quayside Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 “Mike isn’t having to put money in either,” he said. “We had to have a clean piece of paper at first, and there were huge amounts of securitised loan. That was £105million, which had to be cleared. When we were relegated, we out to borrow £28million to get us back into the Premier League and to reshape ourselves and push forward. Crikey. The book value of that loan was around £50-60m at the time of the takeover, the break fees on the loan must have been horrific. That's why you do due diligence, boys! Also, last time I checked a 'cash advance' is a loan. I don't mind the board running the club as they see fit, but their obfuscation around financial issues drives me up the wall. What they are say here is "Mike doesn't want his loan back, apart from the bit he did. Which we've paid him". FFS (Shepherd) hid quite a bit of the debt (from the losses from 2005 - 2007) via Barclays with a huge overdraft and new loans which Ashley didn't know. Also Shepherd with his cosy relationship with Barclays putting in takeover clauses into them didn't help. I don't think any debt or loans were hidden but the loan agreements did contain clauses that resulted in them being repayable in full if there was a change of ownership. I believe this came as a bit of a shock to Ashley, as did the flawed business model he inherited. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 “Mike isn’t having to put money in either,” he said. “We had to have a clean piece of paper at first, and there were huge amounts of securitised loan. That was £105million, which had to be cleared. When we were relegated, we out to borrow £28million to get us back into the Premier League and to reshape ourselves and push forward. Crikey. The book value of that loan was around £50-60m at the time of the takeover, the break fees on the loan must have been horrific. That's why you do due diligence, boys! Also, last time I checked a 'cash advance' is a loan. I don't mind the board running the club as they see fit, but their obfuscation around financial issues drives me up the wall. What they are say here is "Mike doesn't want his loan back, apart from the bit he did. Which we've paid him". I think this particular "advance" was identified and disclosed in last year's accounts as being specifically for short term purposes and to be repaid shortly after it was received. I can see what you mean but I suppose the point is that the major chunk of Ashley's loan hasn't been reduced and is now arguably pretty much an intrinsic part of the capital structure of the club. Yup, seems to me out of the remaining loan we have £17m that needs to be paid back over the next couple of seasons, and then hopefully we'll be effectively debt free. The rest will only ever be an issue if we were to be sold as it has no ongoing cost to the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 The rest will only ever be an issue if we were to be sold as it has no ongoing cost to the club. The rest wouldn't be there if we were sold, it would be eliminated at the point of sale. I do love how they bang on about the change of control on the secured loan. Aside from the fact anyone buying a company assumes all debt has to be repaid, it was even in the public domain (was mentioned in the Chronicle a couple of times). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 The rest will only ever be an issue if we were to be sold as it has no ongoing cost to the club. The rest wouldn't be there if we were sold, it would be eliminated at the point of sale. I do love how they bang on about the change of control on the secured loan. Aside from the fact anyone buying a company assumes all debt has to be repaid, it was even in the public domain (was mentioned in the Chronicle a couple of times). is it not different with the debt being held by the owner ? for example, potential buyer offers £100mill inclusive of the debt, then it's up to the owner to decide to accept or not, as opposed to banks etc holding the debt. does it put us in a better position in that ashley, should he need/want to, just cut his losses and can accept however much he wants whereas the banks would want the lot ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 You wouldn't want to buy a business and still have the former owner as a creditor. It does happen sometimes (called vendor loan notes), but it's not usual practice. If the loan was bank debt and the business was sold then the banks (or bondholders) would receive 100% of the money back before until the shareholders even got a penny. They would only have a say on a sale process if the business was in distress or administration process. If the loan is Ashley's then it doesn't really matter, he can accept whatever he likes because the owner and creditor is the same party. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 The rest will only ever be an issue if we were to be sold as it has no ongoing cost to the club. The rest wouldn't be there if we were sold, it would be eliminated at the point of sale. I do love how they bang on about the change of control on the secured loan. Aside from the fact anyone buying a company assumes all debt has to be repaid, it was even in the public domain (was mentioned in the Chronicle a couple of times). I don't understand why a change of control clause in any financing of any kind would have come as a shock to a businessman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 “Mike isn’t having to put money in either,” he said. “We had to have a clean piece of paper at first, and there were huge amounts of securitised loan. That was £105million, which had to be cleared. When we were relegated, we out to borrow £28million to get us back into the Premier League and to reshape ourselves and push forward. Crikey. The book value of that loan was around £50-60m at the time of the takeover, the break fees on the loan must have been horrific. That's why you do due diligence, boys! Also, last time I checked a 'cash advance' is a loan. I don't mind the board running the club as they see fit, but their obfuscation around financial issues drives me up the wall. What they are say