What is our debt to Staprix going to be next quarter?
Comments
-
Surely that would be in 16/17 numbers?Southendaddick said:Is the £623k for staff restructuring Slade's pay off?
It could be the payoff of any number of people before that.0 -
He'll be lucky, he wants to get rid before the situation gets even worse. He needs to lower his sights and write off the losses, he and his SMT have been totally responsible for._MrDick said:
So, that's what the selling price is, I guessdavid2206 said:Page 24 of report - £55.7m debt to Staprix, as l read it.
1 -
No that is for the Luzon etc. Slade's cost won't appear till next year.Southendaddick said:Is the £623k for staff restructuring Slade's pay off?
0 -
Oh yeah silly me
So Luzon and Fraeye?0 -
Does Mr.Gobby still think he'll be bringing in some new faces for pre-season training?
I suggest anyone thinking of going over to Ireland to watch a few games that they take their boots and shin-pads with them, as they might be needed.2 -
So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
0 -
It's a combination of all those lying bitter ex-employees.Southendaddick said:Is the £623k for staff restructuring Slade's pay off?
1 -
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.3 -
There's no urgency to sell other than the fact that he's spent 10% of his £650M fortune on Charlton in 3 years.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
His strategy has 100% failed and he will continue to accrue even greater losses.
Which footballers still on the books can he sell & for what price ? (Konsa apart).
If he sells the like of Holmes & Magennis and replaces them with inferior players, which he has done from the off (Polish Pete for Kermorgant), we will likely be relegated again.
His policy is one of complete failure and the fact that he can afford to burn money, doesn't mean that he should continue if he has an ounce of common sense in his muddled brain.
It's not as if he's getting any enjoyment from us.10 -
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.5 - Sponsored links:
-
He didn't seem to know about the charges (Debentures) over the land in respect of the former directors loans did he?.......... Back to ignore mode.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.4 -
Has he spent it or has he invested it and booking a return on his investment ?Covered End said:
There's no urgency to sell other than the fact that he's spent 10% of his £650M fortune on Charlton in 3 years.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.1 -
He didn't amass a fortune on football clubs.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
He is rapidly losing his fortune on a business that he does not and will not even try to understand. A fool and his money ..4 -
I wish I was that foolish to have amassed as much money as him...Covered End said:
He didn't amass a fortune on football clubs.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
He is rapidly losing his fortune on a business that he does not and will not even try to understand. A fool and his money ..0 -
I suspect he inherited a big chunk of his fortune. It's what would have allowed him the freedom to buy into the semiconductor business (which may already have been relatively successful) and fail at both politics and footballletthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.0 -
Would you employ Katrien Meire as your chief executive if you had? The idea that he is wise in business terms falls at that first hurdle. It's a loss-making business outside the Premier League, which we all know, even if he thought he could beat the system. But the losses have been pushed well beyond what's necessary by shocking management, which he has consistently defended. Now either she is just there to fill a chair and he makes all the bad decisions from Belgium (which rather rules out him being astute) or he insists on employing a hopeless chief executive against all the evidence that she is not up to the job. Either way, he's not looking that clever.letthegoodtimesroll said:
I wish I was that foolish to have amassed as much money as him...Covered End said:
He didn't amass a fortune on football clubs.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
He is rapidly losing his fortune on a business that he does not and will not even try to understand. A fool and his money ..27 -
Far more likely that having made a pig's ear of his other clubs in Europe, he was even more determined to make a success of little old CAFC with FFP appearing to be a huge positive for him.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
But, the best laid plans of rats & men .......& FFP will be his legacy.
He will be forever remembered as the Flemish Football Pillock.7 -
I just can't imagine why he employs her.0
-
There is probably no bank debt because the banks concerned insisted on it being repaid given the general state of the finances. You could of course interpret this differently if you are in the habit of finding silver linings to very dark clouds.
2 -
He made most of his money from patents.Hovi's Biscuit said:
I suspect he inherited a big chunk of his fortune. It's what would have allowed him the freedom to buy into the semiconductor business (which may already have been relatively successful) and fail at both politics and footballletthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Could that be his problem, though ?letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
The business model for operating Standard in the Belgium top league must be a world apart from Charlton in the Championship. Standard were almost guaranteed Champions League income for a start.1 -
Loved the stated assumption in the accounts that the loans to Murray et al have been valued on the basis that it will only take 2 years to get back into the Premier League.
And of course Katrien receives no emoluments whatsoever from her services as a director - this may well be what we all think she deserves, but I really don't think she understands what the law (i.e. the Companies Act) says on this matter.
