Investment on the Horizon? (28 Viewers)

Forums New posts
K

Kingokings204

Well-Known Member
skybluesam66 said:
assets are currently
playing squad
ryton
sell on fees - eg callum wilson
balance of this seasons season ticket money
golden share

i think in reality the sale price would be around £10m for a debt free club
one of the guys in the studio on the phone in suggested single figure millions to fisher and he didnt flinch

I think £10m would seal the deal
Click to expand...

I think if they were offered 10mil they wouldn't be here now. I reckon half that might do it.

Trouble is with the debt the club is worth £1. Been confirmed on here.

That's what's holding it up imo sisu want 5-10mil and people are there but want the club at £1. Sisu won't ever take this.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Tonylinc said:
And todays prize for the most stupid and irrelevant question goes to.......
Click to expand...

To those interested in the fortunes of the club it's not stupid. To those who couldn't give a fuck, well....
 
K

Kingokings204

Well-Known Member
FRANK said:
What the club is worth largely depends on what a buyer is able to do with what's left of an asset base.

I'm over simplifying it but company valuations are based on a combination of past performance and potential - applying a multiple to profit. That multiple will be higher if the business has high potential or growth. Hence - in my view - why Tim is so chuffed to tell people we made a £1m profit last year. That certainly wasn't to get the fans on side, but to up the valuation.

Our only asset really is the right to play in the football league - and an established fan base. That's worth more to someone with a ground and training facilities (because they can realise any potential - in theory!!). Maybe someone like Wasps...

But not everyone will be able to realise the club's potential without investing heavily in infrastructure (I'd imagine a new ground would dwarf the investment needed to pull together a competitive Championship side). And so, you'd think, the badge might be worth less.

The problem is SISU aren't daft and are prone to push their luck. Debt free or not their perception of value will depend on the depth of the buyer's pockets and what they think they are due.

If I were having a guess - I'd say £6-8m would get you a football club. Less of they were allowed a silent minority stake - or a lump sum on promotion.
Click to expand...

I agree with your valuation of 6-8m. But who is going to pay that? At a guess no one.

No one has got that lying around. What have recent football league clubs sold for? Bolton sold for a £ didn't they in the summer?

Wrong : Bolton sold for 7.5m! With 172.5m of debt.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35630605
 
Last edited:
K

Kingokings204

Well-Known Member
Further info. Seems Boltons new owners have funds up to end of this season and if they don't go up then they will have to cut cloth to fit.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Do you think given a limited budget resigning Ricketts and Tudgay were sensible moves Tony?
Click to expand...

Depends on what wages they stayed on for. I don't know what that is. Do you?

Within the budget they may have been the best options that we could afford although a gamble.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
No, we didn't get the squad did we as all of the decent monkeys were snapped up ;)

We ended up getting wingers in on trial when we didn't even play wingers. We signed 2 left wingers and about 6 or 7 strikers.

We should have gone for solid league 1 players in the first place or at least had a solid plan B after going for championship players failed.
Click to expand...

Could we afford solid league one players? Presumably they're in demand in league one and as we now know we don't have a competitive budget. I say we, I said all along we'd gone backwards with the budget. Aside from the marked difference in recruitment compared to the previous season there was no bragging from the board about the budget. The latter told a story all on it's own, the boards form has always been no news is bad news. I really don't understand why anyone thought we had a top half budget in the first place to be honest.
 
D

Deleted member 4439

Guest
Kingokings204 said:
Further info. Seems Boltons new owners have funds up to end of this season and if they don't go up then they will have to cut cloth to fit.
Click to expand...

Owners are currently bankrolling to the tune of 800K per month.

It's what I don't get about the concept of financial fair play. For L1 you can spend 60% of your turnover on the playing budget, but turnover includes any amount an owner chooses to add to revenues!
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
It was down to the players TM was going after. What on earth he thought he would achieve going after players we clearly couldn't afford only he knows.
Click to expand...
Maybe just Maybe they were in his budget range.
Who knows did they cut the budget forcing him to get in the ones he did, or did were the targets mentioned just rumours to get us to buy ST etc?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
It was down to the players TM was going after. What on earth he thought he would achieve going after players we clearly couldn't afford only he knows.
Click to expand...

So we couldn't afford them as we don't have a competitive budget and them not signing convinced people that we must have a competitive budget. You'd have to be pretty stupid to come to that conclusion from the events as they happened.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
letsallsingtogether said:
Maybe just Maybe they were in his budget range.
Who knows did they cut the budget forcing him to get in the ones he did, or did were the targets mentioned just rumours to get us to buy ST etc?
Click to expand...

