|
|
Post by gasincider on May 6, 2016 11:30:22 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of?
Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club.
It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 11:39:14 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of? Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club. It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings? Are you saying there is another 'investor', as yet un-named, willing to pour money into the club? Here we go again....is it time to fire up the 'New Beginning' thread? |
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on May 6, 2016 11:48:35 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of? Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club. It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings? Are you saying there is another 'investor', as yet un-named, willing to pour money into the club? Here we go again....is it time to fire up the 'New Beginning' thread? A PRINCely statement ? |
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on May 6, 2016 12:07:11 GMT
I am pleased with what's been said so far, but am waiting for action later in the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 6, 2016 12:07:27 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of? Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club. It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings? Surely this is all conjecture it could be our new owners couldn't get access to the info or did get full access and then decide to resolve the issues once NH & co were out of the way. Ass matters stood we had no chance of ever building the UWE once Sainsbury's did the dirty but at least now all the noises coming out of the club & UWE suggest both side are trying to move in the right direction. |
|
|
|
Post by buckrippers on May 6, 2016 12:13:56 GMT
Are you sure they haven't mixed him up with Steve Lewis, who was virtually hounded out of Swansea and ended up in charge of Exeter during the infamous year of Uri Geller? I used to work in Swansea but have never seen Steve Hamer's name mentioned in terms of bringing the club to its knees. Also, I think there may even have been a police investigation at Exeter over Lewis, who used to be a big wig at Spurs The following Swansea historical article from 2002 is just one that suggests frustration with Steve Hamer amongst Swansea fans. The situation was very different then from now - Swansea had no money at all then. Hamer's reign preceded their worst moments, but similarly it would be wrong to associate Steve Hamer with Swansea's subsequent rise in any way. www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/swanseacity/news/21148/a-chairman-elect Thanks for that Curly Wurly, very interesting. I was working on the Swansea Post a few years earlier when they only had 24 hours to save the club from winding up. At that time it was Dougie Sharp in charge. Later when he was criticised he threw his toys out of the pram and "sold up" to some bloke who then appointed someone called Kevin Cullis as manager, a guy who had only ever been in charge of some non-league Midlands youth team. He lasted a game and a half. So Swansea really was a mess. I don't remember much about this Silver Shield lot coming in, though I do remember they were doing really well when Molby got them to the play offs - playing fantastic stuff - and his sacking didn't go down well when they missed out. It was, in fact, Mike Lewis, not Steve Lewis, who was a prominent figure when all the real troubles kicked off under Tony Petty. I think there may have been a few disgruntled fans, but at least the article says that Hamer has all the right contacts and knows about mixing in football's corridors of power. We're 14 years on and he has probably learned a lot from past mistakes. Let's give him a chance. |
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on May 6, 2016 12:54:36 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again, all this we're richer than you nonsense and we're scrabbling around trying to get someone else to pay for the stadium. I've explained before, billionaires don't tend to splash their cash as it earns more invested in high interest accounts and investments that earn them more money than the cost of borrowing. Simple maths, spend your own 30 million and your interest will be zilch. 30 million earning 5% per annum earns him 1.5 million Having access to investment funds with such low interest rates as they are secured by very rich borrower will cost Half a million to service meaning that your own interest has paid for your loan and earned a further 1 million. So simple maths tells you that it's much more prudent to borrow than to spend your own cash. |
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on May 6, 2016 13:05:24 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again, all this we're richer than you nonsense and we're scrabbling around trying to get someone else to pay for the stadium. I've explained before, billionaires don't tend to splash their cash as it earns more invested in high interest accounts and investments that earn them more money than the cost of borrowing. Simple maths, spend your own 30 million and your interest will be zilch. 30 million earning 5% per annum earns him 1.5 million Having access to investment funds with such low interest rates as they are secured by very rich borrower will cost Half a million to service meaning that your own interest has paid for your loan and earned a further 1 million. So simple maths tells you that it's much more prudent to borrow than to spend your own cash. If Swansea gas post,this article and our own experience tells me anything its probably that fans don't always make the best chairmen |
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on May 6, 2016 13:13:23 GMT
Explained better here. Exchange apartment for stadium
Are large purchases by billionaires done in cash?
of course not. Billionaires don't carry around (or spend) much more cash than regular people.
