ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

[Taffy on the wing]

and no peas!

Scandalous!

[Goodclaret]

Burnley are doing a lot more player trading than the club has ever done before. Most/all of this is being financed with borrowings either from banks/other financial institutions or by credit agreed with the selling club. When ALK acquired BFCHL they took out a loan of £65 million from MSD. This loan has been repaid by new borrowings a few times since then. ALK also borrowed money from BFCHL/BFACL. The total amount was £124 million at 31st July-2023. The amount has reduced to £97.5 million in the latest set of accounts to 31st July 2024.

On the other hand, the accounts also show that Bank loans and other loans total £112 million at 31st July 2023 compared with £100.9 million a year earlier.

Note 8. Interest payable and similar expenses breaks down the £19.0 million amount as: bank loan interest payable £11.1m, other interest payable £2.1m, finance expenses on player trading creditors £5.8m and a small amount on interest payable on finance leases and hire purchase contracts.

The £11.1m bank loan interest paid really hurts. Up from £2.5m the previous year.

[Vegas Claret]

11 million in interest, Christ on a bike.

[Chester Perry]

The £11.1m bank loan interest paid really hurts. Up from £2.5m the previous year.

There is actually more to it than that as the total costs indicate, the interest rate paid to MGG was a new high (both MSD and Macquarie were stated as 8% plus SONIA

2024 BFCHL Interest and financing payments.jpg (56.73 KiB) Viewed 2455 times

we appear to be doing something credit orientated on transfer payments for which the interest is significant. The curious thing about this is that we believe that the huge loan was also contributing to incoming transfers.

then there is the curious matter of the other non-bank loan

2024 BFCHL loans overview.jpg (162.44 KiB) Viewed 2455 times

At first I though this may have been the factored Prem TV money with Macquarie - but the charge for that was satisfied on the 20th June 2024 (well before the account date) and from what we can gather it was replaced by a loan from MGG (which may be the £30m loan that was initially unsecured)

The curious thing about the main MGG loan is that it appears to have been for just 12 months - though that could have just been as a result of relegation, we will never know. When you add in the transfer payments (before the contingencies) that is an awful lot of pressure on cashflows which may go a long way to explaining player sales and loans as well as the partial repayment from Velocity

2024 BFCHL Creditor payments due.jpg (52 KiB) Viewed 2455 times

[Goodclaret]

Thank you, Chester, for putting more meat on the bones. Pretty complicated stuff to be honest! I suppose we have to hope it's all manageable debt but it does indicate a high risk strategy (cover by player sales, pressure to remain in the PL etc). We have to trust Pace and his team it's all in hand!?

Thanks again

[Goalposts]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

[Paul Waine]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

Was this Alan Pace that told you this or just some guy in a pub?

Martin Samuel, sports journo for The Times, a few weeks ago said ALK have plenty of money.

Administration, absolutely no chance.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

Wasn’t there supposed to be a fire sale last time we got relegated? Maybe it’s the same person who said it.

[NewClaret]

Was this Alan Pace that told you this or just some guy in a pub?

Martin Samuel, sports journo for The Times, a few weeks ago said ALK have plenty of money.

Administration, absolutely no chance.

Really? Any link to that?

[NewClaret]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

The fire sale - most likely. We’d definitely have lost Trafford and Esteve. We may still lose them to established clubs if someone wants to pay big money, as Matt Williams recently said, but neither were ever going to play another season in the Championship.

Administration - behave

[Row x]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

I take it you were told by Graeme Bailey, as he is the only person saying this rubbish

[Quickenthetempo]

Martin Samuel, sports journo for The Times, a few weeks ago said ALK have plenty of money.

They certainly have plenty of Burnley football clubs money.

[Big Vinny K]

Was this Alan Pace that told you this or just some guy in a pub?

Martin Samuel, sports journo for The Times, a few weeks ago said ALK have plenty of money.

Administration, absolutely no chance.

With all due respect Paul how on earth would Martin Samuel have a clue whether ALK have plenty of money ? Tbh I cannot imagine that he would have a clue who or what ALK are or where to start on our ownership structure.

And even on the small chance he is correct having lots of money and making that available to your football club are two completely different things.

