|
Post by bluebeard on Apr 20, 2018 14:12:24 GMT
I understand people wondering or worrying about how the club is funded but there ain’t a lot any of us can do about that now. That ship sailed a long time okay well before The Al-Qadi’s ever rocked up. I only mention ‘asset stripping’ as I am at a loss as to what people are expecting of the Al-Qadi’s. If they were going to run away and recoup all/most of their money they are going a funny way about it as far as I can do as they seem to be spending an awful lot of money even if it isn’t on the shiny new stadium we would all love to see. We can keep coming back to the charge and whether they need it or not, and we know they don’t necessarily need it if they want to bail, so why do we even need to try and answer that question when it essentially makes no difference? It’s like trying to answer the meaning of life, even if we know the answer is 42 Well if your view is we can't do anything about it so don't discuss it then we may as well stop discussing DCs team selection or tactics as we have as much input into that as we do the financing of the club. Best just to be good obedient customers handing over our money on a Saturday and clapping politely when allowed. That would be a fair analogy if DC only had 11 players to choose from every week and only one formation to work with. Or, if we had multi-millionaires queuing up to buy the club and a variety of funding options. It's also fair to say that your average fan knows more about football than they do about corporate finance. Which is reflected in the quality of debate ...
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Apr 20, 2018 14:21:29 GMT
Well if your view is we can't do anything about it so don't discuss it then we may as well stop discussing DCs team selection or tactics as we have as much input into that as we do the financing of the club. Best just to be good obedient customers handing over our money on a Saturday and clapping politely when allowed. Of course I am not saying we shouldn’t talk about how the club is run. Crikey I have spent years doing it. I just don’t get the question regarding the charge if a) we are agreed they don’t necessarily need it to get their money back, b) any new owners would want it gone because…, so c) the answer is probably trivial to make no difference
otherwise as I said earlier the club is funded as it has been in the past via loans from the owners, and the current owners seem to be spending to improve things on the face of it
Sorry you should've said earlier that a charge for circa £15m was trivial to you. Looks like your the type of investor we need.
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Apr 20, 2018 14:23:18 GMT
Well if your view is we can't do anything about it so don't discuss it then we may as well stop discussing DCs team selection or tactics as we have as much input into that as we do the financing of the club. Best just to be good obedient customers handing over our money on a Saturday and clapping politely when allowed. That would be a fair analogy if DC only had 11 players to choose from every week and only one formation to work with. Or, if we had multi-millionaires queuing up to buy the club and a variety of funding options. It's also fair to say that your average fan knows more about football than they do about corporate finance. Which is reflected in the quality of debate ... this is very true, and the reason that people like myself with zero corporate finance knowledge stay away from these debates.... All I know is that it's better to use shortcrust pastry when making a humble pie....
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Apr 20, 2018 14:37:55 GMT
Of course I am not saying we shouldn’t talk about how the club is run. Crikey I have spent years doing it. I just don’t get the question regarding the charge if a) we are agreed they don’t necessarily need it to get their money back, b) any new owners would want it gone because…, so c) the answer is probably trivial to make no difference
otherwise as I said earlier the club is funded as it has been in the past via loans from the owners, and the current owners seem to be spending to improve things on the face of it
Sorry you should've said earlier that a charge for circa £15m was trivial to you. Looks like your the type of investor we need. well that isn't quite what I said is it.
I thought the charge was £10m? The credit facility is now £15m and The Mem is valued at £11.1m if I recall the accounts/documents correctly on companies house
I though we have established/agreed that they don't need a charge to sell the ground, and get there money if they really wanted to haven't we? In that respect yes the charge is trivial.
It wouldn't be trivial that we lost the ground, but the charge wouldn't matter one bit
you went on to say any new owners would want the charge gone, so if someone else took over and paid/agreed to pay off the Al-Qadi's the charge would be gone wouldn't it, so again what real difference does the charge make?
what is the alternative scenario where the charge itself will f**k us over bearing in mind the conversation we have had and if we are tentatively agreeing on the two points above.
