Buying Burnley Football Club

[MT03ALG]

A couple of questions about our American friends:
1. How much did they pay for Burnley Football Club ?
2. Did they pay the amount in one lump sum or are they paying in instalments ?

[Juan Tanamera]

Without wishing to sound rude, have you been away for a while?

[TheFamilyCat]

1. Magic beans
2. Installments as and when they find a few spare

[MT03ALG]

Without wishing to sound rude, have you been away for a while?

Comment appears to be very rude, just checking to see if there are some sensible and genuine replies

[Juan Tanamera]

Comment appears to be very rude, just checking to see if there are some sensible and genuine replies

Sorry, but my question was genuine.
The information has generally been in the public domain for 8-9 months.
Google is your friend.

[BigChaCha]

Comment appears to be very rude, just checking to see if there are some sensible and genuine replies

Just spend 10 seconds doing a search on the board... It has been done to death and you'll also find a dedicated thread on it where you will find some sensible and genuine replies among the mountains of dross.

[PadihamThickNeck]

1. 48p
2. 1p a month for 4 years

[MT03ALG]

Thanks Juan. My research shows an amount of £170 million paid for the club with the club now valued at £200 million. £60 million borrowed from MSD UK holdings and £30-£40 from the club's own cash reserves with the club now £90 million worse off than before the takeover. Assuming the amount of £170 million is being paid in instalments, I just wondered if the instalments had been paid on time so far....

[dsr]

I was told they had managed to cobble together £15m of their own money, as well as all the money borrowed or secured by BFC. The balance was 3 instalments, which if they don't get paid, will mean the shares go back to Garlick and friends.

[Untinted Glasses]

Thanks Juan. My research shows an amount of £170 million paid for the club with the club now valued at £200 million. £60 million borrowed from MSD UK holdings and £30-£40 from the club's own cash reserves with the club now £90 million worse off than before the takeover. Assuming the amount of £170 million is being paid in instalments, I just wondered if the instalments had been paid on time so far....

This is worth watching Mike

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0smoOWCr0w

[Juan Tanamera]

I was told they had managed to cobble together £15m of their own money, as well as all the money borrowed or secured by BFC. The balance was 3 instalments, which if they don't get paid, will mean the shares go back to Garlick and friends.

Makes you wonder where they got the money for £30m+ worth of signings.

[dsr]

Makes you wonder where they got the money for £30m+ worth of signings.

Ithas to be either cash in the bank, or further borrowing. I suspect the latter. I'm pretty sure it has come from the club's resources, not the owners; the owners appear to be in the business of taking money out of the club, not putting it in.

[MT03ALG]

Many thanks Untinted Glasses, I had not watched that before. It explains why shareholders may not have been paid the full amount owing to them and why it is possible that any instalments to buy the club may be late....

[helmclaret]

Makes you wonder where they got the money for £30m+ worth of signings.

Transfer fees are usually paid over the life of the contract in annual instalments

[Juan Tanamera]

Transfer fees are usually paid over the life of the contract in annual instalments

Indeed!
So if we're in debt already to the tune of whatever, where had the £30m+ come from?

[gandhisflipflop]

Awaiting Chester Perry’s 5000 word essay in the subject......

[Froobs]

Makes you wonder where they got the money for £30m+ worth of signings.

Cornet is over 5 years of instalments

[dougcollins]

Awaiting Chester Perry’s 5000 word essay in the subject......

His 5000 word factually accurate essay?

[taio]

Awaiting Chester Perry’s 5000 word essay in the subject......

He's been a brilliant poster.

[Chester Perry]

Thanks Juan. My research shows an amount of £170 million paid for the club with the club now valued at £200 million. £60 million borrowed from MSD UK holdings and £30-£40 from the club's own cash reserves with the club now £90 million worse off than before the takeover. Assuming the amount of £170 million is being paid in instalments, I just wondered if the instalments had been paid on time so far....