But if by "cash" you mean "paying in full up front, instead of taking out a loan or mortgage", then it depends on a number of factors, particularly including:
(a) their Liquidity (that is, do they have a good part of their assets in easily accessible form, such as money in bank accounts, public stocks, etc., as opposed to "illiquid" forms, such as long term investments in venture capital funds, real estate, and the like); and
(b) their Opportunity Cost (that is, can they make more by investing the same amount of money than it would cost them to borrow it.)
As an example of the latter, let's say that you're a billionaire who wants to buy a super-duper luxury apartment that costs $50,000,000. Since that's less than 5% of your net worth, the odds are that you have enough liquid investments that you could cash them out and pay for the apartment with a check if you wanted to.
But do you?
Let's say that because of your great credit rating and the high quality of the apartment you could get a 25 year mortgage for the full amount at 4% interest. But let's also say that as a reasonably smart investor who does exactly as well as the S&P 500 market index, you know that your 25 year averaged return is 10%. That means if you sold your stock to buy the apartment for 'cash', it would cost you 6% annually, or $3 million per year. Or, looked at from the other direction, because the loan will be secured by apartment, you have the ability to borrow $50 million at 4% interest, then turn around and invest it to generate 10%, making you a profit of $3 million per year.
The bottom line? If you're a billionaire and can use the money you borrow on the apartment to get a higher equity return, you may well want to take out a mortgage!
|
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on May 6, 2016 13:18:35 GMT
Mark Zuckerberg just refinanced his Palo Alto home with a 30- year, 1.05 percent adjustable mortgage rate. Why do billionaires like Zuckerberg take out home loans, when they could easily buy their properties outright?
No matter who you are, if you qualify for a home loan, you're going to get an historically low interest rate on your mortgage in the current market.
But unless you're a billionaire, it won't be as low as Mark Zuckerberg's.
In addition to getting married and taking his company public, the Facebook CEO capped off a busy summer by refinancing the mortgage on his house, Bloomberg reported Monday. The Palo Alto, Calif., home three miles from Facebook headquarters cost $5.95 million, and Mr. Zuckerberg financed it with a 30-year adjustable mortgage loan, with a rate of 1.05 percent, less than half the national average.
At 28, Zuckerberg is the world's 40th-wealthiest person, worth an estimated $15.6 billion. If he wanted, he could buy a dozen $6 million homes, in cash, without batting an eye. So why get a mortgage?
Because it costs him absolutely nothing. "When you can borrow at an interest rate that's below the rate of inflation you're essentially borrowing for free," says Greg McBride, senior analyst at Bankrate.com. a Florida-based firm that tracks interest rates on mortgages, auto loans, and credit cards, among others. "When you can borrow for free, there's no sense in tying up your own money, when you can use that money for more profitable things."
|
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on May 6, 2016 13:32:03 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again, all this we're richer than you nonsense and we're scrabbling around trying to get someone else to pay for the stadium. I've explained before, billionaires don't tend to splash their cash as it earns more invested in high interest accounts and investments that earn them more money than the cost of borrowing. Simple maths, spend your own 30 million and your interest will be zilch. 30 million earning 5% per annum earns him 1.5 million Having access to investment funds with such low interest rates as they are secured by very rich borrower will cost Half a million to service meaning that your own interest has paid for your loan and earned a further 1 million. So simple maths tells you that it's much more prudent to borrow than to spend your own cash. To butt in a lot of what you say is very true and because of that I've been saying all along that he won't be paying for a new stadium for us, actually one way or another we'll be paying for a new stadium for him. Now some, maybe all, we'll be happy with that but why do people keep on denying that that is actually the situation? |
|
|
|
Post by garystash on May 6, 2016 13:36:53 GMT
You don't have to be a billionaire to play this game.
Imagine you have a mortgage that costs you £500 per month.
Now imagine you inherit the funds to pay your mortgage off and get rid of that pesky monthly cost.
However, you realise you could put your inheritance into a high interest account, and earn £600 per month interest.
What is the sensible thing to do?
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboy on May 6, 2016 13:55:48 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of? Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club. It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings? Wael is still very new here and I'd say he's been incredibly approachable myself! The board seem willing to meet with near enough anyone that has ideas to bring to the table. I'm sure they were aware of the issues, but what were they gonna do? They have to sort it out now... |
|
|
|
Post by pirate49 on May 6, 2016 13:57:14 GMT
I still can't decide if Wael is a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive family who has
connections with people with loads of dosh, or a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive
family who has money flowing out of every orifice.
