EMA Equity Partners

[Chester Perry]

So this is an interesting bit of speculation

We know from the accounts that the club is paying out on all of VSL's takeover obligations started 2022 with:
- £65m of debt to MSD
- VSL 'advanced' £10m which is likely to have been used to cover the costs of the shares from the small shareholders (they may have to advance more as the deal is likely to have cost in excess of £10m unless VSL are availing themselves of discount pricing at the club for the club credit/gold card purchases)
- VSL needing to pay stage payments of £37m in the calendar year with another £21m in 2023
- we had only fronted up £3m of the £12m for Nathan Collins (according to the last accounts) and no doubt exercised similar practice on all other incomings - raising the clubs outstanding transfer balance from £0 to around £25m when including Vout.

There have been ins and outs on the transfer front which have brought in a sizeable amount but when outstanding transfer monies and sell on fees are added (together with agent fees - £6m between Feb 2021 and end of Jan 2022) we will not be making the profits some are figuring. This is before we add the cost of factoring to Macquarie - how many realise we will have paid a greater fee to advance the Nick Pope monies than the Chris Wood ones (the time lapse is the key factor) or that we have paid to advance monies on the Pope deal that will have then been paid straight to Charlton (the suggestion from their fans is the sell on was in the high 20's%)

We know this summer that some of the cash has reduced the debt to MSD by £20m, we await the next accounts for confirmation of whether there was a penalty fee applied to that - something I have been suggesting as likely based on publicly available information from MSD UK Holdings Limited. That same information also highlights how stringent MSD are about sticking to the terms of their agreements, no early payoffs without a repayment trigger (like relegation).

Beyond that there is the commitment to buy the remaining shares from the old board by October 2024 - another £20m if the pricing is the same as the takeover. This is a non-binding (for VSL) exclusivity agreement which was part of the long standing plan to facilitate a dividend payment in 2025 to pay off the capital on the MSD loan.

There is still no indication of when or even if VSL intend to repay the loans from the club used for buying shares in the club, loans they keep adding to - do not be surprised if dividends or indeed impairments (write-offs) are used at some point down the line, particularly if the quest for investment partners continues on it's forlorn journey of rejection (we have to hope not).

- Are positive things happening at the club? yes

- Will the club be debt free once again? it is far from impossible given that the MSD debt has already been reduced (it could easily rise again if we are promoted this season) but that is unlikely ever to include outstanding transfer debt

- Will the club see all it's money returned from VSL? almost certainly not, and it feels like it will be a very long time before an exponential increase in revenues from new initiatives will make up the difference.

So all that considered, I am wondering how you see us as being debt free inside 12 months

forgot to add the cost of sacking Dyche and co

[aggi]

So this is an interesting bit of speculation
...
So all that considered, I am wondering how you see us as being debt free inside 12 months

Of course the likely reason we'd need to repay that loan is because we hadn't been promoted and were viewed as a credit risk.

[Chester Perry]

Of course the likely reason we'd need to repay that loan is because we hadn't been promoted and were viewed as a credit risk.

but even that is likely to be over more than 12 months given the parachute situation

[NewClaret]

forgot to add the cost of sacking Dyche and co

From what I recall, we had £45m debt to MSD. That is all anyone cares about on here. Stage payments and all that jazz don’t matter because there remains so much unknown and optional about them, it’s pointless wasting your time worrying about until they end up being converted to debt. Which they haven’t so far.

Since then we have had £20.5m (Collins), £15m guaranteed (McNeil), £17.5m (Cornet). £53m. Plus £3m (ish) outlays on a Vitinho/Benson. So that roughly nets off as us being debt free now.

I don’t want all that income to be spent on paying down the debt, since we need more players. But the last accounts also showed £50m cash so it’s conceivable some of that remains. We’d be much better off discussing net debt in that respect.

Either way, we’re getting our ship in order both on and off the field and there’s far less to fear now than there was. Which is great news.

[bumba]

So this is an interesting bit of speculation

We know from the accounts that the club is paying out on all of VSL's takeover obligations started 2022 with:
- £65m of debt to MSD
- VSL 'advanced' £10m which is likely to have been used to cover the costs of the shares from the small shareholders (they may have to advance more as the deal is likely to have cost in excess of £10m unless VSL are availing themselves of discount pricing at the club for the club credit/gold card purchases)
- VSL needing to pay stage payments of £37m in the calendar year with another £21m in 2023
- we had only fronted up £3m of the £12m for Nathan Collins (according to the last accounts) and no doubt exercised similar practice on all other incomings - raising the clubs outstanding transfer balance from £0 to around £25m when including Vout.