Meanwhile I will continue to listen the sky falling in theories whilst they continue to spend money on something they apparently have no appetite for anymore according to some (not necessarily by yourself)
|
|
|
Post by knowall on Apr 20, 2018 15:13:48 GMT
Why is it such a big thing that the Al-Qadi have a charge against the Mem? There has been a charge against the Mem since the Rovers have owned it and a charge against the Company when they didn't. But I don't recall complaints when Barclays or Geoff Dunford had a charge It is quite normal for anyone lending a company money to take a charge against assets
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Apr 20, 2018 15:28:46 GMT
Sorry you should've said earlier that a charge for circa £15m was trivial to you. Looks like your the type of investor we need. well that isn't quite what I said is it.
I thought the charge was £10m? The credit facility is now £15m and The Mem is valued at £11.1m if I recall the accounts/documents correctly on companies house
I though we have established/agreed that they don't need a charge to sell the ground, and get there money if they really wanted to haven't we? In that respect yes the charge is trivial.
It wouldn't be trivial that we lost the ground, but the charge wouldn't matter one bit
you went on to say any new owners would want the charge gone, so if someone else took over and paid/agreed to pay off the Al-Qadi's the charge would be gone wouldn't it, so again what real difference does the charge make?
what is the alternative scenario where the charge itself will f**k us over bearing in mind the conversation we have had and if we are tentatively agreeing on the two points above.
Meanwhile I will continue to listen the sky falling in theories whilst they continue to spend money on something they apparently have no appetite for anymore according to some (not necessarily by yourself)
You're agreeing that you don't know why there is a charge and we're agreeing there must be a reason. The reason that evades everyone even though you say they don't need it. Strange why people trivialise things they can't answer. To f'all yes there has always been a charge usually a lot smaller and linked to a loan from an external party. My best guess for the charge is Dwane Sports borrowing the money and having to offer security. So I imagine that we are hostage to some other parties whim, or contract interpretation, and not just the owners. Of course just my guess and it doesn't matter to most anyway for such a trivial amount.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Apr 20, 2018 15:39:55 GMT
We can argue until we are blue (and white)in the face about whether it is normal for a controlling shareholder owning 92% of the equity in a company to take a legal charge over that company's asset but if fans want to believe it is normal then nothing will change their minds.
What may be interesting is to take a look back to the accounts for the year ended 30th June 2009 when Rovers had just finished 11th in League 1 with 63 points.
In his Chairman's report Nick Higgs said the loss of £1,727 368 on turnover of £4 007 389 was unsustainable and the club still relied on the support of it's directors through both loans and equity. The loans from the directors increased by £490 127 during the year and new shares were issued to raise £869 945 including £54 000 coming from the share scheme. Nick said he was hoping to soon give positive news on the stadium regeneration plan and also commented on the first class training facilities Rovers had at South Bristol Sports Centre. He said Darren Patterson had been appointed to bridge the gap between the centre of excellence and first team squad with Ben Swallow,Charlie Reece and Charlie Clough being a testament to the progress being made in that direction.
The secured borrowings were a bank mortgage of £944 902, a bank overdraft of £1,348 807 and a brewery loan of £281 250. The unsecured interest free directors loans amounted to £939 891 making total debt of £3,514 850.
So in comparison today:
Our league position is about the same
Our trading revenue (turnover) is about 50% higher
Our trading losses are about 20% higher
The losses are covered by interest bearing loans rather than a mix of interest free loans and equity
The debt has increased from £3.5 million to about £12 million
We are still awaiting news on stadium regeneration (redevelopment)
Young players are still transitioning from the youth set up (development squad) to the first team
Fans who ask questions about the progress supposedly being made are still told they will have to eat humble pie at some time in the future
|
|
|
Post by inee on Apr 20, 2018 15:46:15 GMT
Sorry but they one of the worst groups I saw at the Colston Hall. One of the few concerts I've walked out of Never mind. I bet thàts not the only money you have ever wasted in your life. Love the humble pie's tin soldier ,for a long while i though it was nazareth who did it
|
|
|
Post by onefindunford on Apr 20, 2018 15:56:01 GMT
So would you say Bristol City are not in a better stadium earning more money for them than they were two/three years ago? It can be done! So who said that they were 99.9% confident that UWE would be built. Nick Higgs is the obvious answer. I remember the dot the i’s and cross the t’s interview.
