Grim

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm

Amazing how many people are satisfied with that from Pace. Let's see how much money is invested this window before we lap up what he has said.

Rumblings coming out of the club that the Wood money won't be invested and will be used to cover debt. We will see come February 1st.

claretandbluesky
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2022 9:14 pm
Been Liked: 78 times
Has Liked: 13 times

Re: Grim

Post by claretandbluesky » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm

Perhaps Paul Waines comments might be more appreciated if he dropped the now absurd, exciting times tag.
Where is the excitement?
An ageing squad, a host of soon to be out of contract players, the real possibility of relegation.
You can only assume Paul is some kind of masochist.
This user liked this post: tiger76

RVclaret
Posts: 4480
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 1091 times
Has Liked: 561 times

Re: Grim

Post by RVclaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:19 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm
Rumblings coming out of the club that the Wood money won't be invested and will be used to cover debt. We will see come February 1st.
What are you basing that on? Interesting because I have heard the exact opposite.

Sleeping Cat
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:13 am
Been Liked: 150 times
Has Liked: 27 times

Re: Grim

Post by Sleeping Cat » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:24 pm

jedi_master wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:17 pm
Agree with all of this.

The facts are we have a £60m loan to Dell to repay, loans to Garlick and Banasciewicz to pay, and the repayments as they stand are deemed serviceable on Premier League TV monies.

All fans want to know is if we go down this season, are the repayments going to have to be met by selling anything that’s not bolted down and our parachute payments? If they are, how do we expect to renew our squad who are mostly 30+ or out of contract (or both).
Precisely. I simply cannot see how the club copes with all this debt in the case of relegation. Previously we had money in the bank ready for that scenario to help keep us strong in the event of a relegation, but as the DM article says "The Delaware-based investment firm agreed an unusual takeover deal last January, largely financed by borrowing and the club’s own resources. ALK initially only put in £15m of their own money, with the rest of the funds coming from a £60m loan and Burnley’s own bank account."

The clubs own bank account. ALK used the clubs own money to buy the club. So we have no cash in the bank, are now in serious debt, and also in serious risk of seeing our annual turnover reduced by 60%.

But hey, Alan's on twitter saying everything is alright so I feel better now.
These 2 users liked this post: tiger76 Top Claret

spt_claret
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 6:52 pm
Been Liked: 183 times
Has Liked: 152 times

Re: Grim

Post by spt_claret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:25 pm

claretandbluesky wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:13 pm
I think for most fans the problem is simple.
When we had 50 million in the bank it looked certain we could survive over a number of years. Most accepted we could be a yo-yo club or maybe settle down to being a Championship side, but we would exist.
What was and remains concerning is the fact that our survival now appears to depend on both growth of our revenues and maintenance of our ability to be at the top table, when everything points to the club having diminishing assets, lack of growth potential and what appears like instability ahead.
As a country we are heading into economically turbulent times and that is when the weakest go to the wall.
Financially to the lay person at least our house appears to be built on sand rather than rock.
That element of risk may well appeal to some but to most it possess a problem, particularly in a club which means so much to the town and its people.
The Board need to be much more transparent in their dealings with the fans and fully explain how they might deal with descent into Division 1 because given our position that is a possibility.
This perfectly sums up my position. The club has seemingly been put into a very high risk strategy which is extremely unclear as to how it will benefit the club on the pitch or its long term survival, at a time when high risk investment is even more volatile than usual, and the ownership have a history of high level employment at banks where high risk strategies have failed or turned scandalous, and I fail to see how the club could survive a risky strategy failing.
Pace's statement doesn't actually rule out any of the fears over cashflow or alleged motivations behind the Wood sale, but provides some reassurance for now.
Also worth remembering, sports MSM has a history of misrepresentation particularly with us (See the Barnes/Matic affair, or our 'dirty' reputation) and the timing of an article sowing doubt about our transfer capability, while our Saudi-backed rivals need to weaken us, is suspect. Had this article come out in 2 weeks time after the window closes I'd be much more worried. Should we fail to make signings before it closes, likewise.
For now my concern is not predicated on the DM article but wider factors, but it is also just that- a concern, not a prediction. After Sky Digital, Flood etc. I've developed a habitually worried disposition about Burnley's finances.
Last edited by spt_claret on Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

WiscoClaret
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:34 am
Been Liked: 40 times
Has Liked: 237 times

Re: Grim

Post by WiscoClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:25 pm

fatboy47 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:48 am
The reality is there in the article. I have a close friend who works on the financial section of a national broadsheet...not a claret, but he assures me that our precarious position is common knowledge whilst not deemed particularly newsworthy to his editor.

The rest of this thread is mere whistling in the dark to keep spirits up. Understandable.....theres going to be plenty of that in the coming years.

