| 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: |
| Latest Accounts; to Jun 14 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 1 2015, 12:13 PM (3,902 Views) | |
| Setenza | Apr 7 2015, 10:38 AM Post #31 |
Knitting with only one needle
  ![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
Seems like most people in the media are lining up to defend McNamara. Even nemesis Tommy Wright. The trust / federation statements doesn't seem to have helped much, except to let people know the situation, despite any damage it may cause. Either that's what was intended, or was a bit of a lack of judgement. Beyond that, there still seems to be a bit of unhappiness about Thompson, which seems to be what the vague reference of the clubs running costs was about in the initial statement. ArabTRUST AGM this week should be interesting, although hopefully it's not followed by more statements. |
 |
 
|
| yasser | Apr 7 2015, 01:22 PM Post #32 |
Ivan Golac
|
Seems AT/Fed are still on their high horse and released a new statement. Personally I'm left wondering what sort of relationship AT/Fed expect to have with the club from now on. Response to Club statement that was released earlier We are hugely disappointed at the suggestion in the Dundee United statement of 3rd April 2015 that ArabTRUST and the Federation of Dundee United Supporters Clubs have been 'perpetuating the inaccurate suggestion that the manager of Dundee United and/or other employees may have benefited through the payment of over £500,000 in relation to transfer activity'. This adds to media reports of the false accusation that we leaked confidential information that had been provided. We are sure that the Dundee United Board members who were present at the meeting of 26th March would appreciate that we have respected the confidentiality of some very sensitive information provided. This was agreed at the meeting - and we will continue to honour that - given that the Dundee United Chairman stated he was afraid of potential legal action based on what he was telling those present. We cannot control how the media interpret a statement. Indeed, the only person who has been attributed comments in the press has been the Dundee United Chairman. Whilst we have kept a dignified silence since our statement was published, there has been a barrage of media spin in the last 24 hours from the Dundee United Board following an initial balanced statement yesterday afternoon. This further highlights one of our original concerns in our questions to the club i.e. the communications from the Dundee United Board. At no point in our statement of 1st April did we imply, far less name, anyone who may have benefited from the transfers of the four players mentioned. We were concerned around 'commission' payments that the club had informed us of. However, they would not outline who they had been paid to - it now appears to be confirmed that Jackie McNamara was one recipient although we would continue to ask the club who else has been in receipt of these 'commissions'? Our exact points are that we required a full breakdown of the transfer income leaving the club, as we were worried that the information shared at the meeting by the club was incomplete. The club did provide clarity in certain areas (which again we have kept confidential) and this is how we arrived at the 'over £500,000' stated. Despite the club promising us a full breakdown as an action from the meeting last Thursday, they have still failed to provide this. We would hope that the confidential provision of this would allow closure of the matter. We repeat the original point we made at the meeting on 26th March and in our statement of 1st April that the shareholders in the club (of which both organisations are) and fans (of whom we are the main representative bodies) deserve to know where the funds that leave our club go. Every penny that leaves the club is one less to be invested in the playing side - which everyone will agree is the most important part of football. Whilst we remain disappointed with the Dundee United Board's communications, we urge all United fans to head to Tannadice tomorrow to roar the team on. A victory tomorrow is required to set us up for the massively important derby on Wednesday. |
|
|
|
| Cobardon | Apr 7 2015, 03:31 PM Post #33 |
Uncle Smurf
|
That reads like a statement from some people whose main method of debate is via football messageboards. This one apart, of course. |
|
|
|
| vvhatsthatonyourback | Apr 7 2015, 03:50 PM Post #34 |
wild eyed
|
Yas, that's an old statement from Friday night. Thankfully, there didn't appear to be any more recent statements since that flurry. A win against Dundee and let's hope this all quietens down. I don't see any benefit of it dragging on. |
|
|
|
| Skeletor | Apr 12 2015, 09:19 PM Post #35 |
Most likely to be Ann Widdecombe
|
Can I ask, were Eddie Thompson's contributions labelled under "Thompson Family Loans" at the time? |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Apr 13 2015, 11:40 AM Post #36 |
Twat
|
The fuck is this? I don't understand how we've reached this point. Is anyone outraged that JMc was due a bonus based on transfer income? Because I'm not. Not even slightly. Clearly, it was a mistake for Thompson to share (an unknown amount of possibly) confidential information with Arabtrust. And it was wrong for Arabtrust to release its bizarre "something in the woodshed" statement. But it takes a fevered brain to imagine these actions were part of some Machiavellian power-play conspiracy. It's far more likely, I'd have thought, that the story snowballed after Thompson said slightly too much in response to the question "where did all the money go?" Why are we getting shit in national newspapers about the JMc being "shafted" and "completely hung out to dry by his chairman" because he apparently "leaked" confidential information (which is contrary to the Record's own story on the matter). None of the publicly available facts support this reading. We're in a vortex of insanity here, and I'd very much like it to stop. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Apr 13 2015, 01:02 PM Post #37 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
Presumably, as I'd guess it's unlikely you'd be able to go back to previous accounts and change details like that. Of course, at the time it was probably just reported Thompson putting money in, which was all great. |
|
|
|
| Skeletor | Apr 14 2015, 01:44 AM Post #38 |
|
Most likely to be Ann Widdecombe
|
That's one of my own problems with all of this; one man puts in his money and another takes it out fast. I understand that Eddie put in large amounts of money to save our skin, and presume that Stephen was tasked with the job of masterminding financial success at United in order to ringfence any inheritance. It's just the manner in which he's doing so, which seems often ruthlessly at the expense of success on the pitch. Let me have a crack at this... --------------------- Within the first repost was:
Noting that they've managed a way of paying however much to Thompson, halving the entire debt and ridding us of all bank debt.