|
|
|
Post by tbonegas on Apr 20, 2018 15:58:18 GMT
Never mind. I bet thàts not the only money you have ever wasted in your life. Love the humble pie's tin soldier ,for a long while i though it was nazareth who did it Love that track. Frampton has a very clear guitar sound that you can spot from a mile away. And Marriott's vocals are strong as they always were. On the subject of Nazareth, did you ever see them live? Another great live act, from these shores.
|
|
|
Post by garystash on Apr 20, 2018 16:19:34 GMT
We can argue until we are blue (and white)in the face about whether it is normal for a controlling shareholder owning 92% of the equity in a company to take a legal charge over that company's asset but if fans want to believe it is normal then nothing will change their minds. What may be interesting is to take a look back to the accounts for the year ended 30th June 2009 when Rovers had just finished 11th in League 1 with 63 points. In his Chairman's report Nick Higgs said the loss of £1,727 368 on turnover of £4 007 389 was unsustainable and the club still relied on the support of it's directors through both loans and equity. The loans from the directors increased by £490 127 during the year and new shares were issued to raise £869 945 including £54 000 coming from the share scheme. Nick said he was hoping to soon give positive news on the stadium regeneration plan and also commented on the first class training facilities Rovers had at South Bristol Sports Centre. He said Darren Patterson had been appointed to bridge the gap between the centre of excellence and first team squad with Ben Swallow,Charlie Reece and Charlie Clough being a testament to the progress being made in that direction. The secured borrowings were a bank mortgage of £944 902, a bank overdraft of £1,348 807 and a brewery loan of £281 250. The unsecured interest free directors loans amounted to £939 891 making total debt of £3,514 850. So in comparison today: Our league position is about the same Our trading revenue (turnover) is about 50% higher Our trading losses are about 20% higher The losses are covered by interest bearing loans rather than a mix of interest free loans and equity The debt has increased from £3.5 million to about £12 million We are still awaiting news on stadium regeneration (redevelopment) Young players are still transitioning from the youth set up (development squad) to the first team Fans who ask questions about the progress supposedly being made are still told they will have to eat humble pie at some time in the future Do you know what swiss, I don't think it's the questions that are a problem, it's the way they are asked. You always put your points across without the condescending tone that - to me at least - seems prevalant amongst those who feel the club is not being ran well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 21:03:51 GMT
Never mind. I bet thàts not the only money you have ever wasted in your life. Love the humble pie's tin soldier ,for a long while i though it was nazareth who did it Small faces did the original version
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Apr 20, 2018 21:10:33 GMT
Love the humble pie's tin soldier ,for a long while i though it was nazareth who did it Small faces did the original version I didn't trust them, their eyes were too close together....
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Apr 20, 2018 21:17:51 GMT
We can argue until we are blue (and white)in the face about whether it is normal for a controlling shareholder owning 92% of the equity in a company to take a legal charge over that company's asset but if fans want to believe it is normal then nothing will change their minds. What may be interesting is to take a look back to the accounts for the year ended 30th June 2009 when Rovers had just finished 11th in League 1 with 63 points. In his Chairman's report Nick Higgs said the loss of £1,727 368 on turnover of £4 007 389 was unsustainable and the club still relied on the support of it's directors through both loans and equity. The loans from the directors increased by £490 127 during the year and new shares were issued to raise £869 945 including £54 000 coming from the share scheme. Nick said he was hoping to soon give positive news on the stadium regeneration plan and also commented on the first class training facilities Rovers had at South Bristol Sports Centre. He said Darren Patterson had been appointed to bridge the gap between the centre of excellence and first team squad with Ben Swallow,Charlie Reece and Charlie Clough being a testament to the progress being made in that direction. The secured borrowings were a bank mortgage of £944 902, a bank overdraft of £1,348 807 and a brewery loan of £281 250. The unsecured interest free directors loans amounted to £939 891 making total debt of £3,514 850. So in comparison today: Our league position is about the same Our trading revenue (turnover) is about 50% higher Our trading losses are about 20% higher The losses are covered by interest bearing loans rather than a mix of interest free loans and equity The debt has increased from £3.5 million to about £12 million We are still awaiting news on stadium regeneration (redevelopment) Young players are still transitioning from the youth set up (development squad) to the first team Fans who ask questions about the progress supposedly being made are still told they will have to eat humble pie at some time in the future Do you know what swiss, I don't think it's the questions that are a problem, it's the way they are asked. You always put your points across without the condescending tone that - to me at least - seems prevalant amongst those who feel the club is not being ran well. That is so true. A lot of posters could learn a lesson from how Swiss gas posts, including me.