And the line "" we'll be fine because Pace is a Mormon" could be destined to haunt us for decades.
I’m not saying we will be fine because Pace is a Mormon. 🤦‍♂️. I’m saying his church will tear him to shreds if he defaults, asset strips, and puts people out of a job. I studied church history at Princeton and while I’m not the expert that writes the books and I’m not a Mormon I do fancy myself as someone who knows a thing or two about church history and anthropology.

Pace could very well do all those terrible things and I wouldn’t be the least but surprised. Lots of people who claim to follow God have done some terrible things.- I’m just saying he has a small incentive not to do so.

You are quite right- we are in a precarious position. I wouldn’t say otherwise. We just knew this from the start.
This user liked this post: fatboy47

Milltown1882
Posts: 1766
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:47 pm
Been Liked: 648 times
Has Liked: 525 times

Re: Grim

Post by Milltown1882 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:27 pm

claretandbluesky wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:13 pm
I think for most fans the problem is simple.
When we had 50 million in the bank it looked certain we could survive over a number of years. Most accepted we could be a yo-yo club or maybe settle down to being a Championship side, but we would exist.
What was and remains concerning is the fact that our survival now appears to depend on both growth of our revenues and maintenance of our ability to be at the top table, when everything points to the club having diminishing assets, lack of growth potential and what appears like instability ahead.
As a country we are heading into economically turbulent times and that is when the weakest go to the wall.
Financially to the lay person at least our house appears to be built on sand rather than rock.
That element of risk may well appeal to some but to most it possess a problem, particularly in a club which means so much to the town and its people.
The Board need to be much more transparent in their dealings with the fans and fully explain how they might deal with descent into Division 1 because given our position that is a possibility.
What message does that send to Dyche and the players if they come out and openly have discussions about the Championship when we have more than half a season of PL games left to play?

NewClaret
Posts: 7334
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 1606 times
Has Liked: 1761 times

Re: Grim

Post by NewClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:29 pm

claretandbluesky wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm
Perhaps Paul Waines comments might be more appreciated if he dropped the now absurd, exciting times tag.
Where is the excitement?
An ageing squad, a host of soon to be out of contract players, the real possibility of relegation.
You can only assume Paul is some kind of masochist.
As I’ve posted before, there’s a lot happened under ALK’s ownership and been discussed by Pace for future that I find exciting.

I also appreciate Paul’s balanced and positive contributions far more than the constant negativity spouted by some posters. Not everyone wants to look for the bad in everything.

RVclaret
Posts: 4480
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 1091 times
Has Liked: 561 times

Re: Grim

Post by RVclaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:31 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:29 pm
As I’ve posted before, there’s a lot happened under ALK’s ownership and been discussed by Pace for future that I find exciting.

I also appreciate Paul’s balanced and positive contributions far more than the constant negativity spouted by some posters. Not everyone wants to look for the bad in everything.
Absolutely this.

boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:36 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:19 pm
What are you basing that on? Interesting because I have heard the exact opposite.
Let's put it this way, I was told when we sold Wood that it was likely the money would be banked.

I was also told that we had already made some funds available before we knew Wood was leaving.

I'm still told that we are trying to recruit and spend the money we had prior to Wood leaving, but from what I've heard the money we got from Wood won't be added to the pot.

Only time will tell but it seems a bit like we are making enquiries left right and centre but we have no intention of signing some of these players.

I think we might spend 10-15 million, but I'd be amazed if we spent the 35 million we would have from the Wood sale and what was made available previously.

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 6610
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 2498 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:36 pm

claretandbluesky wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:13 pm
I think for most fans the problem is simple.
When we had 50 million in the bank it looked certain we could survive over a number of years. Most accepted we could be a yo-yo club or maybe settle down to being a Championship side, but we would exist.
What was and remains concerning is the fact that our survival now appears to depend on both growth of our revenues and maintenance of our ability to be at the top table, when everything points to the club having diminishing assets, lack of growth potential and what appears like instability ahead.
As a country we are heading into economically turbulent times and that is when the weakest go to the wall.
Financially to the lay person at least our house appears to be built on sand rather than rock.
That element of risk may well appeal to some but to most it possess a problem, particularly in a club which means so much to the town and its people.
The Board need to be much more transparent in their dealings with the fans and fully explain how they might deal with descent into Division 1 because given our position that is a possibility.
When we had money in the bank we had enough fans who wanted a change and for the club to spend more and reach the next level (nobody has ever said what the next level is) and not be scared of having owners not from the town. I said at the time rumours of a takeover that some would be seduced by money and get carried away wanting a sugar daddy approach, this was never going to happen.

Anybody taking over the club was always going to do so with making money the main aim, there just isn't the type of investor some were thinking of for a club of our size. It would now seem a tad unfair that a little over 12 months and everything should be massively different.

