Doug King Takeover (16 Viewers)

BornSlippySkyBlue · Nov 24, 2022

Mcbean said:
Well it would be in his interest as in reality he could go in the summer having made one jump in salary and then get a higher figure - selling in January will only be to a failing Prem team or a team we are competing with - in the summer hes likely to go for much higher money

Think you’re looking at it from a CCFC fan’s perspective to be fair. I’m sure his agent will be pointing out that if he runs his contract down it lowers the transfer fee and means the buying club have more money available for wages, signing bonus and agent fees. Which is why players run their contracts down (and agents encourage them).

Also we’d be actively trying to get him out the door rather than leave it another year and get naff all for him and so we’d save his agent from having to actually do anything to ‘earn’ his massive fees. We shouldn’t have let him get down to 18 months of his contract left really, although it seems our finances meant we had little choice because we couldn’t afford to offer him a new one.

shmmeee · Nov 24, 2022

BornSlippySkyBlue said:
Think you’re looking at it from a CCFC fan’s perspective to be fair. I’m sure his agent will be pointing out that if he runs his contract down it lowers the transfer fee and means the buying club have more money available for wages, signing bonus and agent fees. Which is why players run their contracts down (and agents encourage them).

Also we’d be actively trying to get him out the door rather than leave it another year and get naff all for him and so we’d save his agent from having to actually do anything to ‘earn’ his massive fees. We shouldn’t have let him get down to 18 months of his contract left really, although it seems our finances meant we had little choice because we couldn’t afford to offer him a new one.

We always offer renewals halfway through the second year.

Sick Boy · Nov 24, 2022

Saddlebrains said:
None of it adds up

-No one had ever heard of him
-Another hedge fund with links to SISU
-'Debt Free' Remember when Fisher said that? Moneys just been moved about
- All conveniently announced 16 hours before the court hearing
- Suddenly had 25 Million to outbid Ashley
- Constantly saying 'Subject to approval' as if that's already the get out card lined up
- Conveniently willing to pay £25 Million for a stadium he openly admits hed never been too and hadn't done any due diligence
- Fuck all mentioned about the playing side etc

All quiet on the western front at the minute aswell. The EFL literally have nothing to do while the WC is on and weve heard shit all else.

I just see it as a last minute attempt at hijacking Ashley that was never going to happen but can be ''Look we tried but its everyone else fault' scenario again

When did Fisher say that?

SkyblueDad · Nov 24, 2022

Sick Boy said:
When did Fisher say that?

He didn’t, he said “cash flow positive” Not quiet the same.

BornSlippySkyBlue · Nov 24, 2022

shmmeee said:
We always offer renewals halfway through the second year.

Doesn’t make it the right approach! Tbf when did we last have multiple players potentially worth large fees? Once they get down to 12 months the ball is firmly in the player’s (agents) court.

Sick Boy · Nov 24, 2022

slowpoke said:
He didn’t, he said “cash flow positive” Not quiet the same.

It was Ranson who went on about us being debt free.

Skyblueweeman · Nov 24, 2022

Sick Boy said:
It was Ranson who went on about us being debt free.

I've admitted before, I was taken in by Ranson and Sisu at the start. Even sunk some Champagne the night of the takeover.

That's why I'm more reserved this time on King. Fool me once and all that.

shmmeee · Nov 24, 2022

BornSlippySkyBlue said:
Doesn’t make it the right approach! Tbf when did we last have multiple players potentially worth large fees? Once they get down to 12 months the ball is firmly in the player’s (agents) court.

Worked OK with O’Hare and Hamer, would you have extended Walkers contract after he was top scorer first year?

BornSlippySkyBlue · Nov 24, 2022

shmmeee said:
Worked OK with O’Hare and Hamer, would you have extended Walkers contract after he was top scorer first year?

The post I replied to said it was in Vik’s interest to sign a new contract and move in the summer, as he’d get 2 pay bumps. I was saying that from a selfish POV it’s probably in Vik’s interests to run his contract down to give him more leverage in any future transfer negotiations.

Would I have given Walker a new contract when he had 2 years left? No, probably not. Would I let Gyökeres get down to 18 months (if I could help it)? Also no.

Evo1883 · Nov 24, 2022

Could be bollocks ofcourse ,don't believe it myself

Skyblueweeman · Nov 24, 2022

I guess written off makes more sense. Although I find it hard to believe that Sisu have said 'hey, you know that £65m, yeah, don't worry about that bro'.

Mcbean · Nov 24, 2022

I guess what I am saying is that he could be part of the team that goes up by the summer so why wouldn’t our new owner sanction a decent package - he will get it in the summer anyway and his agent would want him to go for the big money instead of being robbed by a failing team

Nick · Nov 24, 2022

Skyblueweeman said:
I guess written off makes more sense. Although I find it hard to believe that Sisu have said 'hey, you know that £65m, yeah, don't worry about that bro'.

Yeah exactly.