To whom is this 1.2m going, before the end of the financial year? Who's debt is left in that "overal debt" grouping other than Thompson's? Within the second repost was:
So - From January '13 to February '14, 0.4m reduction. From February '14 to April '15, 2.6m reduction. The Courier article which started this thread, albeit containing old news from January, mentioned that the next set of accounts ending June 2015 will contain the 2.85m for Andy Robertson, roughly the same for Ryan Gauld, and now the 2m gain from GMS and Armstrong. Going by our friend Transfermarkt, within the 2013/2014 season we spent approximately £0 on players, and racked up £750k in the sale of Johnny Russell. Within the 2014/2015 account due for release on 5th January 2016, we've spent approximately 250k on players, and racked up 7.5m in transfer fees. To balance, that's an extra 6.5m to be factored in at the end of this season. Does "overall debt" include "bank debt"? I'd think that's likely, so therefore going on Thompson's first statement, he's likely divvied out 2.6m of this extra 6.5m, leaving 3.9m. He wishes to give back, to himself and possibly others, 1.2m of this by the end of the year. That leaves 2.7m carried over. -------------------- Is it unfair that fans should protest at rising ticket prices given this exceptional year, in which everybody seems to be profiting other than the fans? Is it also none of the fan groups' business given that they are indeed also shareholders? I don't see that ArabTRUST and the Committee of the Federation of DUSC are being unreasonable here. They asked for some transparency in light of these surpluses and the ongoing manner of "driving down costs" at the expense of team performance. Given the recent highlight of a sell-on clause in the management contract it comes as no surprise that we didn't retain GMS, and subsequently our hopes of the Scottish Cup, League Cup and 3rd place, for 250k, and that the gave the green light that they'd be able to manage just fine with the crop we have. Armstrong was a decent deal, that one's business. Please pick holes in this, I want to understand the situation here. |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Apr 14 2015, 05:51 AM Post #39 |
|
Twat
|
I can see the tree you're barking up, Skel, but I'm not sure it's a tree. The money Eddie pissed away is in Stuart FcCall's bookmaker's bank account, never to return, and was written off long ago. The figures are best simplified. There was £5.6m of debt £4.4m of bank debt was taken private at par (more or less) then repaid by net transfer income. Which leaves £1.2m of debt, which is the amount ST says is outstanding. Eddie Thompson died seven years ago. The club tends to run an operating loss of about 120k a year.£120k x 7 = £1.2m. As discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, it's not obvious why £7m gross of transfer income only covered £4.4m of debt. I'll suggest the bank debt buyback was a shit deal and transfer bonus %ges were drawn up on the assumption of fees in the six-figure bracket. Whatever, while there's no hint of malfeasance it's obvious that things could've been handled much better. ST never admits a mistake, though. Usually, he prefers to lie, which is nine-tenths of the problem. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Apr 14 2015, 11:33 AM Post #40 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
From what I can gather, ticket prices are going to stay the same this year. Originally they were going up, which the trust / federation didn't seem too upset about, so long as it was part of being financially stable. However, ST then changed his mind and said they'd be frozen. Which was another issue that seemed to confuse things and upset the trust / federation. |
|
|
|
| Skeletor | Apr 16 2015, 01:17 PM Post #41 |
|
Most likely to be Ann Widdecombe
|
It's all very confusing, this... Something many simple men like myself wouldn't have bothered trying to comprehend had ample reinvestment been evident in the squad. The current lineup gives me the shakes. I want to get excited about Connolly but it just feels like cheering a lamb to the slaughter, he'll be out the door as soon as he hits the sixth figure. I thought the balance from our Spring Clearout would plug absolutely every hole and pave us the path to make baby steps towards building a team for the purposes of competition. The disquiet here is just that, there needs to be a change of philosophy from the board in tandem with our changing fortune. ST's a shrewd businessman who appears to have fully stabilised the club, but we're not here to support an Excel spreadsheet. Even if season ticket prices were to increase, if there was a written commitment to use it to open the purse a little to attract some solid free agents in key positions then I think the row would settle. We need to shake off the tag of being a "selling club" and lift our sights a bit now that we're out of the hole and in good shape. Speculate to accumulate and all that! God I'm not cut out for the futility of Scottish football... 
|
|
|
|
| Naebody | Apr 16 2015, 01:39 PM Post #42 |
|
Twat
|
We went through this in the Armstrong thread, Skel. The core problem is that we've all read Kahneman and Thompson hasn't. As soon as he does, we'll be fine. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Apr 16 2015, 11:08 PM Post #43 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
Maybe we should just support players instead of teams. Happens in other sports, although not so much team sports, but still, it's way easier. |
|
|
|
| vvhatsthatonyourback | Apr 17 2015, 06:57 AM Post #44 |
|
wild eyed
|
Don't do it skel, those are just links to "up your butt with a coconut". |
|
|
|
| yasser | Apr 17 2015, 08:31 AM Post #45 |
|
Ivan Golac
|
I remember the days when I and many others supported the team of Dundee United Football Club and didn't know or care who the actual board of directors were or what the financial stability healthy or otherwise was. Just as long as the team were winning frequently enough to keep us happy. Ahh, what a simple uncomplicated world we lived in back then. Who said nostalgia is dead? 
|
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic » |
4:46 PM Jul 13