There have been varying reports on all you are asking about in short the only things we know for certain are (they are all a matter of legal public record):
- that control of the clubs activities through shareholding has changed hands
- There are 5 new directors who each must have a minimum of 4000 shares to allow them to be directors
- Mike G and John B retain enough shares (4000 or more) that allows them to remain as directors
- At least 3 of the new directors are also key shareholders in ALK and their offshoots Velocity Sports Partners, Calder Vale Holdings and Kettering Capital
- Charges registered at Companies House show that the Club and all it's IP and property holdings have been used as security for loans taken out by Calder Vale Holdings and Kettering Capital from MSD
- we know from legal documents at both West Ham and Southampton that MSd charge a basic rate of circa 9.2% interest on it's loans to football clubs
- One of the first actions of the new board was to change the articles of association allowing the club to loan monies to associated companies

beyond that their is much conflict in reporting, some of which may be a result of confusing $ and £ - The data presented by the Athletic is the one that has become the consensus information across media outlets since the takeover (always refuted by Pace though) though even they have revised their figures in recent weeks. they are now suggesting that the sale price of the 84% of shares was circa £150m that circa £12m of cash was paid upfront and the total of the two loans was for circa £60m and that circa £30m of the clubs cash was used for buying shares via intercompany loan.

Does that mean around £100m upfront?, the Athletic has not changed it's story on £70m outstanding in 3 instalments over a very tight schedule (with expectations that the first payment was dues this summer - some posters on this board suggest that they have been told by good sources this payment is already late).

You may note that 100 + 70 does not equal 150, I have suggested previously that the shorter term of the two loans with MSD was a flexible draw down facility (such as that taken out by West Ham for a similar period) like an overdraft and may have not been fully exercised in the initial deal (even if the deal was for £170m they same logic would apply as there were differing reports of £60, and £80m as to overall the loan value).

[MT03ALG]

Many thanks for your input Chester Perry

[martin_p]

1. 48p
2. 1p a month for 4 years

Interest free credit! Good deal.

[tim_noone]

He's been a brilliant poster.

Chester's a very knowledgeable poster regards football finance and Burnley tbf.

[tim_noone]

Cornet is over 5 years of instalments

I saw 4... at 3 million a year.

[gandhisflipflop]

He's been a brilliant poster.

Hey it ain’t a criticism! Apologies if it came across that way.

[gandhisflipflop]

His 5000 word factually accurate essay?

Yes

[dsr]

I saw 4... at 3 million a year.

Possibly the difference between one person reporting 5 instalments @ £3m, and another person reporting £3m down plus 4 instalments @ £3m. Ie. no difference at all.

[dsr]

Transfer fees are usually paid over the life of the contract in annual instalments

But a club that has cash in the bank and can pay up front, is in a strong negotiating position. Many clubs, especially if they are strapped for cash, will give a discount for cash up front. Or given two bids of equal amount, they will certainly prefer the one with cash up front.

[Paul Waine]

But a club that has cash in the bank and can pay up front, is in a strong negotiating position. Many clubs, especially if they are strapped for cash, will give a discount for cash up front. Or given two bids of equal amount, they will certainly prefer the one with cash up front.

and a club that wants to sign, let's say, 4 new players, each valued above, let's say, £10 million, but has only got, let's say, £20 million cash, can buy those 4 players if they agree to pay in 2 (or more) instalments for each of the 4 players.

It's a (financial) game of cashflow management. What we've seen, from day 1, is that Alan Pace and ALK Capital are very experienced in cashflow management.

Exciting times.

UTC

[dsr]

and a club that wants to sign, let's say, 4 new players, each valued above, let's say, £10 million, but has only got, let's say, £20 million cash, can buy those 4 players if they agree to pay in 2 (or more) instalments for each of the 4 players.

It's a (financial) game of cashflow management. What we've seen, from day 1, is that Alan Pace and ALK Capital are very experienced in cashflow management.

Exciting times.

UTC

No, that isn't true at all. For one thing, they don't have to buy all 4 on the same terms. For another, they can pay up front with the help of a bank loan if that's cheaper.

But that's pretty much a red herring. The point of buying anything of high value is that cash is a very useful negotiating tool. Suppose you are going to buy a house that's on the market at £250k. There might be 3 bidders, two of them offering the asking price of £250k if they can get a mortgage or of they can sell their own house first; the other offers £230k cash down, payable tomorrow, and shows a bank book to prove it. Who gets it?