[Goalposts]

As i said just what i was told , maybe he got it from this article though if so he made it seem a bit bigger than this piece. And not sure how credible the so called expert is.

https://eflanalysis.com/transfers/burnl ... aunt-them/

[Paul Waine]

Really? Any link to that?

Martin Samuel's comment was "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?"

The article was headed: Relegation clauses are killing hopes of promoted clubs

Putting punitive relegation clauses into players’ contracts makes going straight back down a self-fulfilling prophecy — that’s why Burnley are more likely to struggle next season than Leeds

Martin Samuel Tuesday April 22 2025, 8.02pm, The Times

www.thetimes.com/article/33ca85e6-f349- ... 7e52297611

Took me a little time to find it. The Times have improved their search facilities in the past month or so.

Don't know if anyone posted on this mb at the time.

[aggi]

I was told last night that if we had not gone up there would have been a fire sale and potential administration. And that Trafford and Steve will leave in the window. Can any of our financial experts give clarity on whether the administration thing was a high possibility ?

I guess technically correct in that we may end up in administration if we never got promoted in the future.

Administration in the immediate future whilst we have the player assets we do seems incredibly unlikely though.

It also wouldn't be that beneficial for ALK either as one of the first things they'd be looking at would be recovering the £90m or so that ALK owes the club.

[aggi]

As i said just what i was told , maybe he got it from this article though if so he made it seem a bit bigger than this piece. And not sure how credible the so called expert is.

https://eflanalysis.com/transfers/burnl ... aunt-them/

Given their parent website makes more of their advertising and monetisation abilities than their journalism abilities I think you can guess how reliable it is.

It's just another version of HITC and probably as accurate.

[aggi]

Martin Samuel's comment was "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?"

The article was headed: Relegation clauses are killing hopes of promoted clubs

Putting punitive relegation clauses into players’ contracts makes going straight back down a self-fulfilling prophecy — that’s why Burnley are more likely to struggle next season than Leeds

Martin Samuel Tuesday April 22 2025, 8.02pm, The Times

www.thetimes.com/article/33ca85e6-f349- ... 7e52297611

Took me a little time to find it. The Times have improved their search facilities in the past month or so.

Don't know if anyone posted on this mb at the time.

I can't see anything about ALK on that link.

[Paul Waine]

With all due respect Paul how on earth would Martin Samuel have a clue whether ALK have plenty of money ? Tbh I cannot imagine that he would have a clue who or what ALK are or where to start on our ownership structure.

And even on the small chance he is correct having lots of money and making that available to your football club are two completely different things.

See my reply to NewClaret.

Given Martin Samuel typed "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?" it's difficult to know how much detail MS knows about Burnley's ownership structure and the finances of the collective owners. There's every chance, if he is interested to ask the right questions of the right people he will know a lot more than any of us posting on here.

[Paul Waine]

I can't see anything about ALK on that link.

Martin Samuel typed "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money..." in the comments.

Yes, he didn't mention ALK. See my reply to Big Vinny K.

[Big Vinny K]

See my reply to NewClaret.

Given Martin Samuel typed "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?" it's difficult to know how much detail MS knows about Burnley's ownership structure and the finances of the collective owners. There's every chance, if he is interested to ask the right questions of the right people he will know a lot more than any of us posting on here.

Still no evidence whatsoever that MS has got a clue whether ALK have lots of money or not and even less evidence as to whether if they did those monies would be available to support or subsidise Burnley.

What the “evidence” does point to though is that the owners are not prepared to subsidise the club to the tune of owners like Tony Bloom at Brighton. For years he was covering losses of around £50m a year whilst they were fighting the same relegation battles that Burnley were under SD and Garlick. Brighton only became a “selling” club when they started receiving astronomical offers for their players (I put selling in inverted commas because most clubs if they get offered £100m for their midfielder end up being a selling club !!)

The way ALK shave sold players under their ownership and the financing methods they use does not suggest to me that we have owners who are prepared to subsidise the club or any losses with their own money - irrespective as to whether they could afford to or not.

[aggi]

Martin Samuel typed "You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money..." in the comments.

Yes, he didn't mention ALK. See my reply to Big Vinny K.