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:38 pm

spt_claret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:40 pm
It does take regulators time, yes. This is why I'm not concerned by the first item I listed, I mentioned it purely in advance in case someone else brought it up based on the timing of the fine.
I know Libor stands for London, but global banking doesn't require you to be in London to use Libor. Bank of America is an American bank and was implicated.
Prime Finance as I understand it largely concerns funds, securities and services offered to hedgefunds and clients for long & short market positions, which is connected to high risk mortgages. See the subprime mortgage crash. I'm happy to be corrected on this.
The credit practices were relate to misrepresentation and mischarging of credit services- I assume you are saying credit services and general investor services are different, which makes sense to me.
Could you elaborate on what Global Client experience means?

I remain unconvinced of your final point, but thank you for the information.
Bank of America - has offices in London - just like most of the world's banks do. BoA is, of course, one of the very big ones. BoA acquired Merrill Lynch, one of the 5 largest investment banks, in late 2008. ML also had large offices in London.

Prime Finance, also known as Prime Brokerage, provides services to hedge funds and similar. These services include lending and securities trading. However, the hedge fund/client is taking their own trading decisions. Prime Finance is not connected with "high risk" or subprime mortgages, sold as CDOs. Of course, the subprime mortgages/CDOs had all come to an end in late 2008.

You can find jobs advertised for "client experience or customer experience" - it appears to be related to the "customer journey" as the customer interacts with the firm, whatever that firm does. I imagine "Global Client experience" would be a senior role in Citi, "global" meaning in charge for this activity in all of Citi's offices, and, maybe, only responsible for the clients that also have "global scale" to their business. However, I'd expect it wouldn't be in charge of any of the specific business lines that Citi (or whoever the employer was) had that were selling services to the "global" clients.

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 6610
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 2498 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:41 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:36 pm
Let's put it this way, I was told when we sold Wood that it was likely the money would be banked.

I was also told that we had already made some funds available before we knew Wood was leaving.

I'm still told that we are trying to recruit and spend the money we had prior to Wood leaving, but from what I've heard the money we got from Wood won't be added to the pot.

Only time will tell but it seems a bit like we are making enquiries left right and centre but we have no intention of signing some of these players.

I think we might spend 10-15 million, but I'd be amazed if we spent the 35 million we would have from the Wood sale and what was made available previously.
So you have been told we are banking the money but we are also going to spend ?

Todays weather forecast is it is likely to be hot, cold, raining and dry. Nothing like covering your bases. I am sure 1 will be right

boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:44 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:41 pm
So you have been told we are banking the money but we are also going to spend ?

Todays weather forecast is it is likely to be hot, cold, raining and dry. Nothing like covering your bases. I am sure 1 will be right
Did you actually read my post? We had a limited amount of money available prior to the sale of Wood. From what I've heard the money from Woods sale will not be added to this pot- it will be banked- is that difficult to understand really?

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 6610
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 2498 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:45 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:44 pm
Did you actually read my post? We had a limited amount of money available prior to the sale of Wood. From what I've heard the money from Woods sale will not be added to this pot- it will be banked- is that difficult to understand really?

You have been told 10-15m is what we will spend. Lets see then

NewClaret
Posts: 7334
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 1606 times
Has Liked: 1761 times

Re: Grim

Post by NewClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:46 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:36 pm

Only time will tell but it seems a bit like we are making enquiries left right and centre but we have no intention of signing some of these players.
Theory one: Dyche and Pace make lots of enquiries for players during the transfer window that they have no intention of signing for ****s and giggles.

Theory two: the press make things up.

🤔🤔

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 6610
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 2498 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:47 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:46 pm
Theory one: Dyche and Pace make lots of enquiries for players during the transfer window that they have no intention of signing for ****s and giggles.

Theory two: the press make things up.

🤔🤔
Lets hope no club accepts any offers the club makes which are clearly bogus offers and have no intention of going through with. :D

Imagine thinking this kind of s**t up

Steddyman
Posts: 1875
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:45 pm
Been Liked: 431 times
Has Liked: 319 times

Re: Grim

Post by Steddyman » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:48 pm

So, if that article is correct and it says that the first payment to the directors was over £100m and ALK only put in £15m with the rest coming from the clubs resources, isn’t that the same as saying the previous directors found a way of withdrawing all the clubs bank funds into their own pockets?

boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:51 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:45 pm
You have been told 10-15m is what we will spend. Lets see then
I was told that up to 15million was what was available for the right player prior to the sale of Wood, and that pot hasn't changed despite his departure.

I'm happy to wait and see and would be even happier if the info is wrong.