Football clubs are often desperate for cash. We know that some football clubs are vastly in debt to the point of struggling to pay the bills. For them, if we could offer £7m cash, that would quite possibly be seen as a better deal than £10m paid over 5 years.

I don't care how good they are at cashflow management. Which is better - £50m cash at the bank but no-one in charge who knows just what to do when you're on beam ends? Or £50m overdrawn, and the people in charge know just how to scrape by?

[Paul Waine]

No, that isn't true at all. For one thing, they don't have to buy all 4 on the same terms. For another, they can pay up front with the help of a bank loan if that's cheaper.

But that's pretty much a red herring. The point of buying anything of high value is that cash is a very useful negotiating tool. Suppose you are going to buy a house that's on the market at £250k. There might be 3 bidders, two of them offering the asking price of £250k if they can get a mortgage or of they can sell their own house first; the other offers £230k cash down, payable tomorrow, and shows a bank book to prove it. Who gets it?

Football clubs are often desperate for cash. We know that some football clubs are vastly in debt to the point of struggling to pay the bills. For them, if we could offer £7m cash, that would quite possibly be seen as a better deal than £10m paid over 5 years.

I don't care how good they are at cashflow management. Which is better - £50m cash at the bank but no-one in charge who knows just what to do when you're on beam ends? Or £50m overdrawn, and the people in charge know just how to scrape by?

Hi dsr, good cashflow management wins every time. Cashflow management includes the ability to borrow efficiently and economically. Cashflow management includes the ability to leverage whatever you already have.

It's just gone past 11 p.m on transfer deadline day.

I hope you will allow me to conclude:

Exciting times.

UTC

[Dano1bfc]

Hey ,

I’ve just read loans to purchase the club at 9.2% interest ???? Depends on the type of interest chargeable but this seems a massive drain on resources when we are talking about millions of pounds. Very worrying initially.

Whilst I agree that cash flow is great , this is very dependent upon the league we occupy for income. Whilst we have had a v encouraging transfer window in my opinion, we have seen clubs spend massive amounts of money and then drop before.

What do the new owners do if we are relegated??? Let’s hope our American friends have the funds to supplement all eventualities.

At the end of the day whilst Chester is v well informed, I don’t think any of us know the true story inc back up plans etc. We all just hope that the previous stewardship had the best interest of the club at heart when selling.

The signings we’ve made make me a little more optimistic about the nxt season. However speculating to accumulate and going further into debt against monies not yet received seems contradictory to the clubs previous ethos. I hope the purchases we have made are against this seasons takings and any umbrella payments if we were to drop so as sustainable. Apologies I’m not going to pretend I know if so.

We were in trouble without a paddle when Coyles promotion winning side got us out of jail . Therefore all local ownership has not been worry free despite the marvellous job they’ve done in raising the profile of the club.

We were massively in the mire at that point but with the scale of payment now required to buy a player anywhere near the first team in this league things could unravel v quickly if things don’t work out. More so than previously.

In conclusion cash flow is great if things are planned for all eventualities so u can speculate. If u have ready cash available then the risk is much less. If we have a decent mixture of both then that could put bfc in a strong position even if some of the figures mentioned re interest chargeable and capital amounts are eye opening to a club of our size.

We can’t just sit and watch other teams over take us, it takes finance to keep up. We have seen the willingness to open the cheque book more from the new owners.

Give the guys in charge a chance , they have shown more ambition in this window than we are used to. If it doesn’t work out then it sounds like the old guard are there to ensure we have a club to support no matter what league we occupy.

Fingers crossed.

[RammyClaret61]

No need to cross your fingers. We’re constantly told by people on here, debt is the way to go. Every club does it, so why not Burnley. Being well run is over rated apparently. But then these same people who want the club to spend, spend, spend. Then want cup ties for free, complain about ticket increases, complain about stadium upgrades that will increase income. It’s mind boggling at times some of the diarrhoea our own fans come out with.

Don’t forget this board are now paying themselves also.

