19/20 Accounts (21 Viewers)

[Grendel]

In terms of interest rates if a company with the trading history similar to the club wanted to run a debt of 7 or 8 figures from a commercial lender what sort of interest rate we would be looking at?

Its not a commercial lender and the debt is with the owner so it’s a stupid comparison

 

---

[Grendel]

We gained approx £5.5m in base payments plus an extra £650k from TV appearances. That all in and another £3 million loss seems quite plausible

Wages up
Was a near £6 million loss without transfer activity - nowhere near this time I’d have thought
EFL loan which requires payment
An admission we have already spent net £1.5m on transfer actinity
Assuming the rent was the same a £1.6 m payment with no revenue in return

Huge losses I’d expect around £6 - £7 million.

 

[Grendel]

I think that’s an excellent question. I don’t think an offer would be made would it?

It’s a nonsense question really as who on earth would independently loan a hedge fund money without significant caveats

Surely a better approach is to look at clubs who’ve had owner loans and the rates those owners charge? I am pretty sure the original loans were at less interest so why go up when Seppalla assures is the clubs future is safe

Perhaps Boddy can log on here for a Q and A as he’s interested in transparency?

 

[Nick]

Same strategy that the owners have had for approximately 10 years now.
There has been slight variations to it over the decade, but the final aim is always the same.
You have mostly cheered and egged them on, throughout this time.

How would you know as you only signed up a couple of months ago?

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Yeah agreed sorry if you feel I’ve crossed a line

Not aimed at anyone, i just know that at least one on here who has got embroiled in spats has struggled, and I can't believe that anyone would want to contribute willingly to anyone's ill health. All I am suggesting is that people choose their words wisely, or desist from engaging if they find that it is affecting them negatively. If you are conversely enjoying upsetting someone, then you ought to think twice before posting.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

difference is I don’t whine when it’s chucked back

I snap back sometimes if someone goes personal but that's not really unique behaviour on this forum. I don't have much of an issue with you personally but a hell of a lot of people on here do most of which stems from not ever admitting you're sometimes wrong

Wages up
Was a near £6 million loss without transfer activity - nowhere near this time I’d have thought
EFL loan which requires payment
An admission we have already spent net £1.5m on transfer actinity
Assuming the rent was the same a £1.6 m payment with no revenue in return

Huge losses I’d expect around £6 - £7 million.

Commercial income from the EFL up £6-7 million, TV income an extra £650k. Counterbalance with outlays for Walker, Hamer, Reid, Hilssner plus increased wages across the squad, zero attendances at fixtures and I think losses will probably be similar to 19/20.

I also don't think this will be atypical for the division at all. Derby for instance are staring at much bigger losses with an owner who has failed to sell the club 3 times and who seems very reluctant to continue pouring money in. As said many times the Championship is one of if not the most financially unstable leagues in Europe

 

[COV]

Yeah I have, two different intentions though? Man United fans are trying to oust them, you’re attempting to form a dialogue. The end result is the same, owners remain.

yes but with respect, everyone seems to be jumping all over Pete when he has the best intentions. From what I can see other people are just venting on a messageboard and presenting speculation as if it were known fact.

I don’t know what the answer is but for what it’s worth I think Pete is getting a bit patronised here.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It’s a nonsense question really as who on earth would independently loan a hedge fund money without significant caveats

Surely a better approach is to look at clubs who’ve had owner loans and the rates those owners charge? I am pretty sure the original loans were at less interest so why go up when Seppalla assures is the clubs future is safe

Perhaps Boddy can log on here for a Q and A as he’s interested in transparency?

Sorry you did answer. Do you have the evidence or are you surmising?

 

[wingy]

Not really. Could ccfc borrow the money they need anywhere else? If they did what interest rate would it come with. Again you refuse to answer the question as it would lead you to an answer you don’t want to accept

I'd assume had Sisu not taken over administration would have happened at this point and ability to raise finance via traditional methods would have resumed from there?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

yes but with respect, everyone seems to be jumping all over Pete when he has the best intentions. From what I can see other people are just venting on a messageboard and presenting speculation as if it were known fact.

I don’t know what the answer is but for what it’s worth I think Pete is getting a bit patronised here.

It’s fine my friend patronised / challenged - two heads of the same coin. Absolutely right to be challenged

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I'd assume had Sisu not taken over administration would have happened at this point and ability to raise finance via traditional methods would have resumed from there?

Yep agreed

 

[chiefdave]

I'd assume had Sisu not taken over administration would have happened at this point and ability to raise finance via traditional methods would have resumed from there?