The comments don't show up for me but that's a very vague comment to support "ALK have plenty of money." Particularly as one of the answers to that question is "the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money"

Given that he was presenting Tresor as a Championship signing with none of the nuance of him being a premier league signing with an obligation to buy I'm prepared to believe he may not be that aware of what's happening at Burnley.

[Paul Waine]

The comments don't show up for me but that's a very vague comment to support "ALK have plenty of money." Particularly as one of the answers to that question is "the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money"

Given that he was presenting Tresor as a Championship signing with none of the nuance of him being a premier league signing with an obligation to buy I'm prepared to believe he may not be that aware of what's happening at Burnley.

Agree, the comparison of Amdouni and Tresor as players bought in different seasons didn't make sense. It just shows he wanted to make an argument why relegation clauses are a "bad idea."

I'm not sure MS was looking for the response that you suggest "the guy that owns Burnley hasn't got money."

His full comment, again, was:"You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?"

[aggi]

Agree, the comparison of Amdouni and Tresor as players bought in different seasons didn't make sense. It just shows he wanted to make an argument why relegation clauses are a "bad idea."

I'm not sure MS was looking for the response that you suggest "the guy that owns Burnley hasn't got money."

His full comment, again, was:"You think the guy that owns Burnley hasn’t got money; or that he prefers not to invest it as Marinakis did?"

Without the context I have no idea whether he's suggesting the guy that owns Burnley (and let's be honest, if he's referring to "the guy that owns Burnley" it's pretty clear he has little idea of the ownership structure) hasn't got money or prefers not to invest it.

I know you're one of those that tends to be more favourable of our owners but I'm also sure that you're experienced and knowledgeable enough to realise that this throwaway comment is no evidence of Pace's wealth or lack of.

[ClaretPete001]

I think I must have been away when these came out and they have completely passed me by.

As predicted everything is still pretty much going in the wrong direction. The wage bill is staggering given it took us several years to get to that level under Dyche. Even if you blame PL inflation that in itself is quite concerning. And the Creditors have increased again.

The Balance Sheet is held together by a £120 million inter company loan and if the Director cannot or are not prepared to repay it then it's gone.

I'm not sure how Paul Waine can look at those accounts and be confident that another year in the Championship would not lead to a firesale at best, which would then lead to us being uncompetitive in the Championship. Or something worse.

It just seems to me that after 3 years or so of debate those who think ALK are good for the club are reliant on the notion that ALK have money. Other than that we are lower in the Pyramid than when they first arrived, have seemingly received no external investment, commercial revenue is still totally dependent upon the PL and we have a Balance Sheet shored up by huge inter company loans.

We need a Dychesque period of 7 or 8 years in the PL to sort this out.

[Vegas Claret]

I think I must have been away when these came out and they have completely passed me by.

As predicted everything is still pretty much going in the wrong direction. The wage bill is staggering given it took us several years to get to that level under Dyche. Even if you blame PL inflation that in itself is quite concerning. And the Creditors have increased again.

The Balance Sheet is held together by a £120 million inter company loan and if the Director cannot or are not prepared to repay it then it's gone.

I'm not sure how Paul Waine can look at those accounts and be confident that another year in the Championship would not lead to a firesale at best, which would then lead to us being uncompetitive in the Championship. Or something worse.

It just seems to me that after 3 years or so of debate those who think ALK are good for the club are reliant on the notion that ALK have money. Other than that we are lower in the Pyramid than when they first arrived, have seemingly received no external investment, commercial revenue is still totally dependent upon the PL and we have a Balance Sheet shored up by huge inter company loans.

We need a Dychesque period of 7 or 8 years in the PL to sort this out.

Grim synopsis mate, gonna be hard for us to stay in the league that's for sure

[Paul Waine]

Without the context I have no idea whether he's suggesting the guy that owns Burnley (and let's be honest, if he's referring to "the guy that owns Burnley" it's pretty clear he has little idea of the ownership structure) hasn't got money or prefers not to invest it.

I know you're one of those that tends to be more favourable of our owners but I'm also sure that you're experienced and knowledgeable enough to realise that this throwaway comment is no evidence of Pace's wealth or lack of.