[BurnleyFC]

No need to cross your fingers. We’re constantly told by people on here, debt is the way to go. Every club does it, so why not Burnley. Being well run is over rated apparently. But then these same people who want the club to spend, spend, spend. Then want cup ties for free, complain about ticket increases, complain about stadium upgrades that will increase income. It’s mind boggling at times some of the diarrhoea our own fans come out with.

Don’t forget this board are now paying themselves also.

Blame the authorities for the financial mess that football has become, not the fans.

[RammyClaret61]

Blame the authorities for the financial mess that football has become, not the fans.

I’m blaming some of our fans for wanting to follow the rest.
I’m not blaming fans for the financial mess of football. But SOME of our fans wanted us to follow the same plan. Here we are.

[Burnley1989]

I’m blaming some of our fans for wanting to follow the rest.
I’m not blaming fans for the financial mess of football. But SOME of our fans wanted us to follow the same plan. Here we are.

How the hell can you blame our fans for some Americans buying the club

[RammyClaret61]

How the hell can you blame our fans for some Americans buying the club

They wanted Garlick out. They wanted a takeover from outside. They got what they wanted. Others said be careful what you wish for. We’ve gone from money in the bank, to now being millions in debt, we have that debt to finance, they’re paying themselves. More money is going out than seems to be coming in.

I’m not blaming our fans for who took over. I’m just saying that a lot have got what they wanted. Are they happy now? No they don’t seem to be.

[Local cricketer]

Most exciting transfer window In years and people are still whinging. That bloody Garlick selling out what a mercenary

[aggi]

They wanted Garlick out. They wanted a takeover from outside. They got what they wanted. Others said be careful what you wish for. We’ve gone from money in the bank, to now being millions in debt, we have that debt to finance, they’re paying themselves. More money is going out than seems to be coming in.

I’m not blaming our fans for who took over. I’m just saying that a lot have got what they wanted. Are they happy now? No they don’t seem to be.

There was definitely what you'd describe nowadays as briefing against Garlick. I lost count of the number of times I read that Garlick had to go or Dyche would go (obviously never with evidence).

No-one on here knows the full facts (or if they do they're not saying). From the evidence out there (nicely summarised above) it seems pretty clear that there was a leveraged takeover of some sort. Exactly what the figures involved and where all the funding came from is much less clear at the moment though.

[ClaretTony]

They wanted Garlick out. They wanted a takeover from outside.

I don't think that is really correct and there is nothing happened at Burnley that fans influenced. If anyone wanted Garlick out it was Garlick, not the fans. He'd been trying to sell the club for some considerable time, probably about four years.

[RammyClaret61]

I don't think that is really correct and there is nothing happened at Burnley that fans influenced. If anyone wanted Garlick out it was Garlick, not the fans. He'd been trying to sell the club for some considerable time, probably about four years.

I’m not saying the fans influenced anything. But it was clearly what some wanted, and were adamant about it. I’ve read the same people who were adamant that Garlick go. Then happy when Pace & Co arrived. But they changed once again once some details of the buying of Burnley Football Club came out. That’s what I’m on about.

[NewClaret]

They wanted Garlick out. They wanted a takeover from outside. They got what they wanted. Others said be careful what you wish for. We’ve gone from money in the bank, to now being millions in debt, we have that debt to finance, they’re paying themselves. More money is going out than seems to be coming in.

I’m not blaming our fans for who took over. I’m just saying that a lot have got what they wanted. Are they happy now? No they don’t seem to be.

I agree that a lot, including myself, wanted a takeover. There were two reasons:

1. Our bank balance may have been growing, and some fans took comfort in that, but investment in many important areas of the club - critically the first team squad - had at best stalled and at worst was going backwards. Most fans, CP aside (in the nicest possible way ) are interested in what they see on the pitch - not on the balance sheet. It's best if both progress in tandem but it was clear one was being prioritised over the other.

