Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Ellis Short Sells Sunderland - Pays Off All Debt

That's how you leave a club you have messed up. Ellis Short has sold the club and paid off something like £100,000,000 in debt on his way out the door, leaving the club debt free for the new owners.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/sport/football/sunderland-sold-ellis-short-steward-donald-chris-coleman-debt/amp/
«1

Comments

  • So the lesson is, RD, write off the debts to yourself?
  • This smells.
    Club has been getting huge Premier league payments for past x years, then relegated , but still getting parachute payments. It is one of the best supported clubs in the land - yet get relegated again.

    It clearly hasnt invested in players, and then the (Amercian) owner decides hes going to pay off all the debt.

    Just doesnt add up.
  • This smells.
    Club has been getting huge Premier league payments for past x years, then relegated , but still getting parachute payments. It is one of the best supported clubs in the land - yet get relegated again.

    It clearly hasnt invested in players, and then the (Amercian) owner decides hes going to pay off all the debt.

    Just doesnt add up.

    Don’t think he’s necessarily paid off the debt, just turned the debt into equity. So he’s written it off.
  • Written off/paid off debts to make the club desirable to would be buyers and so to avoid adding to those losses.
  • This smells.
    Club has been getting huge Premier league payments for past x years, then relegated , but still getting parachute payments. It is one of the best supported clubs in the land - yet get relegated again.

    It clearly hasnt invested in players, and then the (Amercian) owner decides hes going to pay off all the debt.

    Just doesnt add up.

    I agree this feels a bit spin-y, as does his claim that he turned down higher offers from less qualified individuals.

    It's a club that has been poorly run for a long time. They have had a litany of bad managerial appointments and bad signings. And in listening to people more knowledgeable about the club than myself, it just sounds like there's something wrong at their core, something miasmic.

    As to them being one of the best supported, I just don't know how much that matters in the modern era. I'd say they're one of the best domestically supported clubs, but have no global appeal. And unfortunately, that means a lot these days.
  • I don't know a huge amount about the situation but in reading that statement from him he seems genuine.

    This is the chairman who got them a decade in the premier league. It seems to me that he feels incredibly guilty/responsible for what has happened in the last 2/3 years and so wants to move on and give someone else the chance to do it. And he's giving them the beat chance possible by writing off all debt.
  • SDAddick said:

    This smells.
    Club has been getting huge Premier league payments for past x years, then relegated , but still getting parachute payments. It is one of the best supported clubs in the land - yet get relegated again.

    It clearly hasnt invested in players, and then the (Amercian) owner decides hes going to pay off all the debt.

    Just doesnt add up.

    I agree this feels a bit spin-y, as does his claim that he turned down higher offers from less qualified individuals.

    It's a club that has been poorly run for a long time. They have had a litany of bad managerial appointments and bad signings. And in listening to people more knowledgeable about the club than myself, it just sounds like there's something wrong at their core, something miasmic.

    As to them being one of the best supported, I just don't know how much that matters in the modern era. I'd say they're one of the best domestically supported clubs, but have no global appeal. And unfortunately, that means a lot these days.
    I appreciate what you are saying but if you think about it, how much global appeal do Leicester have? They won the bloody league!
  • I don't know a huge amount about the situation but in reading that statement from him he seems genuine.

    This is the chairman who got them a decade in the premier league. It seems to me that he feels incredibly guilty/responsible for what has happened in the last 2/3 years and so wants to move on and give someone else the chance to do it. And he's giving them the beat chance possible by writing off all debt.

    Reads like the sort of thing RD will likely put out when selling us in an attempt to put a positive spin on a giant cock up to me.
  • I keep reading the title of this thread as someone called Ellis that is short selling Sunderland (stock). I am not enough of an economist to know if that's funny or apt or neither of the above.
  • Sponsored links:


  • ^^^ great post Stig
  • Nice one Mr. Thundercock. I would love to believe that you could forward this to the twat.
  • SDAddick said:

    This smells.
    Club has been getting huge Premier league payments for past x years, then relegated , but still getting parachute payments. It is one of the best supported clubs in the land - yet get relegated again.