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:53 pm

claretandbluesky wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm
Perhaps Paul Waines comments might be more appreciated if he dropped the now absurd, exciting times tag.
Where is the excitement?
An ageing squad, a host of soon to be out of contract players, the real possibility of relegation.
You can only assume Paul is some kind of masochist.
I believe I've explained once or twice before, "exciting times" isn't about the football, it's about the excitement of someone taking on the challenge of providing the finance to keep Burnley in the Premier League. Most want BFC to be a PL team. Most recognise that the town of Burnley is not the "largest" in terms of population, or the wealthiest. Most know that Mike Garlick and John B and the other former owners recognised that they didn't have the wealth that was required to keep BFC in the PL. So, the only way to stay there was to find new owners. There are already enough examples around Lancashire of clubs that had wealthy owners until the owner ran out of money, or died and their heirs didn't want to continue with their club ownership. So, Burnley is pursuing another way with Alan Pace and ALK - and, that for me, with a little understanding of what they are aiming to do, is exciting. It has a chance of success and that's all that matters.

Yes, I also get excited when the team plays well and when we come away with a point, or 3, especially when playing one of the big clubs. I was at Chelsea a few weeks ago. I will be at Emirates on Sunday.

I hope you can understand a little when I acclaim....

Exciting times.

UTC

joey13
Posts: 7140
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1700 times
Has Liked: 1174 times

Re: Grim

Post by joey13 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:56 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:53 pm
I believe I've explained once or twice before, "exciting times" isn't about the football, it's about the excitement of someone taking on the challenge of providing the finance to keep Burnley in the Premier League. Most want BFC to be a PL team. Most recognise that the town of Burnley is not the "largest" in terms of population, or the wealthiest. Most know that Mike Garlick and John B and the other former owners recognised that they didn't have the wealth that was required to keep BFC in the PL. So, the only way to stay there was to find new owners. There are already enough examples around Lancashire of clubs that had wealthy owners until the owner ran out of money, or died and their heirs didn't want to continue with their club ownership. So, Burnley is pursuing another way with Alan Pace and ALK - and, that for me, with a little understanding of what they are aiming to do, is exciting. It has a chance of success and that's all that matters.

Yes, I also get excited when the team plays well and when we come away with a point, or 3, especially when playing one of the big clubs. I was at Chelsea a few weeks ago. I will be at Emirates on Sunday.

I hope you can understand a little when I acclaim....

Exciting times.

UTC
There’s nothing exciting about the club being in debt

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm

Steddyman wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:48 pm
So, if that article is correct and it says that the first payment to the directors was over £100m and ALK only put in £15m with the rest coming from the clubs resources, isn’t that the same as saying the previous directors found a way of withdrawing all the clubs bank funds into their own pockets?
NO, NO, NO. ALK bought the club. The 84% shareholder appointed the directors and a directors' vote on the use of the club's cash in the bank was carried by ALK directors. The former owners, even though MG and JB are continuing as directors, had no say in how ALK funded the purchase.

RVclaret
Posts: 4480
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 1091 times
Has Liked: 561 times

Re: Grim

Post by RVclaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm

joey13 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:56 pm
There’s nothing exciting about the club being in debt
Wake up, Every club in the league is in debt

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:59 pm

joey13 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:56 pm
There’s nothing exciting about the club being in debt
Maybe not for you, Joey. However, if that's how Alan Pace wants to run the club, that's his decision and I'm not going to tell him he's got it wrong.

How are things going for you? Did I see that you'd been in hospital with heart issues?

Take care.

spt_claret
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 6:52 pm
Been Liked: 183 times
Has Liked: 152 times

Re: Grim

Post by spt_claret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:03 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:38 pm
Bank of America - has offices in London - just like most of the world's banks do. BoA is, of course, one of the very big ones. BoA acquired Merrill Lynch, one of the 5 largest investment banks, in late 2008. ML also had large offices in London.

Prime Finance, also known as Prime Brokerage, provides services to hedge funds and similar. These services include lending and securities trading. However, the hedge fund/client is taking their own trading decisions. Prime Finance is not connected with "high risk" or subprime mortgages, sold as CDOs. Of course, the subprime mortgages/CDOs had all come to an end in late 2008.

You can find jobs advertised for "client experience or customer experience" - it appears to be related to the "customer journey" as the customer interacts with the firm, whatever that firm does. I imagine "Global Client experience" would be a senior role in Citi, "global" meaning in charge for this activity in all of Citi's offices, and, maybe, only responsible for the clients that also have "global scale" to their business. However, I'd expect it wouldn't be in charge of any of the specific business lines that Citi (or whoever the employer was) had that were selling services to the "global" clients.
Again the investigation and fine involve US authorities and Libor is used in the US and worldwide. Parts of the manipulation were traced to Singapore. Nothing about the Libor scandal required being physically in London as I understand it.