Agree. I was surprised by MS's comment. First time I've read anyone in the media make a comment that could be understood to indicate the journo thought "the guy who owns Burnley has lots of money."

The opening para of his article indicates he is not up to speed with Burnley's transfer business, though he obviously knows enough to write about Burnley as a club that requires relegation clauses in player contracts. MS doesn't appear to address the situation when a player in Switzerland or Belgium is on, let's say, £10,000 per week and is offered £20,000 in the Premier League and his contract includes a relegation clause which will reduce his wage to £10,000 per if the club is relegated. In my view, the only player who would turn that deal down is one that is being offered more money by another club. There's logic, of course, if they were on more than £10,000 with their current club and offered £20,000 to sign for a Premier League club and get themselves in the Premier League window. There's also logic that says many players will sign for Burnley knowing that their next move will be to a club that pays even more. So, I think MS has got it wrong about relegation clauses.

MS obviously isn't too well informed of Burnley's ownership structure. Saying "the guy who owns.." rather than Alan Pace and ALK would have shown more knowledge.

[NewClaret]

CP - I may have asked this before and apologies if I’ve forgotten your response, but did you ever track the £170m+ back through MG and JB’s company accounts?

I.e. are we certain all monies that left the club and now owed back to the club reached their respective companies?

[Paul Waine]

I think I must have been away when these came out and they have completely passed me by.

As predicted everything is still pretty much going in the wrong direction. The wage bill is staggering given it took us several years to get to that level under Dyche. Even if you blame PL inflation that in itself is quite concerning. And the Creditors have increased again.

The Balance Sheet is held together by a £120 million inter company loan and if the Director cannot or are not prepared to repay it then it's gone.

I'm not sure how Paul Waine can look at those accounts and be confident that another year in the Championship would not lead to a firesale at best, which would then lead to us being uncompetitive in the Championship. Or something worse.

It just seems to me that after 3 years or so of debate those who think ALK are good for the club are reliant on the notion that ALK have money. Other than that we are lower in the Pyramid than when they first arrived, have seemingly received no external investment, commercial revenue is still totally dependent upon the PL and we have a Balance Sheet shored up by huge inter company loans.

We need a Dychesque period of 7 or 8 years in the PL to sort this out.

Hi Pete, in what way is promotion to the Premier League "pretty much going in the wrong direction?" I don't just mean on the football pitch but also the club's finances? The club that finishes 20th in the Premier League will receive more money than any club playing in the Championship. (Obviously, we all hope that BFC achieve 17th or better this time around).

The latest set of accounts are for the last Premier League season. They don't reflect the season that's just finished. Are you saying that if BFC hadn't been promoted the club would have had a fire sale? I understand a fire sale to be an event where everything must be sold for whatever price is available. I don't think that would have been the case.

What do you mean by "external investment?" Do you understand the club structure, ALK plus Velocity Sports? Most of the new money will come into the ownership structure via Velocity Sports, though we also know not all of it has come this way. What we can't see with the structure - and it is how these structures work - is who and how much, unless individuals choose to announce their participation.

[Paul Waine]

CP - I may have asked this before and apologies if I’ve forgotten your response, but did you ever track the £170m+ back through MG and JB’s company accounts?

I.e. are we certain all monies that left the club and now owed back to the club reached their respective companies?

That's an interesting question, but surely only relevant if the shares that represented MG's and JB's ownership of the club were all held by MG's and JB's respective companies.

[Chester Perry]

CP - I may have asked this before and apologies if I’ve forgotten your response, but did you ever track the £170m+ back through MG and JB’s company accounts?

I.e. are we certain all monies that left the club and now owed back to the club reached their respective companies?

All 7 of the selling directors received their share of the £190m (including performance bonus) they were due, with final payment made (late as with all the previous payments) in early July 2023 - though not possible to trace though the various business holdings as a number of the entities in receipt were offshore.

The ringfence on their remaining shares does not appear to have been exercised and has now expired, leaving 5 of them with a minor shareholding.

I still have question marks around one of those selling offshore holdings, how many shares it actually held at the time of takeover and indeed who actually truly owned the said entity. I am still investigating that one.

[aggi]

Fire sale is a much overused term on here. Mainly by people who don't know what a fire sale is.

