Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

    Search       Member List      Official United Site     ArabZone      ArabTRUST       BBC Sport     Twitter
Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum.

New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join The Arab League!


If you're already a member please log in:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Bank debt gone; Apparently...
Topic Started: Feb 7 2014, 09:59 AM (5,456 Views)
Naebody
Member Avatar
Twat
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
vvhatsthatonyourback
Feb 22 2014, 06:30 PM
ETA: did ST shag your wife?
Possibly. But his psychological trauma is no excuse.

Look, if United had said "we'll give the bank between £250k and £2.4m depending on what we make on transfer fees over the next 18 months" then your interpretation of a possible cash settlement would be fair enough.

Instead, United have said: "we'll pay the bank between £250k and £2.4m from transfer fee income over the next 18 months."

I read that as having guaranteed player sales. That'd be a substantive difference between meaning and message.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Morvant's Finest
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I get what you're saying Naebs (as an additional £250,000 is payable by Aug 2015 regardless of whether players are sold or not), but I think it's just the way the statement is worded that's causing confusion. I still can't see how Utd can have guaranteed they will sell players to the bank, surely there are too many factors involved in a sale beyond a club's control (player agreeing wages, passing medical, agreeing fee/add-ons with club etc), to make that guarantee.

As VVhatsthat said, whether this part of the deal is good news for the club or not will depend on the percentage of the transfer fee we're still entitled to. And given (almost?) all the funds from the Goodwillie and Russell deals were used to clear debt, even if we only get 25%-30% (and a fair fee for the player at the same time, to avoid devaluing our other assets) we're up on the deal?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Morvant's Finest
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Not Utd related, but more evidence that banks don't act logically or in the interest of their shareholders when it comes to football clubs: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26583407 (Killie's £9.4M debt "reduction" deal)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Morvant's Finest
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Now the reality of the title of this thread appears to have come to pass, thought it would be worth moving the discussion to this thread.

As of today the club appears to be completely debt free, after owing about £6.4M only 4 years ago. In that time we've enjoyed the most consistently good run of success on the field for 10-20 years (unlike other cost cutting clubs like Hibs...) and still have a highly promising team that contains young assets that could continue to generate transfer income in the next few years.

If you look around at our longterm SPFL rivals like Hibs, Hearts, Kilmarnock etc we should be bloody delighted with that state of affairs, no? :ban:

Will be interesting where we go from here though, have always wondered what being debt free and having very little ability to borrow to invest in the team would mean. You'd have to presume the bank isn't going to be willing to loan us money again anytime soon (but we may have flexibility in our overdraft with them?). So will the Thompson family be willing to put in money to improve our squad? Will the mystery cabal increase their involvement? Or will we have to love strictly within our means until we make the next transfer?

Interesting times.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
vvhatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
wild eyed
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I don't see it makes much difference really, aside from having no bank or creditors nipping at us to repay them or charge us interest.

As ever we will run at a gentle loss punctuated by occasional transfer windfalls while finishing 4th or 5th at best. Great times.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Setenza
Member Avatar
Knitting with only one needle
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If we can keep the conveyor belt going, selling Armstrong next year and it looks like one or more of the new batch of young players are destined for bigger things, then our financial position should just get stronger. From that position, hopefully we can invest in the squad sensibly to really try to more consistently win things.

If we can't, and we lose our best players for nothing and Telfer is as bad as McCoist thought, then at least we're not going to be wondering if the administration is happening next tuesday and we head down a division or two



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
vvhatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
wild eyed
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yeah, lets sell Armstrong next year for enough money to let us employ someone as good as Armstrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Setenza
Member Avatar
Knitting with only one needle
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
vvhatsthatonyourback
Jul 25 2014, 01:22 PM
Yeah, lets sell Armstrong next year for enough money to let us employ someone as good as Armstrong.
Armstrong will leave at some point. Or turn into someone we want rid off. Nothing lasts for ever, so we'll need / want to replace him. When that time comes, I'd rather have better budget to do so than have to replace him with somone we all know is a cheap option as we can't afford better.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Morvant's Finest
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Setenza
Jul 25 2014, 01:51 PM
vvhatsthatonyourback
Jul 25 2014, 01:22 PM
Yeah, lets sell Armstrong next year for enough money to let us employ someone as good as Armstrong.
Armstrong will leave at some point. Or turn into someone we want rid off. Nothing lasts for ever, so we'll need / want to replace him. When that time comes, I'd rather have better budget to do so than have to replace him with somone we all know is a cheap option as we can't afford better.
Indeed, sad as it is to say it, but to paraphrase Sir Craig of Levein, if a player like Armstrong is still playing for Utd in 3 years time he'll have failed to progress as he should have.

That's the reality of small club football post Bosman. :fisted:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Naebody
Member Avatar
Twat
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Okay, so we're more-or-less debt free. Great.

The first thing I suggest we do is borrow £3m.

Then we use ~£250k of that £3m to launch a hostile takeover of Dundee FC. Owning both clubs would consolidate the market and create plenty of mutually beneficial cost-saving synergies. It makes sense.

Then we'd use ~£1.25m to fund the massive legal case against the UEFA's restrictive two-club-ownership rules, which would generate loads of publicity for the complaisant plan to turn the City of Discovery into a twin-engined football powerhouse.

And with the remaining £1.5m we could buy a bunch of nice houses in St Andrews that we'd rent to all the players at a 10% yield, which'd more than pay the interest on the £3m loan.

Okay, it's not a failsafe plan. But it's more interesting than running a gentle loss punctuated by occasional transfer windfalls while finishing 4th or 5th at best.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vex
Paul Sturrock
[ *  * ]
Great plan.

Would we need that much to take over Dundee?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
vvhatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
wild eyed
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A wee club paying for a legal challenge to any restriction on owning more than one club is exactly what every big club would like. We might just be tiddlers in the sea of world football but there's no need to jump into the predators' mouths.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Naebody
Member Avatar
Twat
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Okay then, Mr WhatsThatOnYourBackIfThatReallyIsYourName ... What would you do with ~£3m?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Setenza
Member Avatar
Knitting with only one needle
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
We could spend the £1.5m in an aggressive campaign to put Dundee out of business. Spread false rumors, intimidate supporters, scare away players etc. Then we can pick up the stadium and grounds on the cheap.

Or we could pretend we're a rich aberdeen oil executive who has tons of money to invest and convince dundee to go on a mad spending spree. Either works.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Morvant's Finest
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Setenza
Jul 28 2014, 02:12 PM
Or we could pretend we're a rich aberdeen oil executive who has tons of money to invest and convince dundee to go on a mad spending spree. Either works.
Or pretend to be a wealthy Canadian with grandiose plans to challenge the Old Firm and build an icerink in Dundee.

Or pretend to be a pair of 'wealthy' local nightclub owners with a 'transfer fee generating' masterplan...

etc etc :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.