here is "Mike doesn't want his loan back, apart from the bit he did. Which we've paid him". Some of the initial debt was what we still owed clubs for transfers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/9963189/Newcastle-United-losses-cost-Mike-Ashley-10m.html Accounts for MASH Holdings – the company through which Mr Ashley controls Newcastle United football club and a majority stake in Sports Direct – show pre-tax profits fell to £130.6m in the year to April 30 2012. The dip from a £140.1m profit the previous year was fuelled by a £5.5m loss at Newcastle United, after the club’s £17.2m profit in 2011. The club experienced a “very significant reduction” in profits from player trading compared with the previous year, the accounts reveal. Income from player transfers in 2011 was flattered by the sale in January of that year of Andy Carroll to Liverpool for £35m. Despite the £5.5m loss at Newcastle, directors were “satisfied with both the playing and the financial performance of the club during the year”. Newcastle finished last season in fifth position in the Premier League. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 I assume the £5.5m loss mentioned there is after transfers are taken into account Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 So apart from media income everything is going the wrong way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble Newcastle United 2012 detailed accounts have been published: profit of £1.4m (2011 £32.6m) Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble The £31.3m fall in #NUFC profit explained by £31.4m reduction in profit on player sales from £36.7m to £6.5m, due to 2011 Andy Carroll sale. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC revenue rose 5% from £88.5m to £93.3m, which is 7th highest in England and 20th highest in the world. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 revenue £93.3m (2011 £88.5m): match day £23.9m (2011 £24.3m), TV £55.6m (2011 £48.5m), commercial £13.8m (2011 £15.8m). Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 average attendance rose from 47,746 to 49,936 (3rd highest in England), but match day revenue down due to season ticket discounts. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 TV revenue up £7m, mainly due to higher league position (5th vs 17th) and 2 more live televised matches. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 commercial revenue down £2m, but these figures exclude new Wonga sponsorship deal. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 staff costs up 20% to £64.1m (2011 £53.6m), leading to rise in wages to turnover ratio from 61% to 69%. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble Despite much transfer activity, #NUFC 2012 player amortisation and impairment down £4.6m to £12.6m. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC spending in Jan window (Sissoko, Debuchy, Gouffran, Yanga-Mbiwa, Haidara) not included. Cost £27m, but player sales ( mainly Ba) £12m. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 gross debt down £11m to £129m (2011 £140m), made up of interest-free loans from owner Mike Ashley. Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 net debt is only down £1m to £129m (2011 £130m), as prior year cash balances of £10m have become a £0.3m overdraft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 See Ashley will be taking another £18m out before 30 June 2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 See Ashley will be taking another £18m out before 30 June 2013 But that's money he's put in though to buy the club? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 TV revenue up £7m, mainly due to higher league position (5th vs 17th) and 2 more live televised matches. It was 5th v 12th, not 17th so people can guess at the money we'll not get this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 TV revenue up £7m, mainly due to higher league position (5th vs 17th) and 2 more live televised matches. It was 5th v 12th, not 17th so people can guess at the money we'll not get this season. Yeah, though Europa money will level that out to a degree, and we could yet finish above 12th (hopefully ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Swiss Ramble@SwissRamble #NUFC 2012 TV revenue up £7m, mainly due to higher league position (5th vs 17th) and 2 more live televised matches. It was 5th v 12th, not 17th so people can guess at the money we'll not get this season. Yeah, though Europa money will level that out to a degree, and we could yet finish above 12th (hopefully ) Europa operating costs could wipe this out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Europa operating costs could wipe this out. I'm sure we get less than £400k if we go out tomorrow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Europa operating costs could wipe this out. I'm sure we get less than £400k if we go out tomorrow. yeah but throw in extra money from tickets through the tournament Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 yeah but throw in extra money from tickets through the tournament It would be interesting to see what attendance we have to achieve to break even for every Europa home game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Europa operating costs could wipe this out. I'm sure we get less than £400k if we go out tomorrow. yeah but throw in extra money from tickets through the tournament Ticket sales tomorrow night will be about £500-600k I'd imagine? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 yeah but throw in extra money from tickets through the tournament At a guess, less than £2.5 million as tickets go for between £15 and £5 for most areas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Ticket sales tomorrow night will be about £500-600k I'd imagine? Before tomorrow we've had 190,620 people through the gates at home in Europe, I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Ticket sales tomorrow night will be about £500-600k I'd imagine? Before tomorrow we've had 190,620 people through the gates at home in Europe, I think. Espn/Itv will have boosted the gate reciepts too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now