The description of the basis of valuation of Sparrow Lane is of course gobbledegook and contradictory - it has all the signs that it may have been cobbled together at the last moment to fill the hole in the accounts, and to offer something tempting to possible purchasers/asset strippers.1 -
out of interest, do we know who owns Staprix, where it's registered, whether it publishes accounts (and as at what date) and whether it's part of a wider group that publishes accounts at a different year end to CAFC ?0
-
He didn't know though did he? He had no understanding of the level of player or manager/coach required, the value of proven players (rather than just the cost) or the importance of stability. He put a bizarre amount of trust into young people with no relevant experience (such as KM and Driesen) and has ideas around what football is about that are completely different when compared to most Charlton fans.letthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.3 -
Patents for what? Genuine question.stonemuse said:
He made most of his money from patents.Hovi's Biscuit said:
I suspect he inherited a big chunk of his fortune. It's what would have allowed him the freedom to buy into the semiconductor business (which may already have been relatively successful) and fail at both politics and footballletthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
Would be fitting, as I've always thought there was a touch of The Man Who Fell To Earth about Roland0 -
Micro electronics including temperature control systemsHovi's Biscuit said:
Patents for what? Genuine question.stonemuse said:
He made most of his money from patents.Hovi's Biscuit said:
I suspect he inherited a big chunk of his fortune. It's what would have allowed him the freedom to buy into the semiconductor business (which may already have been relatively successful) and fail at both politics and footballletthegoodtimesroll said:
No doubt it is and I bow to your better understanding of these things but I don't buy in to the common view on here that a guy who is smart enough to amass a fortune generally said on this site to be around £400 to £500 million (?) from his business dealings has got it so wrong with his purchase of Charlton. Good businessmen do have a history of getting it badly wrong when they buy a football club but in this case Charlton wasnt the first club he has owned. He would have known exactly what he was getting in to when he bought Charlton. There surely must be another angle, isnt there ?Henry Irving said:
For once I agree with you. Total bollocks.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
Would be fitting, as I've always thought there was a touch of The Man Who Fell To Earth about Roland0 -
Did you used to be head of credit function at northern Rock about 10 years ago by any chance?letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
9 -
I was close, £55.652m actual.Rob7Lee said:£50m at least, didn't manage to cash in on many players, was losing more than £1m a month last season.
Sad thing is whatever the figure is you can probably add even more to that by now, the sale of Lookman and a couple of others won't cover a years debt.
Plans going really well Mr D.....
He's been helped I suspect by exchange rate though. 55m pounds is circa 63m euro's, not long ago that would have been 77m euro's. Maybe it's all been an FX bet
2 -
You're insane, how can he possibly make a profit.letthegoodtimesroll said:
Has he spent it or has he invested it and booking a return on his investment ?Covered End said:
There's no urgency to sell other than the fact that he's spent 10% of his £650M fortune on Charlton in 3 years.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.1 -
.
Possibly, possibly not, I'm not qualified to comment but I do support Charlton so I've long suspected something may not be quite right.Stu_of_Kunming said:
You're insane, how can he possibly make a profit.letthegoodtimesroll said:
Has he spent it or has he invested it and booking a return on his investment ?Covered End said:
There's no urgency to sell other than the fact that he's spent 10% of his £650M fortune on Charlton in 3 years.letthegoodtimesroll said:So, here's an alternative take on things and no doubt total bollox.
the business that is CAFC has no bank debt, owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, can generate cash flow and has a regular output of young players it can sell. All
Its debt is friendly debt and although it makes an operating loss, cash generation, capitalising interest and ready access to more friendly debt has taken care of that when needed (?). Sounds like quite a nice, solid business all in all.
The business of Stayprix makes increasing loans to an otherwise debt free, sound business that owns a load of land in London, has a EFL franchise, generates cash from normal operations and produces young footballers it can sell at a profit. Fairly low risk lending on the whole. It probably receives a profitable margin on the interest rate it charges over the one it has to pay on its borrowings to fund its loans to CAFC. It also probably has to capitalise that interest into further loans but that just increases the potential for further profits it can book and as long as the valuation of the otherwise debt free CAFC appears to be able to underpin it, and let's face it there are always rumours of willing buyers, then there's no need to call the debt in. Increasing the debt once it reaches a certain level might have to slow down for the time being but a few cash generating player sales might help that out.
The net outcome of the two businesses could possibly be showing a profit, which in turn could underpin another business for instance and therefore there probably may be no urgency to sell any time soon.
As I said, all total bollox.
Stu - aren't you in China ? How do the lenders to the builders that have put up those new uninhabited 'cities' we read about treat their loans ? Do they completely write them off and wipe out their own capital or do they capitalise any interest and keep the loans ticking over until the day comes when all the tower blocks etc are sold ?0