|
|
oj81
Newbie
Posts: 11
|
Post by oj81 on Apr 20, 2018 22:19:04 GMT
I don't think we should have blind faith in the owners, they are still yet to show their money in any big way. I think a lot of people thought rich arab, lots of money. Funny how higgs is referred to as higgs by people on here but the new guy "wael", first name. I think the guy is very PR savvy and makes all the right noises eg sustainable, in it for the long run etc etc but ultimately isn't really prepared to let us know what's going on. I think we should all remember we might not be billionaires but collectively we put more money into the club through ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. I think people are easily fooled, ultimately he's a guy from Jordan with no historical links to the club etc, for all you could say about higgs he was a gashead. Maybe out if his depth and budget but I dunno I'm not patriotic in any big way but is this globalization of football such a good thing?
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Apr 20, 2018 23:48:32 GMT
I don't think we should have blind faith in the owners, they are still yet to show their money in any big way. I think a lot of people thought rich arab, lots of money. Funny how higgs is referred to as higgs by people on here but the new guy "wael", first name. I think the guy is very PR savvy and makes all the right noises eg sustainable, in it for the long run etc etc but ultimately isn't really prepared to let us know what's going on. I think we should all remember we might not be billionaires but collectively we put more money into the club through ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. I think people are easily fooled, ultimately he's a guy from Jordan with no historical links to the club etc, for all you could say about higgs he was a gashead. Maybe out if his depth and budget but I dunno I'm not patriotic in any big way but is this globalization of football such a good thing? I agree about the blind faith thing. I don’t think I should have blind faith in anything not just the owner of my football club. I go on what I see and what progress happens. Decent team - yes Kept manager and players we possibly could- yep Development squad with lots of good young players making their debuts and playing well ? - yes. Land bought for training ground and planning happening ? - yes Better background staff ? Yes Higgs disastrous UWE project put to bed ? yes That’s progress for me and nothing about that is blind faith. It could all go tits up from here maybe it will but I’m happy and I’m happy based on what I’ve seen not what might happen because I don’t know what might happen. No one does.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 23:59:45 GMT
I don't think we should have blind faith in the owners, they are still yet to show their money in any big way. I think a lot of people thought rich arab, lots of money. Funny how higgs is referred to as higgs by people on here but the new guy "wael", first name. I think the guy is very PR savvy and makes all the right noises eg sustainable, in it for the long run etc etc but ultimately isn't really prepared to let us know what's going on. I think we should all remember we might not be billionaires but collectively we put more money into the club through ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. I think people are easily fooled, ultimately he's a guy from Jordan with no historical links to the club etc, for all you could say about higgs he was a gashead. Maybe out if his depth and budget but I dunno I'm not patriotic in any big way but is this globalization of football such a good thing? What should we call higgs then? super nick? should have stayed nick? Unlucky nick? clueless nick? It only looked like a shambles in my era nick?