[Row x]

Fire sale is a much overused term on here. Mainly by people who don't know what a fire sale is.

Even though it's been explained to them many times.

[Wokingclaret]

I think I must have been away when these came out and they have completely passed me by.

As predicted everything is still pretty much going in the wrong direction. The wage bill is staggering given it took us several years to get to that level under Dyche. Even if you blame PL inflation that in itself is quite concerning. And the Creditors have increased again.

The Balance Sheet is held together by a £120 million inter company loan and if the Director cannot or are not prepared to repay it then it's gone.

I'm not sure how Paul Waine can look at those accounts and be confident that another year in the Championship would not lead to a firesale at best, which would then lead to us being uncompetitive in the Championship. Or something worse.

It just seems to me that after 3 years or so of debate those who think ALK are good for the club are reliant on the notion that ALK have money. Other than that we are lower in the Pyramid than when they first arrived, have seemingly received no external investment, commercial revenue is still totally dependent upon the PL and we have a Balance Sheet shored up by huge inter company loans.

We need a Dychesque period of 7 or 8 years in the PL to sort this out.

What were you expecting, we had Vincent Kompany as manager, like a Bond season it was never going to be cheap!
Did you also miss last summers window sales and the money we got for VK, plus we have players to sell from the current squad plus the loanees out there.

The media have just stated the playoff final is worth 220 mill to the winners

[Wokingclaret]

ClaretPete001 BTW as with PW and CP I do genuinely enjoy and appreciate your posts on the accounts

[NewClaret]

All 7 of the selling directors received their share of the £190m (including performance bonus) they were due, with final payment made (late as with all the previous payments) in early July 2023 - though not possible to trace though the various business holdings as a number of the entities in receipt were offshore.

The ringfence on their remaining shares does not appear to have been exercised and has now expired, leaving 5 of them with a minor shareholding.

I still have question marks around one of those selling offshore holdings, how many shares it actually held at the time of takeover and indeed who actually truly owned the said entity. I am still investigating that one.

Offshore eh? How surprising!

Thanks CP. The question was about MG and JB though, who I understood held their shares in firms where we could trace them? I seem to remember you saying MG’s were held in a Maltese company, for example?

Really just trying to understand if we can trace all the money back to them?

[ClaretPete001]

Hi Pete, in what way is promotion to the Premier League "pretty much going in the wrong direction?" I don't just mean on the football pitch but also the club's finances? The club that finishes 20th in the Premier League will receive more money than any club playing in the Championship. (Obviously, we all hope that BFC achieve 17th or better this time around).

The latest set of accounts are for the last Premier League season. They don't reflect the season that's just finished. Are you saying that if BFC hadn't been promoted the club would have had a fire sale? I understand a fire sale to be an event where everything must be sold for whatever price is available. I don't think that would have been the case.

What do you mean by "external investment?" Do you understand the club structure, ALK plus Velocity Sports? Most of the new money will come into the ownership structure via Velocity Sports, though we also know not all of it has come this way. What we can't see with the structure - and it is how these structures work - is who and how much, unless individuals choose to announce their participation.

Hi Paul I was referring to the finances not the football. In terms of football The fact is we are lower in the pyramid now than when the club was sold.

I think it was Wittgenstein who said that language is understood in the context it is used and everyone on here knows what is meant by firesale.

I recall having the same debate at the beginning of last season with those who said the club would only sell the idd player.

There is no evidence of significant external investment in the club regardless of the group structure.

[ClaretPete001]

What were you expecting, we had Vincent Kompany as manager, like a Bond season it was never going to be cheap!
Did you also miss last summers window sales and the money we got for VK, plus we have players to sell from the current squad plus the loanees out there.

The media have just stated the playoff final is worth 220 mill to the winners

I don’t think it’s possible to do these fag packet figures because of the complexity of how we buy and sell players.

We also spent a lot last summer and lost some PL broadcast revenue. I doubt the finances improved in the Championship.

We now need to fund a PL spend or we probably won’t be competitive next season.

[ClaretPete001]

Grim synopsis mate, gonna be hard for us to stay in the league that's for sure

Even accepting my bias that I never thought it would work and it’s gone pretty much how I expected financially I am disappointed with these figure.