Thank your for the clarification. Wouldn't Prime Finance also involve recommendations on investments? What would Citigroup betting against their own securities and mortgages come under, as per the fine? Which occurred after 2008 as I understand it.

Customer journey sounds awful vague and doesn't really address how they get involved in cash or asset handling or client services. Client relations cover a wide net and specificity would be reassuring.

I would like to know what Pace DID do at Citi, as well as didn't, because I am wary of investment from American Wallstreet finance given previous such problems, especially given the terms of the takeover.
RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
Wake up, Every club in the league is in debt
This is precisely one of the big problems with football, finance, and society in general. I'd ask your views on Glass-Steagall but I can guess.
Additionally, Burnley very much were not in debt before the takeover. We are not a club which can easily survive debt if relegated.

Sleeping Cat
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:13 am
Been Liked: 150 times
Has Liked: 27 times

Re: Grim

Post by Sleeping Cat » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:08 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
Wake up, Every club in the league is in debt
But not every club in the league is currently bottom of their division, with relegation meaning a 70% reduction in turnover, increasing to 90% after 4 years.

aggi
Posts: 7300
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1708 times

Re: Grim

Post by aggi » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:10 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:05 pm
I've read the DM article. This is an odd statement: "the revised schedule will take the payments into the next financial year, potentially enabling the owners to defer millions in tax." I'm an accountant, I've been involved in a few corporate m&a deals. Tax becomes due based on the date of the transaction - delaying any payments due has no impact on the tax payable. I'm not sure what type of tax the DM is referring to. It's not corporation tax, that is charged on the profit made by the trading entity. It's not capital gains tax, whatever gains the previous shareholders have achieved on the sale would become due based on the date of purchase. And, of course, ALK are the buyers, so no capital gains tax for them.

Anyone know any different?

If the DM can make this silly (and obvious) error in their article, it's more likely that there are lots of errors in the article. Why does the article say "fees" are due to former owners? Purchase price paid in instalments, fine, but a buyer doesn't pay "fees" to the sellers.

Best bit of the article: ALK statement "all parties are aligned and abiding by the terms of the sale."

Exciting times.

UTC
CGT can be deferred if payments for the assets are made in installments. I can't remember the exact rules, needs to be payments over a few years or something. It's basically to avoid the situation of selling an asset but not having the cash to pay the tax as you haven't yet been paid for it.

Not sure how this works if the schedule of payments changes.

As for the "Exciting times", it does remind me of the apocryphal curse "May you live in interesting times".
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Jakubclaret
Posts: 6785
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 860 times
Has Liked: 604 times

Re: Grim

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:13 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
Wake up, Every club in the league is in debt
To a certain degree yes, but other clubs are well poised advantageously to generate far more funding to service the debts unlike us, when it’s getting to the stage that clubs are looking to offload their star strikers (granted underperforming) to relegation rivals in order to cushion the impact of the debt it’s unsettling to say the least. Simon Jordan described it as a land grab.

NewClaret
Posts: 7334
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 1606 times
Has Liked: 1761 times

Re: Grim

Post by NewClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:15 pm

aggi wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:10 pm
CGT can be deferred if payments for the assets are made in installments. I can't remember the exact rules, needs to be payments over a few years or something. It's basically to avoid the situation of selling an asset but not having the cash to pay the tax as you haven't yet been paid for it.

Not sure how this works if the schedule of payments changes.

As for the "Exciting times", it does remind me of the apocryphal curse "May you live in interesting times".
My initial reading of the DM article was that MG/JB May have requested a deferral for CGT reasons, which ALK accommodated.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:17 pm

aggi wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:10 pm
CGT can be deferred if payments for the assets are made in installments. I can't remember the exact rules, needs to be payments over a few years or something. It's basically to avoid the situation of selling an asset but not having the cash to pay the tax as you haven't yet been paid for it.

Not sure how this works if the schedule of payments changes.

As for the "Exciting times", it does remind me of the apocryphal curse "May you live in interesting times".
Hi aggi, I agree re previous owners' CGT - maybe my post wasn't as clear as it could be on the distinction between ALK's tax bill and MG/JB et al's tax bills. DM, of course, was suggesting that it would be ALK that would get "several millions" tax saving.

joey13
Posts: 7140
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1700 times
Has Liked: 1174 times

Re: Grim

Post by joey13 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:21 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:59 pm
Maybe not for you, Joey. However, if that's how Alan Pace wants to run the club, that's his decision and I'm not going to tell him he's got it wrong.

How are things going for you? Did I see that you'd been in hospital with heart issues?