    It clearly hasnt invested in players, and then the (Amercian) owner decides hes going to pay off all the debt.

    Just doesnt add up.

    I agree this feels a bit spin-y, as does his claim that he turned down higher offers from less qualified individuals.

    It's a club that has been poorly run for a long time. They have had a litany of bad managerial appointments and bad signings. And in listening to people more knowledgeable about the club than myself, it just sounds like there's something wrong at their core, something miasmic.

    As to them being one of the best supported, I just don't know how much that matters in the modern era. I'd say they're one of the best domestically supported clubs, but have no global appeal. And unfortunately, that means a lot these days.
    I appreciate what you are saying but if you think about it, how much global appeal do Leicester have? They won the bloody league!
    True, and I get what you're saying, but
    1) They marketed to be big in Thailand with a Thai owner (don't know the effect Nigel Pearson's son had on that).
    2) They are the exception that proves the rule. What they did was fantastic. But it's unlikely we'll see anything like it again in the near future, if not in our lifetimes.
  • I've read a number of Sunderland fans who are vary sceptical about this, many think that he has simply written off any debt owed to him and that the club is very much still in debt.
  • people just don't go around writing off 100 million in debt - it would be naïve to think so- especially someone who has no emotional connection to the club in the same way as someone who has supported the club all their lives.
  • Thing is, that call it debt, but I think Ellis is treating it like what it is, sunk money, gone never to be seen again unless the dice fall in your favour and you're successful enough to sell at a profit.

    Calling it debt is a conceit, it's an owner saying "I haven't blown all the money, I've lent it to the club, I'll get it back one day". In 99% of cases that's pure fantasy, you're not getting back, not even part of it in many cases.
  • Did the previous Bolton owner do the same ??
  • edited April 2018
    colthe3rd said:

    I've read a number of Sunderland fans who are vary sceptical about this, many think that he has simply written off any debt owed to him and that the club is very much still in debt.

    I think those fans simply are unable to believe that what could happen, did indeed happen. As I understand it, the club had over £110M in debt. At last official report, £68M was owed to a financial institution and the rest to himself, a la Roland.

    It appears Short was paid some amount for the club. Guessing £30-50M. This probably covered what was owed to himself or close to it. And then it appears he paid off the entire amount to the bank, leaving the club debt free.

    Most of that debt to the financial institution pre-dated his ownership. Clearing that debt was an honorable think to do given the double relegation under his tenure but still unheard of by owners on the way out the door. But it appears he really did do that.

    They are now a debt free club.
  • edited April 2018

    colthe3rd said:

    I've read a number of Sunderland fans who are vary sceptical about this, many think that he has simply written off any debt owed to him and that the club is very much still in debt.

    I think those fans simply are unable to believe that would could happen, did indeed happen. As I understand it, the club had over £110M in debt. At last official report, £68M was owed to a financial institution and the rest to himself, a la Roland.

    It appears Short was paid some amount for the club. Guessing £30-50M. This probably covered what was owed to himself or close to it. And then it appears he paid off the entire amount to the bank, leaving the club debt free.

    Most of that debt to the financial institution pre-dated his ownership. Clearing that debt was an honorable think to do given the double relegation under his tenure but still unheard of by owners on the way out the door. But it appears he really did do that.

    They are now a debt free club.
    True now a debt free club but I imagine they are going to rack up massive debts next season in both wages and having to pay players to leave. I wonder what John O'Shea will be on in League One.

    Again, I'm skeptical, and his tenure hasn't been great, but if true its a good thing to do. I just suspect he did the math of what relegation has and will continue to cost and this way was cheaper. I know they have a couple more years of parachute payments but even in the Prem their wage bill was really high if memory serves.

    Would love it if we picked up Joel Asoro the young Swede and Lynden Gooch the brilliantly named American from them. Suspect both might attract bigger offers though.
  • Sponsored links:


  • how about this as a possible scenario..... Sunderland have had 10 years of Premier money - they havnt spent much money on players (that i can think of) so, has Short trousered vast sums in excess of 100 million in that time and now wants to 'pay it back' and sell to a friendly beneficiary in order that not too many questions are asked?
  • how about this as a possible scenario..... Sunderland have had 10 years of Premier money - they havnt spent much money on players (that i can think of) so, has Short trousered vast sums in excess of 100 million in that time and now wants to 'pay it back' and sell to a friendly beneficiary in order that not too many questions are asked?