2. The relationship between our most successful manager and chairman appeared to be breaking down. I agree with aggi that we have no evidence of that, but his interviews were increasingly pointed, bordering unprofessional, and comments since about not wanting players to leave suggest there was a power struggle and relationship breakdown of some sort. This is not to take anything away from Mike Garlick's contribution to our recent success, but I don't think any one would argue that retaining Sean Dyche was more important for this club at this stage. I am pretty certain, and I think CT would support this view, that we would not be discussing a Dyche renewal had previous ownership remained.

What I did not see is a single fan saying they wanted us to take on some debt or put ourselves in a worse financial situation during a takeover. I think some may have tried to justify the debt since, as a necessary evil in today's market and arguably offset from a fan-perspective by some of the good things that have happened since.

I'll conclude by saying that only one person in the world could sanction a takeover and that was Mike Garlick. He held the key to the gate. He accepted this takeover and its structure. So if it's a poor one, he's to blame. If it's a good one, he takes the credit. The fans are merely bystanders that had to accept his decisions. I remain hopeful that he did have the clubs best interests at heart and there is more to this takeover than we know or understand. Time will tell.

[alf_resco]

I still haven't worked out what's in it for Pace and ALK.
If they're in it for the long-haul it'll need constant £Ms being put in with little return (and with no guarantee of success) and if it all goes belly-up they'll have spent an awful lot of time and effort for relatively small rewards in the form of salaries and interest.
Or am I missing something glaringly obvious?

[Winstonswhite]

I still haven't worked out what's in it for Pace and ALK.
If they're in it for the long-haul it'll need constant £Ms being put in with little return (and with no guarantee of success) and if it all goes belly-up they'll have spent an awful lot of time and effort for relatively small rewards in the form of salaries and interest.
Or am I missing something glaringly obvious?

What’s in it for Pace? You’re joking right?

He owns a soccer club in a far off land part of the BIGGEST LEAGUE IN THE WORLD using none of his own wealth and with no risk to his own finances.

He gets to play real life championship manager and if he spots someone with good attributes (in France for instance) he can go out, spend someone else’s money and hold the scarf with them on the pitch.

I’d love it.

[claretonthecoast1882]

What’s in it for Pace? You’re joking right?

He owns a soccer club in a far off land part of the BIGGEST LEAGUE IN THE WORLD using none of his own wealth and with no risk to his own finances.

He gets to play real life championship manager and if he spots someone with good attributes (in France for instance) he can go out, spend someone else’s money and hold the scarf with them on the pitch.

I’d love it.

When you put it like that does make you wonder why nobody on here (especially those who wanted Garlick to move on) didn't do this themselves

[NewClaret]

When you put it like that does make you wonder why nobody on here (especially those who wanted Garlick to move on) didn't do this themselves

Probably because we're not experienced financiers!

[claretonthecoast1882]

Probably because we're not experienced financiers!

But experienced enough to say what and how they are doing

[Burnley Ace]

What’s in it for Pace? You’re joking right?

He owns a soccer club in a far off land part of the BIGGEST LEAGUE IN THE WORLD using none of his own wealth and with no risk to his own finances.

He gets to play real life championship manager and if he spots someone with good attributes (in France for instance) he can go out, spend someone else’s money and hold the scarf with them on the pitch.

I’d love it.

You make him out to be a modern day Michael Knighton! I’m expecting some Keepy-uppies and a volley into the CFS goal at the next home match!!!

[Rileybobs]

What’s in it for Pace? You’re joking right?

He owns a soccer club in a far off land part of the BIGGEST LEAGUE IN THE WORLD using none of his own wealth and with no risk to his own finances.

He gets to play real life championship manager and if he spots someone with good attributes (in France for instance) he can go out, spend someone else’s money and hold the scarf with them on the pitch.

I’d love it.

How is he spending someone else’s money?

[aggi]

I still haven't worked out what's in it for Pace and ALK.
If they're in it for the long-haul it'll need constant £Ms being put in with little return (and with no guarantee of success) and if it all goes belly-up they'll have spent an awful lot of time and effort for relatively small rewards in the form of salaries and interest.
Or am I missing something glaringly obvious?

Obviously there's no guarantee of success but American private equity carrying out leveraged buyouts don't tend to be those lacking confidence.

The big money is likely to come from the club staying in the Premier League, its value increasing and them selling it for lots of money.