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that he started the recruitment process under the illusion that he was getting the lions share of the Maddison money. Something else that has been confirmed not to be the case.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that he started the recruitment process under the illusion that he was getting the lions share of the Maddison money. Something else that has been confirmed not to be the case.
Click to expand...

Anderson stated he wouldn't when we sold him last January
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
So we couldn't afford them as we don't have a competitive budget and them not signing convinced people that we must have a competitive budget. You'd have to be pretty stupid to come to that conclusion from the events as they happened.
Click to expand...

Again "the budget" is an irrelevant statement and "the budget" being in the lower half was said for one reason and one reason only.
 
Terry Gibson's perm

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
You only have to look at the timing of the Maddison sale to see that they were never going to re-invest in players and I would expect the same sort of thing for Stevenson and or Willis in January.
 
D

Deleted member 4439

Guest
fernandopartridge said:
Which creditors?
Click to expand...

Can't say I've followed the financials closely, but my impression is that the sale of player registrations is simply used simply to reduce losses, not pay back SISU, who have taken equity swaps in Otium in lieu of interest payments on original loans. In the case of Maddison, the sale turned a loss making position into a small 0.5-1m profit, which will be used to fund any shortfall the next financial year.

As Fisher has said, Otium/CCFC will continue to liquidate assets to balance the books, as SISU have said NOPM. The future for the club has ben very clearly marked out: an ever decreasing circle and a drop through the leagues until a natural equilibrium of cash in / cash out has been achieved or, where the balance can not be achieved, sale or liquidation of the club.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Again "the budget" is an irrelevant statement and "the budget" being in the lower half was said for one reason and one reason only.
Click to expand...

So you keep saying. You won't say why so it's either a glip comment or you're trying to trip someone up so you can feel clever about yourself. Spit it out. Why?
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
So you keep saying. You won't say why so it's either a glip comment or you're trying to trip someone up so you can feel clever about yourself. Spit it out. Why?
Click to expand...

Well it's fairly obvious isn't it.

Fisher works on half truths spin and misdirection.

All teams will set budgets as high as they can at 60% of revenue forecasted. Our attendances put us easily in the top half - easily.

So why would Tim want to say we are in the bottom half?
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Kingokings204 said:
I agree with your valuation of 6-8m. But who is going to pay that? At a guess no one.

No one has got that lying around. What have recent football league clubs sold for? Bolton sold for a £ didn't they in the summer?

Wrong : Bolton sold for 7.5m! With 172.5m of debt.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35630605
Click to expand...

I think it is very important that whoever buys of SISU doesn't carry debts over, maybe a little based on targets like promotion but nothing that would hamper the club's future.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Captain Dart said:
I think it is very important that whoever buys of SISU doesn't carry debts over, maybe a little based on targets like promotion but nothing that would hamper the club's future.
Click to expand...
I agree. I doubt SISU would be happy with a deferred payment based on on-pitch success however.

So then you're looking for sufficient of an offer to ensure the club isn't wound up (personally I see it as better for the SISU brand if it is wound up rather than seen to be forced to give in).

And then we're back to the circles of who the hell would hand some cash over for what we have now?!?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Well it's fairly obvious isn't it.

Fisher works on half truths spin and misdirection.

All teams will set budgets as high as they can at 60% of revenue forecasted. Our attendances put us easily in the top half - easily.

So why would Tim want to say we are in the bottom half?
Click to expand...

Stop fucking around and spit it out. If you've got a point to make, make it. I ain't playing your stupid games.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
Stop fucking around and spit it out. If you've got a point to make, make it. I ain't playing your stupid games.
Click to expand...

Well you keep replying so actually - yes you are
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
Fair enough. It was clearly a glib comment based on nothing. Game over.
Click to expand...

No it was based on fishers next comments regarding revenues and the correlation of revenues in league one to on and off field activity.

As you clearly are not stupid work out why he said it.
 
Calista

Calista

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
No it was based on fishers next comments regarding revenues and the correlation of revenues in league one to on and off field activity.

As you clearly are not stupid work out why he said it.
Click to expand...
Mr. Grendel, I haven’t done my homework properly so I don’t know what you mean. Speaking as one of the thickos at the back of the class, it would be great if you could just tell me the answer. And put a gold star in my exercise book. Then we’ll both feel good.
 
the rumpo kid

the rumpo kid

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
No it was based on fishers next comments regarding revenues and the correlation of revenues in league one to on and off field activity.

As you clearly are not stupid work out why he said it.
Click to expand...
thought you were in the "we've got a top six budget and its all mowbreys fault " camp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 29 (members: 0, guests: 29)
Top