Given how many clubs run at a loss other clubs must borrow. Is it being suggested that every club in the country that isn't self sufficient is being funded by owners either gifting the funds or loaning them with zero interest? May well be the case but seems unlikely that we're the only club in the country in this position.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Wages up
Was a near £6 million loss without transfer activity - nowhere near this time I’d have thought
EFL loan which requires payment
An admission we have already spent net £1.5m on transfer actinity
Assuming the rent was the same a £1.6 m payment with no revenue in return

Huge losses I’d expect around £6 - £7 million.

But are you not saying we should spend more to be competitive and therefore losses (apart from interest payments) are part of that as transfers in and out are part of profit or loss

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

But are you not saying we should spend more to be competitive and therefore losses (apart from interest payments) are part of that as transfers in and out are part of profit or loss

If I remember correctly he argued for considerable spending in the January window as the costs of relegation would be greater than the outlay for signings to avoid it. Had we done that and still gone down who knows how much worse the finances could have been?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Given how many clubs run at a loss other clubs must borrow. Is it being suggested that every club in the country that isn't self sufficient is being funded by owners either gifting the funds or loaning them with zero interest? May well be the case but seems unlikely that we're the only club in the country in this position.

Right found this

Sign of the times: why English clubs are turning to high-interest US loans | David Conn

Southampton and Derby are among clubs whose stadiums are mortgaged to MSD Capital in search for much-needed funds

www.google.co.uk

9.14% and this is for a top performing club with assets and no question of paying it back. The 19.6% looks outrageous but the others not so much to me. That’s not to say lower percentages are not possible and it’s a genuine question to ask the owner for me. I think the answer will be something like it is unlikely the borrowing will ever be called in so it’s a moot point but I don’t get that

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Right found this

Sign of the times: why English clubs are turning to high-interest US loans | David Conn

Southampton and Derby are among clubs whose stadiums are mortgaged to MSD Capital in search for much-needed funds

www.google.co.uk

9.14% and this is for a top performing club with assets and no question of paying it back. The 19.6% looks outrageous but the others not so much to me. That’s not to say lower percentages are not possible and it’s a genuine question to ask the owner for me. I think the answer will be something like it is unlikely the borrowing will ever be called in so it’s a moot point but I don’t get that

Strictly speaking Chelsea still owe Abramovich £1.5 billion in loans that can be called in at 18 months notice, he simply hasn't chosen to. All interest free but if he wasn't bothered about the money you'd ask why he has kept it on the books

 

[Legia Sky Blue]

The trouble is that some of our overspending counterparts are not hamstrung the way we are in not having owners who are 'supporters' of the club, and whose primary interest in owning the club is not therefore success on the pitch. Other clubs with seemingly far worse finances than us have owners who will charge 0% interest on loans or even write them off, which allows those clubs to press the restart button, and which ends up meaning that financially we are constantly playing on an uneven playing field with our competitors. Barring an against the odds promotion to the PL we will remain in a catch 22 situation where our owners will never sell at a price acceptable to a new owner and we cannot move on like other clubs can, because the high rate of interest they can charge on their loans to us is probably worth more than any other investments they can make elsewhere.

 

[Grendel]

Given how many clubs run at a loss other clubs must borrow. Is it being suggested that every club in the country that isn't self sufficient is being funded by owners either gifting the funds or loaning them with zero interest? May well be the case but seems unlikely that we're the only club in the country in this position.

Well have you bothered to look?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The trouble is that some of our overspending counterparts are not hamstrung the way we are in not having owners who are 'supporters' of the club, and whose primary interest in owning the club is not therefore success on the pitch. Other clubs with seemingly far worse finances than us have owners who will charge 0% interest on loans or even write them off, which allows those clubs to press the restart button, and which ends up meaning that financially we are constantly playing on an uneven playing field with our competitors. Barring an against the odds promotion to the PL we will remain in a catch 22 situation where our owners will never sell at a price acceptable to a new owner and we cannot move on like other clubs can, because the high rate of interest they can charge on their loans to us is probably worth more than any other investments they can make elsewhere.

Do you have examples of other clubs charging 0%? I’m sure your summary is correct apart from mid table championship existence isn’t a bad one is it? If that’s what happen. I did a quick look but only found the Southampton article

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

This is one at about 12%

AMP and Axa offer £8.2bn in a second bid for Axa’s Asian unit - CityAM

AUSTRALIAN wealth manager AMP launched a fresh £8.15bn bid for Axa Asia Pacific Holdings yesterday in a joint deal with French parent Axa, a year after its original approach. The move comes after rival bidder National Australia Bank pulled out of a deal to buy Axa’a Asian unit after the...

www.google.co.uk

 

[Grendel]

Here is another thought.