It would be super though

BornSlippySkyBlue · Nov 24, 2022

Mcbean said:
I guess what I am saying is that he could be part of the team that goes up by the summer so why wouldn’t our new owner sanction a decent package - he will get it in the summer anyway and his agent would want him to go for the big money instead of being robbed by a failing team

Agree it’s in our best interests! Just hope he signs one if offered.

Anyway more importantly how tf do you use emojis now?! Stays greyed out when I try to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

SkyblueDad · Nov 24, 2022

I think he might don’t think extended contracts prevents players leaving these days someone like Vik as an example could have a few clubs sniffing around. the more there are the higher his value.

Liquid Gold · Nov 24, 2022

I don't think there was £65m of debt in the club's books were there?

Skyblueweeman · Nov 24, 2022

Liquid Gold said:
I don't think there was £65m of debt in the club's books were there?

I did think that was a large figure which probably adds more cold water to that tweet.

Not seen debt figures like that since, well, Sisu 'rescued' us.

CCFCSteve · Nov 24, 2022

Skyblueweeman said:
I guess written off makes more sense. Although I find it hard to believe that Sisu have said 'hey, you know that £65m, yeah, don't worry about that bro'.

Yeah, the deal/payment will be to settle the debts at an agreed figure in exchange for the 85%. SISU keeping 15% in hope of getting value on promotion I guess

Assuming it happens, I wonder if we ever hear how much SISU got for writing off the debt. As others have mentioned it’s been significantly inflated over the years anyway

Not sure if there’s any tax benefits from write offs etc.

fernandopartridge · Nov 24, 2022

Liquid Gold said:
I don't think there was £65m of debt in the club's books were there?

I think it was in the form of preference shares - shows in the SBS&L accounts as 'Equity attributable to the parent company' it's obviously an absolutely bollocks figure but it's there

SkyblueDad · Nov 24, 2022

Not saying it is but sisu’s 15% could be their investment, as for the the other 85% which I assume could be debt and paying off other investors we’ll probably never know.

wingy · Nov 24, 2022

The charges are still on according to CH .
When they go something's happening

Evo1883 · Nov 24, 2022

wingy said:
The charges are still on according to CH .
When they go something's happening

Charges ?

wingy · Nov 24, 2022

Evo1883 said:
Charges ?

ARVO multiple

Evo1883 · Nov 24, 2022

wingy said:
ARVO multiple

So we aren't debt free ? Who is CH

Evo1883 · Nov 24, 2022

Ah OK I'm with it now , we won't be debt free anyway until takeover goes through I'd assume

olderskyblue · Nov 24, 2022

Evo1883 said:
So we aren't debt free ? Who is CH

Central heating…

Mcbean · Nov 24, 2022

olderskyblue said:
Central heating…

Well we need that as well

Legia Sky Blue · Nov 24, 2022

BornSlippySkyBlue said:
The post I replied to said it was in Vik’s interest to sign a new contract and move in the summer, as he’d get 2 pay bumps. I was saying that from a selfish POV it’s probably in Vik’s interests to run his contract down to give him more leverage in any future transfer negotiations.

Would I have given Walker a new contract when he had 2 years left? No, probably not. Would I let Gyökeres get down to 18 months (if I could help it)? Also no.

So even if he wants to stay to the end of the season you would want to sell him in January?

BornSlippySkyBlue · Nov 24, 2022

Legia Sky Blue said:
So even if he wants to stay to the end of the season you would want to sell him in January?

I have no idea how you got that from the words I typed.

Colin Steins Smile · Nov 24, 2022

Evo1883 said:
So we aren't debt free ? Who is CH

Companies House

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Nov 24, 2022

Liquid Gold said:
I don't think there was £65m of debt in the club's books were there?

I think the most likely scenario is that SISu will be paid back any actual capital they've put in and whatever they're owed on paper in terms of interest will be written off.

No inside info. Just a best guess.

Paxman II · Nov 24, 2022

There's a lot of 'paper debt'. The actual hard debt in cash terms is more likely around 30m or less. This would be the figure I assume King has offered on for 85%. (I reckon 20m).

wingy · Nov 24, 2022

Any clarity to a novice?

I understand that and why further charges are applied within Otium but don't understand a new one at the time INNSBS&L?

robbiekeane · Nov 24, 2022

BornSlippySkyBlue said:
I have no idea how you got that from the words I typed.

mad isnt it

oldskyblue58 · Nov 25, 2022

wingy said:
Any clarity to a novice?

I understand that and why further charges are applied within Otium but don't understand a new one at the time INNSBS&L?

Its all to with the group situation. SBS&L owns 90.1% of Otium, ARVO 9.9%.

Without the charge in SBS&L in theory Otium could be sold to a third party and leave ARVO with its charges still outstanding. The funds for the disposal of its 90.1% would be paid to SBS&L. These could be distributed to the shareholders in SBS&L (Sconset & L Brody). With the charge in place on SBS&L ARVO gets any proceeds of a share disposal of Otium by SBS&L to offset what it is owed.

Doug King Takeover (16 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency