| 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: |
| Bank debt gone; Apparently... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 7 2014, 09:59 AM (5,455 Views) | |
| Naebody | Jul 28 2014, 05:24 PM Post #76 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You lot are weird. Why would you want Dundee FC dead? We're in the ideal situation at the moment: we have an inept nemesis. The only way it could be better is if we literally owned them. It'd double revenue at a marginal cost, because there would be a United game both home and away every week. The financial argument is irresistible. Okay, so it's probably not sensible to challenge UEFA's laws about owning two clubs. But what if we somehow convinced Dundee FC to share a stadium, sack all its players and take our entire reserve side on week-to-week loans? Would that break any laws? |
![]() |
|
| reekie | Jul 28 2014, 06:14 PM Post #77 |
|
lum raker
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not entertaining this folly (although I agree that an inept nemesis, as is currently, is amost perfect) but I do wonder what that Dundee (United reserves) FC would look like? McGovern Ballantyne Harwood Souttar Spark Petrie Montgomery Connelly Smith Fraser Moore Perhaps a little unfair to lump Souttar and Aidan in with the other Under-20's but, hey, they'll need a little experience to carry them through. They'd play nice football, no doubt, but they'd get kicked off the park I fear. The big question is...would they beat the wee team from across the road? Probably. So it's a "yes" from me. |
![]() |
|
| vvhatsthatonyourback | Jul 29 2014, 07:32 AM Post #78 |
|
wild eyed
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Maybe buy a warehouse of Nike product and try to shift it over the internet? |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Sep 2 2014, 01:05 PM Post #79 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thompson says bank commitment gone.
So the transfer agreement has gone, not sure if it's been replaced by something, but should make things simpler... |
![]() |
|
| Morvant's Finest | Sep 2 2014, 01:30 PM Post #80 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's pretty good news, no? Though a bit of a pain in the a*se that ST went and renegotiated the details of a deal that we spent so long discussing.... Will be interesting to hear whether we still have an overdraft facility with the Bank for the lean years or will that be effectively provided by the 'soft loan' lenders?? |
![]() |
|
| Naebody | Sep 2 2014, 02:23 PM Post #81 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Eh? What's been renegotiated? And why? Have United paid less than the maximum ~£4m payoff previously agreed? Or more? Or something else entirely? After telling us one thing, then changing it to something entirely different, then seemingly meeting the terms of that entirely different thing in full, we're now told that a third unexplained thing has happened. And, after weeks of hard negotiation, this third thing has resulted in precisely the same outcome as the second thing. Well done, baldie. Help yourself to another bourbon cream. |
![]() |
|
| Cobardon | Sep 2 2014, 10:19 PM Post #82 |
|
Uncle Smurf
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I thought this was interesting on the website though. 5600 is a very good total of season tickets for a club like United. |
![]() |
|
| Morvant's Finest | Sep 3 2014, 06:26 AM Post #83 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Indeed Cob, that's very impressive and it hasn't taken the kind of massive price reduction that people constantly say has to be implemented to get people attending football again in the mythically huge numbers we enjoyed in the 1980's. Difficult to find numbers for other clubs easily but that will definitely compare favourably to the likes of Motherwell, St Johnstone and Kilmarnock etc. |
![]() |
|
| Naebody | Jan 5 2015, 01:56 PM Post #84 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bump. Results to June 2014 show a £100k operating loss, which seems to be our usual level now, and a £1.3m of exceptional gain. I'd guess half of that is the Johnny Russell fee. Anyone know what the rest might be? An "exceptional gain relating to the exit of banking arrangements with the Bank of Scotland" doesn't really explain it. ETA: oh! It's the haircut on the debt, of course! So, assuming the £750k for Russell's booked as an exceptional, that's a writeoff of £550k or thereabouts. Assuming £4.4m of debt was bought back, that'd be a 12% haircut -- which takes us back to page 2 of this thread. Edited by Naebody, Jan 5 2015, 06:21 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Jan 6 2015, 12:47 AM Post #85 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Another small positive which should only be good. Things do seem well balanced at the moment in terms of finances and the playing squad. And it means we can pay for the likes of Telfer without too much sweating. Combined with Aberdeen's debt restructuring, Hearts feeling positive and other clubs cutting their debts, things seem a bit more realistic and sensible in terms of clubs financial actions. Although will see if that holds if someone thinks they can catch Celtic. |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Feb 21 2015, 01:38 PM Post #86 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Interview with Thompson where he updates everyone on the debt situation.
So it sounds like we've not cleared the 'soft' loans yet, and won't with the expected income from the celtic sales. We still owe money to Thompson. But instead of clearing the debt, we're spending a decent chunk of money on players and a pitch. |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Mar 4 2015, 11:27 AM Post #87 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In the Courier, Thompson says:
I wish I could be bothered doing the sums to figure out if that's good or not. |
![]() |
|
| Conan the Destroyer | Mar 4 2015, 11:48 AM Post #88 |
![]()
I prefer it when we're pish
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Excellent, sounds like we can look forward to the next player who attracts a bit of attention being sold with the usual alacrity. |
![]() |
|
| Naebody | Mar 4 2015, 12:53 PM Post #89 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh god. Oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god ..... In February 2014, United said it had bought £4.7m of bank debt for £1.45m. Thompson's references to "soft loans" since then have suggested they were to cover this £1.45m, so let's start the calculations from there. As part of the debt repurchase, the bank was given rights to future transfer income of between £0.25m and £2.4m. Gauld's upfront transfer fee was ~£2.2m. Robertson's transfer fee was ~£2.85m. Transfer fees for Armstrong and GMS were ~£2m. That's £7m. After VAT, that's £5.6m. Net off the bank's transfer fee agreement at the maximum rate and that leaves a £3.2m surplus. Going by Thompson's latest comment, the soft loans (assuming they're ex bank debt) will have been reduced by £150,000 by the time all transfer fees are received. Rounding down throughout to be ultra cautious (because interest needs paid and contract lawyers aren't free), that still leaves a ~£3m surplus. The club tends to run an operating loss of £100,000 a year on a wage bill of around £3.5m. Given all this has happened in just over a year, it's quite difficult to understand where a ~£3m surplus might have gone. The most plausible reading of the above, I guess, is that there were "soft" loans outstanding even before United did the bank debt buyback. However, the idea that the club owed ~£3m to parties unidentified in previously undisclosed agreements (on top of the £4.7m owed to the bank!) would open up a whole new can of WTF. |
![]() |
|
| Morvant's Finest | Mar 4 2015, 01:24 PM Post #90 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Top work Naebs Innaresting figures there.... You can knock off 10% of Robertson's fee for a start (http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/300k-robertson-boost-a-cut-above-for-queens-park.24865122 Could it be that other payments are due to be paid in installments? The Goodwillie deal was certainly done that way: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2106000/Blackburn-deny-missing-David-Goodwillie-payment.html |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




2:36 PM Jul 11