Take care.
Still in , thanks for asking
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

NewClaret
Posts: 7334
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 1606 times
Has Liked: 1761 times

Re: Grim

Post by NewClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm

joey13 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:21 pm
Still in , thanks for asking
Wishing you a speedy recovery
This user liked this post: joey13

joey13
Posts: 7140
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1700 times
Has Liked: 1174 times

Re: Grim

Post by joey13 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:23 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
Wake up, Every club in the league is in debt
Weren’t we always led to believe that would lead to us ending up like Bolton,Wigan,Portsmouth etc

aggi
Posts: 7300
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1708 times

Re: Grim

Post by aggi » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:24 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:17 pm
Hi aggi, I agree re previous owners' CGT - maybe my post wasn't as clear as it could be on the distinction between ALK's tax bill and MG/JB et al's tax bills. DM, of course, was suggesting that it would be ALK that would get "several millions" tax saving.
I read it as referring to the former owners but that's probably because I couldn't see where the tax would be arising for ALK.

Steddyman
Posts: 1875
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:45 pm
Been Liked: 431 times
Has Liked: 319 times

Re: Grim

Post by Steddyman » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:30 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
NO, NO, NO. ALK bought the club. The 84% shareholder appointed the directors and a directors' vote on the use of the club's cash in the bank was carried by ALK directors. The former owners, even though MG and JB are continuing as directors, had no say in how ALK funded the purchase.
But was the end result that the former directors got paid the majority of the money in the clubs bank account?

If that is the case, I’d be more annoyed about the former directors than ALK.

dsr
Posts: 13064
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 3867 times
Has Liked: 1677 times

Re: Grim

Post by dsr » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:37 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:57 pm
NO, NO, NO. ALK bought the club. The 84% shareholder appointed the directors and a directors' vote on the use of the club's cash in the bank was carried by ALK directors. The former owners, even though MG and JB are continuing as directors, had no say in how ALK funded the purchase.
That's disingenuous. You know perfectly well that Garlick and B were fully aware that the funds for their shares were coming from within the club. You must have discovered from your extensive knowledge of baking that no-one sells a £100m+ asset without checking where the funds are coming from.

It is technically correct to say that ALK decided how the purchase would be funded and all that Garlick and B did was to nod their heads and accept it, but it's the sort of technicality designed to deceive people into thinking they weren't party to the decision. Garlick and B absolutely were party to the decision to remove the funds from BFC.
Last edited by dsr on Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ClaretTony
Posts: 55920
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 25131 times
Has Liked: 4625 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Grim

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:37 pm

Sleeping Cat wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:24 pm
But hey, Alan's on twitter saying everything is alright so I feel better now.
Not for one minute am I saying his tweet is incorrect but I’m amazed how so many people suddenly become all reassured because of it.

ClaretTony
Posts: 55920
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 25131 times
Has Liked: 4625 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Grim

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:43 pm

dsr wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:37 pm
That's disingenuous. You know perfectly well that Garlick and B were fully aware that the funds for their shares were coming from within the club. You must have discovered from your extensive knowledge of baking that no-one sells a £100m+ asset without checking where the funds are coming from.

It is technically correct to say that ALK decided how the purchase would be funded and all that Garlick and B did was to nod their heads and accept it, but it's the sort of technicality designed to deceive people into thinking they weren't party to the decision. Garlick and B absolutely were party to the decision to remove the funds from BFC.
I think you need to be very careful with your words/suggestions.

RVclaret
Posts: 4480
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 1091 times
Has Liked: 561 times

Re: Grim

Post by RVclaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:44 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:37 pm
Not for one minute am I saying his tweet is incorrect but I’m amazed how so many people suddenly become all reassured because of it.
1. It’s pretty rare that club owners communicate on random media reports 2. AP has made it clear MG, JB and ALK are all in agreement with how the finances are set up - I would assume JB and MG were happy to put out the joint statement given their names are attached 3. Maybe some people aren’t doom mongers and want to look at positives 4. Has AP upset you somehow? Seem to be very negative towards him.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Paul Waine
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1934 times
Has Liked: 2518 times

Re: Grim

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:46 pm

spt_claret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:03 pm
Again the investigation and fine involve US authorities and Libor is used in the US and worldwide. Parts of the manipulation were traced to Singapore. Nothing about the Libor scandal required being physically in London as I understand it. Libor interest rates were the interest rates (theoretically) charged between banks in London. Yes, Libor rates would impact activities in the bank's other major offices, so, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore and New York may also have been involved in setting these rates - and, as happened, submitting inaccurate figures, at times. Using Libor in a loan agreement, for example, is not the same as being part of the banking groups that set the Libor interest rates.

