Together this makes a total investment of £35.8m - plus the £5.6m put in since and more promised this summer.

In the two financial years to June 2010 there was a a net payment of £9.2m on transfer fees (some of which would presumably have been payments due on signings made in 2007/08 ) and a £21.2m reduction in liabilities.

*(In one of the earlier posts a figure of £9m was quoted as being the amount Mr Gadsby and co had put into the club)

You appear to have already added the £5.6m into your initial £19.8m,and then added it again later (this £5.6m was subsequently updated/amended to £6.6m in both the Gellaw and GS Derby accounts.)

Anyone who has access to the General Sports Derby (UK)Ltd accounts can verify the investment figure-absolutely no accounting experience needed,just the ability to read.Just go to the start of page 9 "Company balance sheet" and the first item "investment".The figure quoted of £30.291m represents the total acquisition cost (including Pearson),together with new investment into the club.Add on the additional £6.6m shown in the directors' report as having been invested after the year end and you get a total figure of £36.891m (including acquisition).This was the check that I performed before posting my own breakdown of figures.

Of course the loan capital is an interesting one.I calculate that the accrued interest of £152,013 represents 8.7% of the loan of £1.747m.As this doesn't appear to be a particularly favourable interest rate,I see little difference between this and simply borrowing from a financial institution (which wouldn't be considered investment by the owners).However,those who wish to classify this as "investment" are entitled so to do.

The contingent £1.8m may never be paid.Correct me if I'm wrong,but I've never actually heard the club say that new investment is going to be pumped in during the next window.Investment may just mean utilising existing resources plus wheeling and dealing.

[CornwallRam]

You appear to have already added the £5.6m into your initial £19.8m,and then added it again later (this £5.6m was subsequently updated/amended to £6.6m in both the Gellaw and GS Derby accounts.)

Anyone who has access to the General Sports Derby (UK)Ltd accounts can verify the investment figure-absolutely no accounting experience needed,just the ability to read.Just go to the start of page 9 "Company balance sheet" and the first item "investment".The figure quoted of £30.291m represents the total acquisition cost (including Pearson),together with new investment into the club.Add on the additional £6.6m shown in the directors' report as having been invested after the year end and you get a total figure of £36.891m (including acquisition).This was the check that I performed before posting my own breakdown of figures.

Of course the loan capital is an interesting one.I calculate that the accrued interest of £152,013 represents 8.7% of the loan of £1.747m.As this doesn't appear to be a particularly favourable interest rate,I see little difference between this and simply borrowing from a financial institution (which wouldn't be considered investment by the owners).However,those who wish to classify this as "investment" are entitled so to do.

The contingent £1.8m may never be paid.Correct me if I'm wrong,but I've never actually heard the club say that new investment is going to be pumped in during the next window.Investment may just mean utilising existing resources plus wheeling and dealing.

I hope you're not tossing out the ideas of our new poster:-)

[ramblur]

I hope you're not tossing out the ideas of our new poster:-)

You've been at the scotch again

[kaber]

Ramblur is of course correct in saying that my figure of total investment is incorrect (although wrong in his assumption as to the actual error); my apologies for the mistake.

My only excuse is that I am been suffering from chronic depression for over two years and therefore am not at my best mentally - but don't worry Ramblur, your less than welcoming comments have not pushed me over the edge.....

Suffice to say I won't be putting my head above the parapet and post on here again.

[Boycie]

Well, if you're going to play with the big boys, (Rambler) you have to know your onions.

and potatoes, runner beans and turnips.

http://dorothydalton.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/peeping-over-the-parapets?w=252&h=164

[ramblur]

Ramblur is of course correct in saying that my figure of total investment is incorrect (although wrong in his assumption as to the actual error); my apologies for the mistake.

My only excuse is that I am been suffering from chronic depression for over two years and therefore am not at my best mentally - but don't worry Ramblur, your less than welcoming comments have not pushed me over the edge.....

Suffice to say I won't be putting my head above the parapet and post on here again.

Yes,I suppose it was coincidence that the figure was inflated by £5.6m,just as it's no doubt a coincidence that your figure of £35.8m,when added to £5.6m gives £41.4m (which would happen to represent £16m of acquisition + £25m of further investment-shame it's incorrect).

I note your dramatic £21.2m reduction in liabilities-pity you didn't mention a reduction of assets to the tune of £23.957m over the corresponding period,giving rise to a reduction in net assets of £2.7m

[ramblur]

Well, if you're going to play with the big boys, (Rambler) you have to know your onions.

and potatoes, runner beans and turnips.

http://dorothydalton.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/peeping-over-the-parapets?w=252&h=164

...not to mention pesticides:eek: