What I don't understand is how some on here think £40m price tag is gospel but five potential buyers is made up.
Either the whole article is true or the whole article is bollox.
Certain people seem to have an agenda and only want to look at the bad instead of look at the situation (from the outside I may add) even-handedly.
It could be about right. Secured loans (say) £25m existing shareholder investment (say) £15m
The secured loans are well documented. More like £12m than £25m.
However, from recollection this regime didn't set up the deferrals and while I'm sure the bank and former directors would like their money back now, we can't assume they wouldn't roll them over again to the right new owners.
The problem for the owners is their exposure is only going to increase unless they sell and the value of the club isn't going to rise with it unless something miraculous happens.
Total club debts are around £40M of which just £5M is secured against the Freehold of the Valley by the bank which funded the North Upper. The rest of the debt is owed to the new crowd (£15M) Richard Murray (£5M) and the old board (£10M). The last bit has been deferred until promotion to the Premier League is achieved.
That's not right and doesn't add up of itself! The debts to the former directors are £4.4m, unless you think they have been putting in money in 2012/13 (!) and Richard Murray was owed £4.15m at June 30th, 2012, of which only £1.55m is repayable in instalments now and the rest is deferred on the same basis as that to the ex-directors, i.e. promotion to the Premier League. This is all in the 2011/12 accounts.
OK here are the full numbers and why it "doesn't add up" ! Bank Overdraft £2.2M Trade Creditors and HMRC £2.5M Bank Mortgage £4.2M Parent Co. £14M** Directors payable upon Premier League Promotion £8.5M Accruals and deferred income £8M * Other £0.5M Total £40M of which Trade Creditors, HMRC and 50% of the deferred income is short term (<1yr) *Accruals and deferred income will mainly relate to Season Tickets sold before June, VIP monies and grants secured to build the Valley which are released over the life of the asset - I wouldn't class these as creditors as no one is going to reclaim the money! ** Assuming that last seasons losses met by the parent co.
Hopefully it is very clear for all that creditors like HMRC are in a minority which is why administration is unlikely.
I am referring to the accounts and being precise in order to make the following point very clearly:
There are several interested parties in any transaction around selling the club. This is not the world of Goldberg or Jordan where there is no ground and no balancing interests and where the club ends up falling over because they won't deal with anyone until it's too late. It appears that by design all of the current board AND the bank have an interest in securing the best deal for the future of the club and themselves and none of them have any interest in letting a creditor like HMRC become a risk.
All of the numbers are 7 figure so a few grand here or there simply doesn't matter does it? I trust that any deal for sale (or more financing) can be struck swiftly in order to facilitate the continuing rise of CAFC from mid-table 3rd tier back to the Premier League.
Chicago Addick dug into the accounts first and may have updated his blog.
We may have lost £7m in the last published accounts but are we losing that now? Losses have to slow to £5m because of FFP, I know that's not a significant monetary difference but, if £7m was the last published accounts, it means that whoever placed the story has no knowledge of the current state of play.
NB I've been having a rather amateurish look at the financial state of the clubs in this league and at most clubs all the players are up for sale, it aint just us.
Who on earth would pay 40m for a football club that is losing £7m a year and has almost an entire playing squad out of contract within a year. Deluded.
What I don't understand is how some on here think £40m price tag is gospel but five potential buyers is made up.
Either the whole article is true or the whole article is bollox.
Certain people seem to have an agenda and only want to look at the bad instead of look at the situation (from the outside I may add) even-handedly.
Wouldn't be much of a message board if you could only comment from the base of perfect information
Read what I said. I'll say it so you can possibly understand it.
From the outside ie, without inside information, look at the situation even-handedly and don't always assume the worst or best because it fits into your particular agenda.
And don't assume anyone has an 'agenda' - all I basically said was that I thought that if the sellers don't lower their expectations we're in the shit.
From the imperfect information I have, that is my 'even handed' view, not my 'agenda' - please try not to be so patronising.
You seem to be saying 'until you have full knowledge don't have a view'. If we all adhered to that principle nothing much would be said here.
For it's limited worth, some of my view is based on experience - I have been heavily involved in distressed corporate recovery throughout my working life.
Which is why the Trust chose images of Roulette to illustrate articles on Championship and CAFC finances... put in your £7M stake every year with a view to winning the jackpot. For those who want to read up go to castrust.org But very tricky to get your stake back if you're nearly there unless you can find someone to buy your position. The only trouble with this game is that it all becomes dependent on the skills of a few and tends to ignore the tens of thousands who pays their money year in year out... p'raps there's a middle ground?
What I don't understand is how some on here think £40m price tag is gospel but five potential buyers is made up.
Either the whole article is true or the whole article is bollox.
Certain people seem to have an agenda and only want to look at the bad instead of look at the situation (from the outside I may add) even-handedly.
Wouldn't be much of a message board if you could only comment from the base of perfect information
Read what I said. I'll say it so you can possibly understand it.
From the outside ie, without inside information, look at the situation even-handedly and don't always assume the worst or best because it fits into your particular agenda.
And don't assume anyone has an 'agenda' - all I basically said was that I thought that if the sellers don't lower their expectations we're in the shit.
From the imperfect information I have, that is my 'even handed' view, not my 'agenda' - please try not to be so patronising.
You seem to be saying 'until you have full knowledge don't have a view'. If we all adhered to that principle nothing much would be said here.
For it's limited worth, some of my view is based on experience - I have been heavily involved in distressed corporate recovery throughout my working life.
I don't "assume" anything.
I read what people write and some on here DO have an agenda particularly where the current board are concerned.
People can take whatever view they like. This is my view.
Chicago Addick dug into the accounts first and may have updated his blog.
We may have lost £7m in the last published accounts but are we losing that now? Losses have to slow to £5m because of FFP, I know that's not a significant monetary difference but, if £7m was the last published accounts, it means that whoever placed the story has no knowledge of the current state of play.
NB I've been having a rather amateurish look at the financial state of the clubs in this league and at most clubs all the players are up for sale, it aint just us.
The observations of Swiss Ramble (with great graphs) Chicago and New York Addick all formed the basis of articles published by the Trust in March and May. These concluded that TV income is bigger in the Championship but costs are up. Independent sources confirmed analysis that CAFC lost £7M last season give or take... FFP allows a loss of £8M this season of which max £3M can be loans
The Trust are not speculating about what might happen but simply putting some analysis out there to inform the fans... CAFC do not violently disagree with analysis to date seeing they distributed 4,000 issues of the last issue of our magazine...
perhaps the focus for the Trust should move to what now / whats next?
Here comes another big IF. If the club could be got for £15mil, and to include the debts. What would be needed is money plus time. If five thousand season ticket holders paid in 4000 each (told you it was a big if!) we would have £20mil. With a good wind that gets you the club and through this season. During that time you cost cut as much as possible, accept massive player departures (hopefully in January when they can realise some money), and get closer to balancing the books. Then you need to re-schedule debt over a goodly period of time, and try to make the remaining little go a long way without further debt. Yes it would mean relegation, even successive relegations. The club would however be owned by the supporters whose duty would be to balance the books henceforth, and chip away at the debt over time. You then hope to make profits on player development and sales to hopefully make progress. Yeah I know it is pie in the sky, but I bet Coventry, and Portsmouth wish they had been able to do something like that previously. OK, that is one equation attempting to see a way out of the mess. What others are there?
I like your thinking and perhaps 50% of the fans / season ticket holders care enough to invest in the future of the club... for the next Trust survey we could research the fans appetite for how much and why they might invest... Anything more would be speculation but the Trust is here to help the fans help the club so perhaps time ?
Well I suppose it is worth having some kind of a plan, even my back of the envelope one, for after administration. Better than no plan at all, and simply crying into our beer.