One of the reasons Seppala quoted as a legitimate argument for putting the club into administration prior to Northampton was the colossal rent which it could not afford.

The rent was a huge amount and was unreasonable for a club making revenues of around I think £13 million at the time

Yet she then sanctions a move to St Andrews at even more rent and starving the club of income

So we need to have loans pumped in at large interest rates due to a strategic decision by the very same person.

So the loans are there to fund losses from a strategic decision the owner made

Therefore how are high interest rate loans remotely justified

 

[wingy]

Given how many clubs run at a loss other clubs must borrow. Is it being suggested that every club in the country that isn't self sufficient is being funded by owners either gifting the funds or loaning them with zero interest? May well be the case but seems unlikely that we're the only club in the country in this position.

Agreed.
What I find a bit befuddling from Grendel's stance is that it now reflects pretty much every emotion we were feeling right at the start of Save Our City etc etc after that Southampton cup game and thereon .
The boardroom change ten years ago tbh.
I agree with just about everything he's saying in here , but it's at least five years beyond doing anything about it.
They have done what they do.
We've been rationalised,used in pointless vexacious legal battles,we still run at a loss admittedly ,some player's have been sold to cover the consequences of those moves ( Wilson) and someone else will be to cover At Andrews .
Yet I have come around to the current model we're run on .
Somehow they have come to be in it for the long-term .
I wouldn't say no to a sugar daddy though.

 

[wingy]

Here is another thought.

One of the reasons Seppala quoted as a legitimate argument for putting the club into administration prior to Northampton was the colossal rent which it could not afford.

The rent was a huge amount and was unreasonable for a club making revenues of around I think £13 million at the time

Yet she then sanctions a move to St Andrews at even more rent and starving the club of income

So we need to have loans pumped in at large interest rates due to a strategic decision by the very same person.

So the loans are there to fund losses from a strategic decision the owner made

Therefore how are high interest rate loans remotely justified

Or sell another player.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Another one showing how football clubs aren’t able to use player values as assets and therefore limiting their ability to borrow funds

Is there really any hope for us if our owner can’t invest some capital?

The Lender Financing Soccer Clubs' Big-Money Transfers

With banks refusing to provide funding, soccer clubs are finding other ways to acquire new players. Enter 23 Capital.

www.google.co.uk

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Here is another thought.

One of the reasons Seppala quoted as a legitimate argument for putting the club into administration prior to Northampton was the colossal rent which it could not afford.

The rent was a huge amount and was unreasonable for a club making revenues of around I think £13 million at the time

Yet she then sanctions a move to St Andrews at even more rent and starving the club of income

So we need to have loans pumped in at large interest rates due to a strategic decision by the very same person.

So the loans are there to fund losses from a strategic decision the owner made

Therefore how are high interest rate loans remotely justified

That’s an easy one . Things change. That which you don’t want to do becomes something you do do

Also again you’ve asked another question rather than asking one posed of you. Where do ccfc borrow the money from and what are the likely interest rates?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Agreed.
What I find a bit befuddling from Grendel's stance is that it now reflects pretty much every emotion we were feeling right at the start of Save Our City etc etc after that Southampton cup game and thereon .
The boardroom change ten years ago tbh.
I agree with just about everything he's saying in here , but it's at least five years beyond doing anything about it.
They have done what they do.
We've been rationalised,used in pointless vexacious legal battles,we still run at a loss admittedly ,some player's have been sold to cover the consequences of those moves ( Wilson) and someone else will be to cover At Andrews .
Yet I have come around to the current model we're run on .
Somehow they have come to be in it for the long-term .
I wouldn't say no to a sugar daddy though.

Great summary I agree or sugar mummy

 

[Grendel]

That’s an easy one . Things change. That which you don’t want to do becomes something you do do

Also again you’ve asked another question rather than asking one posed of you. Where do ccfc borrow the money from and what are the likely interest rates?

Who are they borrowing from? It’s their own fund isn’t it?

 

[Grendel]

That’s an easy one . Things change. That which you don’t want to do becomes something you do do

Also again you’ve asked another question rather than asking one posed of you. Where do ccfc borrow the money from and what are the likely interest rates?

What changes? You are constantly flinging other clubs links at me well fund me a link where a football club uproots and moves home for 3 seasons out of 8

 

[wingy]

This is one at about 12%

AMP and Axa offer £8.2bn in a second bid for Axa’s Asian unit - CityAM

AUSTRALIAN wealth manager AMP launched a fresh £8.15bn bid for Axa Asia Pacific Holdings yesterday in a joint deal with French parent Axa, a year after its original approach. The move comes after rival bidder National Australia Bank pulled out of a deal to buy Axa’a Asian unit after the...

www.google.co.uk

Interesting article .
What does it really mean?
Is it a vehicle for a stake of things or does it absolutely get paid back Thinking Prem Rugby here?