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Apr 21, 2018 0:09:18 GMT
I don't think we should have blind faith in the owners, they are still yet to show their money in any big way. I think a lot of people thought rich arab, lots of money. Funny how higgs is referred to as higgs by people on here but the new guy "wael", first name. I think the guy is very PR savvy and makes all the right noises eg sustainable, in it for the long run etc etc but ultimately isn't really prepared to let us know what's going on. I think we should all remember we might not be billionaires but collectively we put more money into the club through ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. I think people are easily fooled, ultimately he's a guy from Jordan with no historical links to the club etc, for all you could say about higgs he was a gashead. Maybe out if his depth and budget but I dunno I'm not patriotic in any big way but is this globalization of football such a good thing? What should we call higgs then? super nick? should have stayed nick? Unlucky nick? clueless nick? It only looked like a shambles in my era nick? Personally I think he was unlucky, clueless and a shambles but not very super. That was my opinion years ago when I met him both times and it still is now. Second time I had to walk out of the room his arrogance about the stadium situation was embarrassing , if I’d stayed I’d have probably said something and been kicked out maybe banned. Thank god he’s no longer at the club. Did his best maybe and obviously a gas head but what a terrible chairman.
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Apr 21, 2018 5:47:54 GMT
We can argue until we are blue (and white)in the face about whether it is normal for a controlling shareholder owning 92% of the equity in a company to take a legal charge over that company's asset but if fans want to believe it is normal then nothing will change their minds. What may be interesting is to take a look back to the accounts for the year ended 30th June 2009 when Rovers had just finished 11th in League 1 with 63 points. In his Chairman's report Nick Higgs said the loss of £1,727 368 on turnover of £4 007 389 was unsustainable and the club still relied on the support of it's directors through both loans and equity. The loans from the directors increased by £490 127 during the year and new shares were issued to raise £869 945 including £54 000 coming from the share scheme. Nick said he was hoping to soon give positive news on the stadium regeneration plan and also commented on the first class training facilities Rovers had at South Bristol Sports Centre. He said Darren Patterson had been appointed to bridge the gap between the centre of excellence and first team squad with Ben Swallow,Charlie Reece and Charlie Clough being a testament to the progress being made in that direction. The secured borrowings were a bank mortgage of £944 902, a bank overdraft of £1,348 807 and a brewery loan of £281 250. The unsecured interest free directors loans amounted to £939 891 making total debt of £3,514 850. So in comparison today: Our league position is about the same Our trading revenue (turnover) is about 50% higher Our trading losses are about 20% higher The losses are covered by interest bearing loans rather than a mix of interest free loans and equity The debt has increased from £3.5 million to about £12 million We are still awaiting news on stadium regeneration (redevelopment) Young players are still transitioning from the youth set up (development squad) to the first team Fans who ask questions about the progress supposedly being made are still told they will have to eat humble pie at some time in the future Excellent post swissgas and puts forward some really interesting points. One thing I would say though to counter your final point slightly, is that you're comparing two timeframes that are considerably different, and you are taking a snapshot to compare the old regime to this one in regards progress made, but it's a snapshot of perhaps the loftiest peak that regime saw since the 90s, and doesn't take into account the disasters that were just around the corner. Timeframe wise, it may have been less than 10 years ago, but the landscape in football has changed massively these last few years, and I would imagine we're not the only ones by a long shot that are running up higher trading losses these days. Another difference is that we have better building blocks in place now to make genuine tangible progress, as the owners have bought the land for the training ground, rather than the South Bristol training centre which was never owned. Granted, progress on that has been painfully slow though! Hard to really compare like for like, as too many external variables are not consistent, but interestingly to see regardless.
|
|
|
Post by pucklegas on Apr 21, 2018 5:49:19 GMT
Response to Swiss Gas
The Humble pie is directed at certain posters who post unfounded rumours on here to cause resentment of the current board, and curry shock and horror headlines.
The figures you diligently put need to be addressed at an Agm or when 20 pence finally gets Wael on his show, he then can explain what the bigger picture is.
Some fans moan when the infrastructure was poor and shoddy, now we are addressing those issues fans moan too.
Down to what the family are trying to achieve if they are in it for the long haul there is nothing to worry about, UTG.
|
|