Thank your for the clarification. Wouldn't Prime Finance also involve recommendations on investments? What would Citigroup betting against their own securities and mortgages come under, as per the fine? Which occurred after 2008 as I understand it. I've read the little of the Reuters report you linked. Citi's events took place in 2007. What I understand Citi did was structure and sell CDOs based on subprime mortgages on the one hand, and on the other they took CDS positions that would pay out if the CDOs they sold defaulted. No, Prime Finance wouldn't be recommending any investments or trades to hedge funds. Other parts of the bank may recommend trades to pension funds and other institutional clients. But, hedge funds are generally staffed by people who have more experience than the people working at the banks - they may have learnt their trading skills at one or more banks - and won't be looking to banks for trading recommendations. What they do want and need from the banks are the trading infrastructure and the funding so that they can leverage the hedge fund's own funds.

Customer journey sounds awful vague and doesn't really address how they get involved in cash or asset handling or client services. Client relations cover a wide net and specificity would be reassuring. The way I see it - and it is vague - client experience is aiming to ensure that clients have good experiences in all their broad dealings with the bank. This would include aiming to ensure that the bank didn't miss out on anything that the bank could be do with the client only that the client wasn't aware of the bank's skills/experience in a particular area.

I would like to know what Pace DID do at Citi, as well as didn't, because I am wary of investment from American Wallstreet finance given previous such problems, especially given the terms of the takeover. Alan Pace lists his career appointments on LinkedIn. I'm not sure why you are wary of Wall Street finance, that's where all the biggest banks are, and, as someone once said, "that's where the money is." I see nothing to fear with an investment banker, nor with Mike Garlick's or John B's professions. Some might argue that we need to be wary of ownership by a butcher.


This is precisely one of the big problems with football, finance, and society in general. I'd ask your views on Glass-Steagall but I can guess.
Additionally, Burnley very much were not in debt before the takeover. We are not a club which can easily survive debt if relegated. BFC was in debt before Mike Garlick took charge. Remember, the club sold the ground.
Added comments - underlined above.

ClaretTony
Posts: 55920
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 25131 times
Has Liked: 4625 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Grim

Post by ClaretTony » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:48 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:44 pm
1. It’s pretty rare that club owners communicate on random media reports 2. AP has made it clear MG, JB and ALK are all in agreement with how the finances are set up - I would assume JB and MG were happy to put out the joint statement given their names are attached 3. Maybe some people aren’t doom mongers and want to look at positives 4. Has AP upset you somehow? Seem to be very negative towards him.
I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing with what was said, just that I was amazed really how many people suddenly changed opinion based on one tweet.

What I would like to know is who is leaking info to the Daily Mail.

boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:49 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:44 pm
1. It’s pretty rare that club owners communicate on random media reports 2. AP has made it clear MG, JB and ALK are all in agreement with how the finances are set up - I would assume JB and MG were happy to put out the joint statement given their names are attached 3. Maybe some people aren’t doom mongers and want to look at positives 4. Has AP upset you somehow? Seem to be very negative towards him.
Given that MG and JB are still due money then I'm not surprised they agreed to the statement, risking further unbalance to the club would be no good for any of them.

jedi_master
Posts: 4330
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:33 pm
Been Liked: 2239 times
Has Liked: 639 times
Location: Chesterfield

Re: Grim

Post by jedi_master » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:56 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:48 pm
I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing with what was said, just that I was amazed really how many people suddenly changed opinion based on one tweet.

What I would like to know is who is leaking info to the Daily Mail.
When you think of how many people Pace has binned from the club, it could be a long list with axes to grind. Purely conjecture from me as I’ve no idea of how happy they were to leave/whether it was of their own accord (I doubt it considering how many left one after another)

GaryClaret
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 3:41 pm
Been Liked: 24 times
Has Liked: 94 times

Re: Grim

Post by GaryClaret » Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:57 pm

Okay so:

Burnley with Garlick - we're unhappy when we're not spending the required money for a Premier League in transfer windows. 6 years in the Premier League on our budget. Probably would have lost the manager had this ownership continued. Eventually it is probable we were relegated if we continued with this investment/ownership? No guarantee of coming straight back up afterwards. Yes, we have the money in the bank but if we don't go up soon that would ebb away. Agreed?

Burnley with ALK - financed via borrowing so not debt free anymore. I hope people would agree the last transfer window was better? We don't know the outcome of this transfer window. Lots of uncertainty about finances if we do go down. Lots of uncertainty about overall strategy: is it signings? Is it promoting youth into the 1st team and selling it on? Nowhere near achieving that with youth at the moment. This is a transitional time and there is a lot of uncertainty. Looks probable we'll be relegated as things stand. No guarantee of coming straight back up afterwards.

Burnley with Oil money- unlimited money forever and ever but takes away from our identity. It just wouldn't be Burnley anymore. It's not going to happen and we probably don't want it to happen.