When went up in Dyche’s second promotion we made a lot of money because we managed to keep the wage bill at something akin to Championship levels with a Pl mark up. I was expecting something similar but £90 million is much higher than I expected.

SP has done a brilliant job on the pitch - let’s hope the club can get it right off the pitch this time.

[Big Vinny K]

Yep fire sale is an overused term for sure - but it holds a different context in football as it’s become a general term of phrase when a club has to sell a large number of players. Of course football supporters love to exaggerate things and work in the extremes of highs and lows. As said above it does not matter whether this term is technically correct or not - we sold a hell of a lot of players and in football parlours that’s regularly referred to as a fire sale.

Whilst I do not believe we are anywhere near the extreme of administration I also do not understand why some people appear to be pretty comfortable with the current model. Of course getting promoted improves the situation in the short term and is a far better financial scenario than not going up. But it’s also not the massive windfall that it for some clubs or even that it has been for us in the past. We have an underlying cost and debt base under the new owners and that needs factoring in before we spend one penny on new players.
The way the owners restructure our debt regularly at ridiculous commercial rates together with the way use factoring does not point to the availability of external investment or owners with deep pockets prepared to subsidise any losses. When you add to that the history record level of wages in the last reported accounts then I cannot see us being in anything but a precarious financial position - which in my book means we are only ever one or two big mistakes away from things changing significantly.

On the plus side we could be Preston, Blackburn or many other clubs who have not had the fraction of success we have had in the last 15 years. The number of promotions and fantastic seasons we have had for a club of our size I would is say is as good as any club has achieved during this period.

[Wokingclaret]

Even accepting my bias that I never thought it would work and it’s gone pretty much how I expected financially I am disappointed with these figure.

When went up in Dyche’s second promotion we made a lot of money because we managed to keep the wage bill at something akin to Championship levels with a Pl mark up. I was expecting something similar but £90 million is much higher than I expected.

SP has done a brilliant job on the pitch - let’s hope the club can get it right off the pitch this time.

Times have changed
Even Kompany stated it, I'm not signing for you because I think you'll get relegated........

Buying from the Championship has become more expensive, these clubs want the money, so we are shopping abroad.

Not helped by Ipswich blowing money at it and Brentford surviving these seasons

I think we will be more careful this time not having the Kompany wide spend which was never ever going to be cheap.

[Row x]

Yep fire sale is an overused term for sure - but it holds a different context in football as it’s become a general term of phrase when a club has to sell a large number of players. Of course football supporters love to exaggerate things and work in the extremes of highs and lows. As said above it does not matter whether this term is technically correct or not - we sold a hell of a lot of players and in football parlours that’s regularly referred to as a fire sale.

Whilst I do not believe we are anywhere near the extreme of administration I also do not understand why some people appear to be pretty comfortable with the current model. Of course getting promoted improves the situation in the short term and is a far better financial scenario than not going up. But it’s also not the massive windfall that it for some clubs or even that it has been for us in the past. We have an underlying cost and debt base under the new owners and that needs factoring in before we spend one penny on new players.
The way the owners restructure our debt regularly at ridiculous commercial rates together with the way use factoring does not point to the availability of external investment or owners with deep pockets prepared to subsidise any losses. When you add to that the history record level of wages in the last reported accounts then I cannot see us being in anything but a precarious financial position - which in my book means we are only ever one or two big mistakes away from things changing significantly.

On the plus side we could be Preston, Blackburn or many other clubs who have not had the fraction of success we have had in the last 15 years. The number of promotions and fantastic seasons we have had for a club of our size I would is say is as good as any club has achieved during this period.

We sold that many last summer because the players wanted out. The club didn't sell anyone who didn't want to go
Many fans are happy with the current ownership, because without it, we would be like Preston, Blackburn or many others, probably even worse if the previous owners had stayed

[boyyanno]

We sold that many last summer because the players wanted out. The club didn't sell anyone who didn't want to go
Many fans are happy with the current ownership, because without it, we would be like Preston, Blackburn or many others, probably even worse if the previous owners had stayed

That's absolute codswallop.

Financial pressure meant we had to sell and the previous ownership built the success, now apparently they'd have taken us to league one.