 

[Grendel]

Interesting article .
What does it really mean?
Is it a vehicle for a stake of things or does it absolutely get paid back Thinking Prem Rugby here?

Its utterly irrelevant to our situation.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

What changes? You are constantly flinging other clubs links at me well fund me a link where a football club uproots and moves home for 3 seasons out of 8

Why?

 

[Grendel]

I’ve found him absolutely brilliant in lots of ways but he’s a genial Irishman who knows people so I’m not surprised

People who I respect say you can’t trust a word he says. I’ve found completely the opposite, strange eh!

The questions were:

You’re an intelligent man do you ever allow yourself to be influenced against what you think is best? And if not why not? And if so when?

How would you know people get sucked in or thrown out of Joy’s presence?

Those for now but I’ve noticed a habit over the last few days you are quick to question others but don’t ever give any answers yourself. It’s all bluster and accusation. The worst form of critic who spouts from the sidelines but isn’t willing to get his hands dirty,

It’s easy to say fuck the owners much harder to say what should happen and how
It’s easy to say fuck robins much harder to say what should happen and how
It’s easy to say I’m right and have tunnel vision and ignore anything that anyone else says, it’s much harder to have your wider perspective goggles on and see what facts and evidence there is to maybe counter strongly held views you hold dear

I hated joy Seppalla with a vengeance she utterly destroyed my football club taking it to Northampton. My vitriol knew no bounds I would quite happily have described her as a witch with no interest in what I hold dear. I’d dehumanised her and that was wrong . Similarly I hated Richardson and wasps and lost any good feeling I had Towards rugby when they took advantage of the situation and bought a hugely long leasehold of the Ricoh.
I hated duggjns and Lucas and mutton for turning their backs on their club selling the ground built for my club

I was wrong as no one should be dehumanised as it’s far too easy to then take cheap shots at them

But you know what I ceased to think of them as sub human, I ceased to think of them as the enemy and thought is there anything that little pete can do to make any difference to the situation. You and slow poke and boosh can think all you like that my relationships and discussions with these people do duck all and maybe you’re right but I’m chuffed to bits we have a long term deal at the ricoh and I’m chuffed to bits that we have been successful on the pitch these last 4 years,

So if you want the owners gone do something about it but don’t expect me to confirm to you that joy doesn’t give a shit about ccfc when she does

Same with wasps and Derek Richardson, wasps are going nowhere and have huge plans for the stadium and the franchise but if you want them gone do something about it. Campaign or something. For me I’ve come to terms with their move and that they genuinely want the best for ccfc supporters

Same with duggjns and Reeves you want them to invest in ccfc and do things to help do something about it. I’ve come to terms that their business hands are tied but I’m still working on their emotional ties and holding them to account for their public comments that suggest they don’t give a shit about the club, interestingly I would say their actions and I mean duggins and reeves show they care less about the club than Seppalla and I’ve told them so and they don’t like it

You think you’re so bloody clever pointing out how bad everything is. Why not have a bit of hope a bit or excitement a bit of optimism? Just a thought

For now though why not answer the questions and when you’ve admitted you rarely change your mind about something you think you’re correct about then you’ll stop demonising Joy Seppalla for doing exactly the same

Emotional

 

[Hobo]

Who are they borrowing from? It’s their own fund isn’t it?

The fund is made up of their clients money. So they are borrowing from their clients who expect a high per centage return to off set the high risk of the investment. It is how hedgefunds work.


You have spent years mocking every protest against the owners. So until there is an alternative we are stuck with them. Perhaps you should not have capitulated so easily and trotted off to Northampton?

Ultimately SISU are a hedge fund and that is their priority. Coventry City FC is just one of many things they invest in. Yes the clubs debts can create a means for them to make money - most of us were aware of that at the time we moved to Northampton.

Whinge all you like but I can't see them selling anytime soon.

 

[Grendel]

The fund is made up of their clients money. So they are borrowing from their clients who expect a high per centage return to off set the high risk of the investment. It is how hedgefunds work.


You have spent years mocking every protest against the owners. So until there is an alternative we are stuck with them. Perhaps you should not have capitulated so easily and trotted off to Northampton?

Ultimately SISU are a hedge fund and that is their priority. Coventry City FC is just one of many things they invest in. Yes the clubs debts can create a means for them to make money - most of us were aware of that at the time we moved to Northampton.

Whinge all you like but I can't see them selling anytime soon.

I went to Northampton twice but let’s make a few false claims

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

I went to Northampton twice but let’s make a few false claims

Did we win on them occasions?