I may lack imagination but I don't see many other models of football ownership that are realistic for us. The reality surely is that we are always going to be under threat from relegation. Along with this we're always at risk of blowing our budget - a few wrong moves and we're in big trouble.

Is there any league, which Burnley can exist in, that is financially sustainable without a benefactor? We have done well in terms of accounts in recent years but we were probably mostly upset with lack of investment across transfer windows.

I know we belong in the Premier League because we earnt it. But I know we don't belong in the Premier League financially. Okay so how about the league below? Well there are lots of benefactors there too oh and the TV deal/commercial income probably doesn't sustain the wages of a decent playing staff. At least if we're trying to run Burnley like a business anyway.

Are we looking for an ownership that doesn't exist?

fatboy47
Posts: 2705
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:58 am
Been Liked: 1561 times
Has Liked: 1961 times
Location: Isles of Scilly

Re: Grim

Post by fatboy47 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:00 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:44 pm
Did you actually read my post? We had a limited amount of money available prior to the sale of Wood. From what I've heard the money from Woods sale will not be added to this pot- it will be banked- is that difficult to understand really?

🤔Wouldn't it be easier and more understandable to say we'll only spend half the Wood money?

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 10998
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 2388 times
Has Liked: 4837 times

Re: Grim

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:12 pm

GaryClaret wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 3:57 pm
Okay so:

Burnley with Garlick - we're unhappy when we're not spending the required money for a Premier League in transfer windows. 6 years in the Premier League on our budget. Probably would have lost the manager had this ownership continued. Eventually it is probable we were relegated if we continued with this investment/ownership? No guarantee of coming straight back up afterwards. Yes, we have the money in the bank but if we don't go up soon that would ebb away. Agreed?

Burnley with ALK - financed via borrowing so not debt free anymore. I hope people would agree the last transfer window was better? We don't know the outcome of this transfer window. Lots of uncertainty about finances if we do go down. Lots of uncertainty about overall strategy: is it signings? Is it promoting youth into the 1st team and selling it on? Nowhere near achieving that with youth at the moment. This is a transitional time and there is a lot of uncertainty. Looks probable we'll be relegated as things stand. No guarantee of coming straight back up afterwards.

Burnley with Oil money- unlimited money forever and ever but takes away from our identity. It just wouldn't be Burnley anymore. It's not going to happen and we probably don't want it to happen.

I may lack imagination but I don't see many other models of football ownership that are realistic for us. The reality surely is that we are always going to be under threat from relegation. Along with this we're always at risk of blowing our budget - a few wrong moves and we're in big trouble.

Is there any league, which Burnley can exist in, that is financially sustainable without a benefactor? We have done well in terms of accounts in recent years but we were probably mostly upset with lack of investment across transfer windows.

I know we belong in the Premier League because we earnt it. But I know we don't belong in the Premier League financially. Okay so how about the league below? Well there are lots of benefactors there too oh and the TV deal/commercial income probably doesn't sustain the wages of a decent playing staff. At least if we're trying to run Burnley like a business anyway.

Are we looking for an ownership that doesn't exist?
They want a Burnley version of Bloom from Brighton I think.
Just pours money into the club regardless as a form of financial doping and don't worry about it, debts of £300 million and growing down there but the media don't care about that one.
This user liked this post: RVclaret

boyyanno
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 7:25 pm
Been Liked: 235 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Grim

Post by boyyanno » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:15 pm

fatboy47 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:00 pm
🤔Wouldn't it be easier and more understandable to say we'll only spend half the Wood money?
No, because that wouldn't be the case. If we had 10-15m to spend before Wood left and we also had half of the Wood money then we'd have 25m to spend.

Papabendi
Posts: 1215
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:29 pm
Been Liked: 277 times
Has Liked: 32 times

Re: Grim

Post by Papabendi » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:33 pm

boyyanno wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:18 pm
Amazing how many people are satisfied with that from Pace. Let's see how much money is invested this window before we lap up what he has said.

what level of detail are you after?

lesxdp
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:11 am
Been Liked: 103 times
Has Liked: 1435 times
Location: Burnley

Re: Grim

Post by lesxdp » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:39 pm

fatboy47 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:00 pm
🤔Wouldn't it be easier and more understandable to say we'll only spend half the Wood money?
I think Boyanno is correct in the way he explained in that a transfer fund had already been agreed before the Wood sale. If he had said as you suggest we are planning to spend half the money from the sale of Wood people would then say that implied without the sale of Wood, nothing would be spent.

Taffy on the wing
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
Been Liked: 598 times
Has Liked: 2016 times

Re: Grim

Post by Taffy on the wing » Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:41 pm

Rumblings coming out of the club that the Wood money won't be invested and will be used to cover debt. We will see come February 1st.

Are these Rumblings in your head?

Did this wrong......it's a reply to Boyyano.

Post Reply