I'd much rather people say- actually I like the owners- instead of making up garbage to try and justify their position.

[Quickenthetempo]

We sold that many last summer because the players wanted out. The club didn't sell anyone who didn't want to go
Many fans are happy with the current ownership, because without it, we would be like Preston, Blackburn or many others, probably even worse if the previous owners had stayed

You do know we employ agents to sell our players quicker don't you?
They have been open about buying players to make money from.

They took it to the extreme in the last prem season.

[Row x]

That's absolute codswallop.

Financial pressure meant we had to sell and the previous ownership built the success, now apparently they'd have taken us to league one.

I'd much rather people say- actually I like the owners- instead of making up garbage to try and justify their position.

The previous owners were not investing in the squad, what makes you think they would have started when we got relegated?
What bit of that is codswallop?

[Chester Perry]

We sold that many last summer because the players wanted out. The club didn't sell anyone who didn't want to go
Many fans are happy with the current ownership, because without it, we would be like Preston, Blackburn or many others, probably even worse if the previous owners had stayed

We are all aware that this had a significant contribution to the outgoings last season, but there were other pressing cash flow concerns that may have been a contributing factor.

According to the latest accounts, there were over £85m of non transfer credit repayments due in the last season plus a little under £48m in transfer payments - the repayments should have a significant impact on the interest payments

Selling players acquired from English clubs - such as Berge and O'Shea requires that all outstanding incoming fee payments be settled immediately, together with any sell on clause amount. Naturally this can cause cash flow pressure, when the incoming fee arrives in instalments and a player is sold early into a long term contract with a large portion of the outstanding fee still unpaid.

Selling players acquired from abroad under UEFA/FIFA requirements, means the club can follow the existing fee payment schedule but must pay the agreed sell on clause value immediately I believe. This means the club may opt to keep paying for players that are no longer registered at the club. This can work in your favour, from a cashflow perspective, when enough players are sold on for a significant profit, but has seen some of Europe's biggest clubs get into financial difficulties - think Barcelona and Juventus

we know that the Parachute payment is just under £50m and the club is likely to earn no more than £25m from it's operational activities (including EFL TV rights) and perhaps less. It would be of no surprise if Velocity had to ease cash flow pressures again with a further repayment of their loans from the club even with the £40m that was loaned from Fasanara Capital in January.

[boyyanno]

The previous owners were not investing in the squad, what makes you think they would have started when we got relegated?
What bit of that is codswallop?

Every bit of what you said.

But actually i didn't mean codswallop, I meant bullsh*t.

[Row x]

You do know we employ agents to sell our players quicker don't you?
They have been open about buying players to make money from.

They took it to the extreme in the last prem season.

So players refusing to play in the Championship is the clubs fault,
Should we just have kept them and not play them?
Of course we all know the model, just that more had to be sold last summer because of the players, not the club.
Turned out ok though, didn't it?

[Orangebernard]

Thanks again to all contributors to this thread, every Burnley fan should take the time to read it and make an effort to understand the financial situation our club is in. I have a few questions that i'd like peoples opinons on:

1). Are the current club debts still entirely made up of the orignal loans ALK used to buy the previous shareholders shares or have they now become mixed with loans taken out to fund player transfers and operating costs etc?
2). Is there any evidence at all of any monies coming from Velocity into the football club from any of the ownership structure at any point since ALK bought the original shares?
3). I assume that ALK/Velocity will at some point, when they beleive the time is right, sell their shares in the club to another entity and given that I don't beleive that they have put any significant monies into the club themselves this might not be at a point when we are successfully avoiding relegation from the EPL but could also be if we fail to gain promotion back there and finanically in real trouble. If its the latter as long as they make a small profit on any monies put into the club themselves and they have enough to repay any other parties such as JJ Watt they can walk away leaving the club with their debts, parachute payments and TV monies possibly factored and with obligations to pay transfer fees for players without any come back on themselves, is that correct? Is there anything that means that ALK/Velocity must clear any of these debts before selling up?

[Row x]

Every bit of what you said.

But actually i didn't mean codswallop, I meant bullsh*t.

So Dyche was talking bullsh*t when he says he was refused funds? As are posters on here, more in the know than I am say the same?