    The thing is I feel like they have spent a fair amount on players and wages. Maybe I'm misremebering, maybe that's because they've had Sam Allardyce and David Moyes and Roy Keane as managers, but I feel like the season they got relegated they had a huge wage bill. Can check later on.
  • SDAddick said:

    how about this as a possible scenario..... Sunderland have had 10 years of Premier money - they havnt spent much money on players (that i can think of) so, has Short trousered vast sums in excess of 100 million in that time and now wants to 'pay it back' and sell to a friendly beneficiary in order that not too many questions are asked?

    The thing is I feel like they have spent a fair amount on players and wages. Maybe I'm misremebering, maybe that's because they've had Sam Allardyce and David Moyes and Roy Keane as managers, but I feel like the season they got relegated they had a huge wage bill. Can check later on.
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/apr/26/sunderland-hall-of-shame-clubs-mostly-bad-signings-under-short
  • SDAddick said:

    how about this as a possible scenario..... Sunderland have had 10 years of Premier money - they havnt spent much money on players (that i can think of) so, has Short trousered vast sums in excess of 100 million in that time and now wants to 'pay it back' and sell to a friendly beneficiary in order that not too many questions are asked?

    The thing is I feel like they have spent a fair amount on players and wages. Maybe I'm misremebering, maybe that's because they've had Sam Allardyce and David Moyes and Roy Keane as managers, but I feel like the season they got relegated they had a huge wage bill. Can check later on.
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/apr/26/sunderland-hall-of-shame-clubs-mostly-bad-signings-under-short
    That's the main difference between successful and unsuccessful clubs really. Buying duff players on long contracts that you're stuck with is a recipe for disaster. I
  • Short has written off the debt but the club is still making significant losses, and the new owners will either have to continue funding those, or cut costs dramatically.

    I'd imagine pretty much the entire squad is for sale, or free to have their contract cancelled should they wish to leave.
  • A quick google suggests he is worth somewhere around the £1billion mark. That is 1000 million. So he still has 900 million in the bank. He should be alright.

    I know it is not as simple as that and he has done the honourable thing but I do get wound up with things like this. In my opinion this should be the way it is anyway. Buy a club and if you f### it up you pay up. Let the next one have a clean slate to work with.

    Just my simple and humble opinion having no clue whatsoever about buying and selling anything more than a house and that was confusing enough.
  • SDAddick said:

    how about this as a possible scenario..... Sunderland have had 10 years of Premier money - they havnt spent much money on players (that i can think of) so, has Short trousered vast sums in excess of 100 million in that time and now wants to 'pay it back' and sell to a friendly beneficiary in order that not too many questions are asked?

    The thing is I feel like they have spent a fair amount on players and wages. Maybe I'm misremebering, maybe that's because they've had Sam Allardyce and David Moyes and Roy Keane as managers, but I feel like the season they got relegated they had a huge wage bill. Can check later on.
    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/apr/26/sunderland-hall-of-shame-clubs-mostly-bad-signings-under-short
    That's the main difference between successful and unsuccessful clubs really. Buying duff players on long contracts that you're stuck with is a recipe for disaster. I
    3 million quid for El Hadji-Ba!
  • The club is losing £2.5M per month last I heard.

    A lot of contracts finally end this season and apparently 14 players at minimum will be sold/dropped. Then again, as parachute payments drop, it may offset those cost cutbacks.

    I think the big threat for Sunderland now is they clearly have exceeded FFP loss limits for a few years and I wonder if a transfer embargo is in their future?

    In League One, they can cut your spending in advance of your financials coming out, not after the fact like in The Championship and PL.
  • Did the previous Bolton owner do the same ??

    Yes.
  • Did the previous Bolton owner do the same ??

    Yes.
    But he was a lifelong fan - had an emotional attachment.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!