In the meantime...sorry if I missed it, but who put up the money to buy out the old board and
write off the debts/loans?
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboy on May 6, 2016 14:01:03 GMT
I still can't decide if Wael is a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive family who has connections with people with loads of dosh, or a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive family who has money flowing out of every orifice. In the meantime...sorry if I missed it, but who put up the money to buy out the old board and write off the debts/loans? The Al-Qadi family, I guess? It was their takeover... |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on May 6, 2016 14:05:19 GMT
I've explained before, billionaires don't tend to splash their cash as it earns more invested in high interest accounts and investments that earn them more money than the cost of borrowing. Simple maths, spend your own 30 million and your interest will be zilch. 30 million earning 5% per annum earns him 1.5 million Having access to investment funds with such low interest rates as they are secured by very rich borrower will cost Half a million to service meaning that your own interest has paid for your loan and earned a further 1 million. So simple maths tells you that it's much more prudent to borrow than to spend your own cash. To butt in a lot of what you say is very true and because of that I've been saying all along that he won't be paying for a new stadium for us, actually one way or another we'll be paying for a new stadium for him. Now some, maybe all, we'll be happy with that but why do people keep on denying that that is actually the situation? Well, we don't know how it's going to work, but if our paying for a new stadium simply involves going to games and buying pasties, then that's got to be a better deal than going to games and buying pasties, and not getting a new stadium. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on May 6, 2016 14:06:42 GMT
I still can't decide if Wael is a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive family who has connections with people with loads of dosh, or a nice bloke with a ready smile and an attractive family who has money flowing out of every orifice. In the meantime...sorry if I missed it, but who put up the money to buy out the old board and write off the debts/loans? No one knows the figures, but I guess it came from the Al-Qadi family as they are the owners.
All we know is circa £2.3m was paid off to MSP to clear that loan
|
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on May 6, 2016 14:42:16 GMT
To butt in a lot of what you say is very true and because of that I've been saying all along that he won't be paying for a new stadium for us, actually one way or another we'll be paying for a new stadium for him. Now some, maybe all, we'll be happy with that but why do people keep on denying that that is actually the situation? Well, we don't know how it's going to work, but if our paying for a new stadium simply involves going to games and buying pasties, then that's got to be a better deal than going to games and buying pasties, and not getting a new stadium. Well deduced, I don't see any other way that it will be funded. But also remember that unless you're a fraudster you can only spend a pound once so if the £20 you pay to watch Rovers is spent on paying for the stadium it can't be spent on players ad well. If pushed on this I'm sure the current board will say that the higher league position that we'll find ourselves in will more than make up the difference. And we've all been watching football long enough to know there is no guarantee of success in football. Even dear old calamity NH wouldn't build a business plan on that. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 6, 2016 14:55:13 GMT
Do any of us know if the debts been cleared or if it has been transferred elsewhere ie Dwayne Sports? As surely using the logic of the arguements being put forward in this thread Wael wouldn't use his own money to pay off our debts but borrow it at a low interest rate? Why make the club debt free now only to then borrow £10m's for the new stadium & training ground?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2016 15:01:57 GMT
Not particularly fussed one way or the other with Hamer. What does worry me is that it is quite apparent that due diligence at the outset fell short. Otherwise why are there issues that have ' come to light' that our new owners were not aware of? Our good friend Nick 'announcer man' was on Radio Brizzle this morning, and all but accused NH of being a liar over the court case etc. I am amazed if our new owners were not aware of what had gone before, and not only did full due diligence on our club, but also asked the UWE what had or had not been agreed with our club. It seems there is an investor out there who is prepared to fully fund the stadium build, but Hamer has history with them, and doesn't want to know. It's just a shame that Wael is not more accessible to us mere mortals, so we can get direct answers to direct questions. I.e. Will our fans directors be shown more respect by the new board than they were by the old board? If so, why even now has there still been no board meetings? Are you saying there is another 'investor', as yet un-named, willing to pour money into the club? Here we go again....is it time to fire up the 'New Beginning' thread? ... "fire up the 'New Beginning' thread?" Oh yes please, one of the all-time great threads in forum history worldwide! WYHIB? |
|