40M + 5M does not get you 120M even if you are promoted though. You would have to stump up 45M of equity to buy us and invest, then get amazingly lucky with promotion then you get turnover of 60M first year and 60M over the next 4. Trouble is, you still have to pay costs, which I assume are currently about 15M pa (so over 4 years means 60M costs IF you invest zero extra pounds in that time). Therefore 45M gets you 60M back, a 15M profit, over 4 years, which is less than 10% pa profit and takes a massive risk on promotion and an unralistic view on costs most likely. There is no financial reason to invest in us. You can only hope for a foreign, sugar daddy football lover IMO.
I know, I know. However instead of despair I am attempting to imagine some kind of scenario to save the club. A scenario that assumes no sugar daddy/mummy will come in.
However
The choices seem to be;
Jonathan Acworth succeeds in persuading a mega rich person to invest. One of us wins big rollover euromillions. A sugar daddy/mummy wants us, and pays Tone and Co for the club. The present lot stumble on, gradually depleting our resources/or having vast good fortune as Chris Powell gets us promoted. Oil/Fracking is discovered in the car park as a pothole collapses to reveal untold riches. We plan for a bleak yet survivable future. The club ceases to exist any more. The present lot change their mind and Kevin Cash pours in the dosh.
Dunno. However musing on some kind of plan helps me to withhold despair.
40M + 5M does not get you 120M even if you are promoted though. You would have to stump up 45M of equity to buy us and invest, then get amazingly lucky with promotion then you get turnover of 60M first year and 60M over the next 4. Trouble is, you still have to pay costs, which I assume are currently about 15M pa (so over 4 years means 60M costs IF you invest zero extra pounds in that time). Therefore 45M gets you 60M back, a 15M profit, over 4 years, which is less than 10% pa profit and takes a massive risk on promotion and an unralistic view on costs most likely. There is no financial reason to invest in us. You can only hope for a foreign, sugar daddy football lover IMO.
Higher st sales, prices, sponsorship? Must be worth a bit, but yes I take your point
What I don't understand is how some on here think £40m price tag is gospel but five potential buyers is made up.
Either the whole article is true or the whole article is bollox.
Certain people seem to have an agenda and only want to look at the bad instead of look at the situation (from the outside I may add) even-handedly.
It could be about right. Secured loans (say) £25m existing shareholder investment (say) £15m
The secured loans are well documented. More like £12m than £25m.
However, from recollection this regime didn't set up the deferrals and while I'm sure the bank and former directors would like their money back now, we can't assume they wouldn't roll them over again to the right new owners.
The problem for the owners is their exposure is only going to increase unless they sell and the value of the club isn't going to rise with it unless something miraculous happens.
Total club debts are around £40M of which just £5M is secured against the Freehold of the Valley by the bank which funded the North Upper. The rest of the debt is owed to the new crowd (£15M) Richard Murray (£5M) and the old board (£10M). The last bit has been deferred until promotion to the Premier League is achieved.
That's not right and doesn't add up of itself! The debts to the former directors are £4.4m, unless you think they have been putting in money in 2012/13 (!) and Richard Murray was owed £4.15m at June 30th, 2012, of which only £1.55m is repayable in instalments now and the rest is deferred on the same basis as that to the ex-directors, i.e. promotion to the Premier League. This is all in the 2011/12 accounts.
OK here are the full numbers and why it "doesn't add up" ! Bank Overdraft £2.2M Trade Creditors and HMRC £2.5M Bank Mortgage £4.2M Parent Co. £14M** Directors payable upon Premier League Promotion £8.5M Accruals and deferred income £8M * Other £0.5M Total £40M of which Trade Creditors, HMRC and 50% of the deferred income is short term (<1yr) *Accruals and deferred income will mainly relate to Season Tickets sold before June, VIP monies and grants secured to build the Valley which are released over the life of the asset - I wouldn't class these as creditors as no one is going to reclaim the money! ** Assuming that last seasons losses met by the parent co.
Hopefully it is very clear for all that creditors like HMRC are in a minority which is why administration is unlikely.
I am referring to the accounts and being precise in order to make the following point very clearly:
There are several interested parties in any transaction around selling the club. This is not the world of Goldberg or Jordan where there is no ground and no balancing interests and where the club ends up falling over because they won't deal with anyone until it's too late. It appears that by design all of the current board AND the bank have an interest in securing the best deal for the future of the club and themselves and none of them have any interest in letting a creditor like HMRC become a risk.
All of the numbers are 7 figure so a few grand here or there simply doesn't matter does it? I trust that any deal for sale (or more financing) can be struck swiftly in order to facilitate the continuing rise of CAFC from mid-table 3rd tier back to the Premier League.</p>
But these numbers bear little relation to the ones you posted earlier, do they (i.e. £10m ex-directors' loans and £5m to Murray)? And as you say yourself accruals and deferred income are not repayable debt in the real world, while trade creditors and HMRC are cash flow issues, which are at a peak in July. All season tickets are technically in the figures as debt at this point because the money only becomes revenue as the games are played, i.e. no longer repayable if they aren't for the purposes of the accounts. There is no documented evidence available for the overdraft being at £2.2m to my knowledge, although it may be. In short, £40m is not a real number for the purposes of this discussion.
40M + 5M does not get you 120M even if you are promoted though. You would have to stump up 45M of equity to buy us and invest, then get amazingly lucky with promotion then you get turnover of 60M first year and 60M over the next 4. Trouble is, you still have to pay costs, which I assume are currently about 15M pa (so over 4 years means 60M costs IF you invest zero extra pounds in that time). Therefore 45M gets you 60M back, a 15M profit, over 4 years, which is less than 10% pa profit and takes a massive risk on promotion and an unralistic view on costs most likely. There is no financial reason to invest in us. You can only hope for a foreign, sugar daddy football lover IMO.
The £40M plus whatever losses are accrued plus whatever investment in player aquisitions to get promoted is the price.
And it secures £120M additional TV revenue guaranteed over five years with lost revenue of £10M solidarity payments/ Championship TV money whilst sitting at the bottom of the Premier League for a season.
Yes, there are additional costs to fund the players but you still have your original £45M because when you come down you look to go up again not just walk away
I think the real question is how much does CAFC need to spend to increase chances of promotion? And what is a yo-yo club actually worth - perhaps one will be sold sooner or later?
The observations of Swiss Ramble (with great graphs) Chicago and New York Addick all formed the basis of articles published by the Trust in March and May. These concluded that TV income is bigger in the Championship but costs are up. Independent sources confirmed analysis that CAFC lost £7M last season give or take... FFP allows a loss of £8M this season of which max £3M can be loans
This isn't very meaningful without knowing the allowable add-backs, which will be significant.
These include investment in youth development, sale and depreciation of fixed assets (e.g. a club’s stadium or training ground), investment in a club’s community scheme, promotion related bonus payments, career ending injury costs, bad debts from other clubs and losses sustained from a defaulting major sponsor.
Comments
Bank Overdraft £2.2M
Trade Creditors and HMRC £2.5M
Bank Mortgage £4.2M
Parent Co. £14M**
Directors payable upon Premier League Promotion £8.5M
Accruals and deferred income £8M *
Other £0.5M
Total £40M of which Trade Creditors, HMRC and 50% of the deferred income is short term (<1yr)
*Accruals and deferred income will mainly relate to Season Tickets sold before June, VIP monies and grants secured to build the Valley which are released over the life of the asset - I wouldn't class these as creditors as no one is going to reclaim the money!
** Assuming that last seasons losses met by the parent co.
Hopefully it is very clear for all that creditors like HMRC are in a minority which is why administration is unlikely.
I am referring to the accounts and being precise in order to make the following point very clearly:
There are several interested parties in any transaction around selling the club. This is not the world of Goldberg or Jordan where there is no ground and no balancing interests and where the club ends up falling over because they won't deal with anyone until it's too late. It appears that by design all of the current board AND the bank have an interest in securing the best deal for the future of the club and themselves and none of them have any interest in letting a creditor like HMRC become a risk.
All of the numbers are 7 figure so a few grand here or there simply doesn't matter does it? I trust that any deal for sale (or more financing) can be struck swiftly in order to facilitate the continuing rise of CAFC from mid-table 3rd tier back to the Premier League.
http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Charlton Athletic
Chicago Addick dug into the accounts first and may have updated his blog.
We may have lost £7m in the last published accounts but are we losing that now? Losses have to slow to £5m because of FFP, I know that's not a significant monetary difference but, if £7m was the last published accounts, it means that whoever placed the story has no knowledge of the current state of play.
NB I've been having a rather amateurish look at the financial state of the clubs in this league and at most clubs all the players are up for sale, it aint just us.
But yes crazy
From the imperfect information I have, that is my 'even handed' view, not my 'agenda' - please try not to be so patronising.
You seem to be saying 'until you have full knowledge don't have a view'. If we all adhered to that principle nothing much would be said here.
For it's limited worth, some of my view is based on experience - I have been heavily involved in distressed corporate recovery throughout my working life.
For those who want to read up go to castrust.org
But very tricky to get your stake back if you're nearly there unless you can find someone to buy your position.
The only trouble with this game is that it all becomes dependent on the skills of a few and tends to ignore the tens of thousands who pays their money year in year out... p'raps there's a middle ground?
I read what people write and some on here DO have an agenda particularly where the current board are concerned.
People can take whatever view they like. This is my view.
FFP allows a loss of £8M this season of which max £3M can be loans
The Trust are not speculating about what might happen but simply putting some analysis out there to inform the fans... CAFC do not violently disagree with analysis to date seeing they distributed 4,000 issues of the last issue of our magazine...
perhaps the focus for the Trust should move to what now / whats next?
If the club could be got for £15mil, and to include the debts. What would be needed is money plus time. If five thousand season ticket holders paid in 4000 each (told you it was a big if!) we would have £20mil. With a good wind that gets you the club and through this season. During that time you cost cut as much as possible, accept massive player departures (hopefully in January when they can realise some money), and get closer to balancing the books.
Then you need to re-schedule debt over a goodly period of time, and try to make the remaining little go a long way without further debt.
Yes it would mean relegation, even successive relegations. The club would however be owned by the supporters whose duty would be to balance the books henceforth, and chip away at the debt over time.
You then hope to make profits on player development and sales to hopefully make progress.
Yeah I know it is pie in the sky, but I bet Coventry, and Portsmouth wish they had been able to do something like that previously.
OK, that is one equation attempting to see a way out of the mess. What others are there?
Anything more would be speculation but the Trust is here to help the fans help the club so perhaps time ?
However
The choices seem to be;
Jonathan Acworth succeeds in persuading a mega rich person to invest.
One of us wins big rollover euromillions.
A sugar daddy/mummy wants us, and pays Tone and Co for the club.
The present lot stumble on, gradually depleting our resources/or having vast good fortune as Chris Powell gets us promoted.
Oil/Fracking is discovered in the car park as a pothole collapses to reveal untold riches.
We plan for a bleak yet survivable future.
The club ceases to exist any more.
The present lot change their mind and Kevin Cash pours in the dosh.
Dunno. However musing on some kind of plan helps me to withhold despair.
And it secures £120M additional TV revenue guaranteed over five years with lost revenue of £10M solidarity payments/ Championship TV money whilst sitting at the bottom of the Premier League for a season.
Yes, there are additional costs to fund the players but you still have your original £45M because when you come down you look to go up again not just walk away
I think the real question is how much does CAFC need to spend to increase chances of promotion? And what is a yo-yo club actually worth - perhaps one will be sold sooner or later?
These include investment in youth development, sale and depreciation of fixed assets (e.g. a club’s stadium or training ground), investment in a club’s community scheme, promotion related bonus payments, career ending injury costs, bad debts from other clubs and losses sustained from a defaulting major sponsor.