There have been ins and outs on the transfer front which have brought in a sizeable amount but when outstanding transfer monies and sell on fees are added (together with agent fees - £6m between Feb 2021 and end of Jan 2022) we will not be making the profits some are figuring. This is before we add the cost of factoring to Macquarie - how many realise we will have paid a greater fee to advance the Nick Pope monies than the Chris Wood ones (the time lapse is the key factor) or that we have paid to advance monies on the Pope deal that will have then been paid straight to Charlton (the suggestion from their fans is the sell on was in the high 20's%)

We know this summer that some of the cash has reduced the debt to MSD by £20m, we await the next accounts for confirmation of whether there was a penalty fee applied to that - something I have been suggesting as likely based on publicly available information from MSD UK Holdings Limited. That same information also highlights how stringent MSD are about sticking to the terms of their agreements, no early payoffs without a repayment trigger (like relegation).

Beyond that there is the commitment to buy the remaining shares from the old board by October 2024 - another £20m if the pricing is the same as the takeover. This is a non-binding (for VSL) exclusivity agreement which was part of the long standing plan to facilitate a dividend payment in 2025 to pay off the capital on the MSD loan.

There is still no indication of when or even if VSL intend to repay the loans from the club used for buying shares in the club, loans they keep adding to - do not be surprised if dividends or indeed impairments (write-offs) are used at some point down the line, particularly if the quest for investment partners continues on it's forlorn journey of rejection (we have to hope not).

- Are positive things happening at the club? yes

- Will the club be debt free once again? it is far from impossible given that the MSD debt has already been reduced (it could easily rise again if we are promoted this season) but that is unlikely ever to include outstanding transfer debt

- Will the club see all it's money returned from VSL? almost certainly not, and it feels like it will be a very long time before an exponential increase in revenues from new initiatives will make up the difference.

So all that considered, I am wondering how you see us as being debt free inside 12 months

Can't be bothered reading that book you wrote but if we get promoted like I said then we could comfortably pay off the remaining loan straight away

[forzagranata]

Can't be bothered reading that book you wrote but if we get promoted like I said then we could comfortably pay off the remaining loan straight away

While undertaking the necessary investments in our squad?

[Paul Waine]

I don’t want all that income to be spent on paying down the debt, since we need more players. But the last accounts also showed £50m cash so it’s conceivable some of that remains. We’d be much better off discussing net debt in that respect.

BFC's accounting year end is 31st July. (It was deferred by a month to 31st July in 2020 when the Premier League season was suspended for a number of weeks given covid-19 lockdown). Every July when the club has been in the Premier League the club has received the first instalment of the Premier League tv money. The second instalment is paid in December and the merit piece is paid after the season has ended, because it is determined by the finishing places. So, when the accounts are published, expected date end of April the following year, the 31st July accounts will always show a large balance of cash. That cash is earmarked to pay wages for the upcoming season. It doesn't necessarily indicate a nice "dry power store" or other unspent savings. Of course, there can be "surplus cash" held by the club over and above the first tv instalment.

Following relegation the club is now in the Championship. I'd guess that the parachute payments are also paid the club in July and December. Anyone know more about these arrangements?

[NewClaret]

The specifics don’t really matter chaps. Zero point arguing over them as nobody has all of the facts they need. And it all depends on promotion anyway!!

The overarching point is that we’re getting our finances in better order and have already paid off 1/3rd of our debt before selling players to a greater value of our debt.

It’s a much better, if still imperfect and uncertain picture.

[Chester Perry]

From what I recall, we had £45m debt to MSD. That is all anyone cares about on here. Stage payments and all that jazz don’t matter because there remains so much unknown and optional about them, it’s pointless wasting your time worrying about until they end up being converted to debt. Which they haven’t so far.

Since then we have had £20.5m (Collins), £15m guaranteed (McNeil), £17.5m (Cornet). £53m. Plus £3m (ish) outlays on a Vitinho/Benson. So that roughly nets off as us being debt free now.

I don’t want all that income to be spent on paying down the debt, since we need more players. But the last accounts also showed £50m cash so it’s conceivable some of that remains. We’d be much better off discussing net debt in that respect.

Either way, we’re getting our ship in order both on and off the field and there’s far less to fear now than there was. Which is great news.

ok
Cash balance at July 21 2021 included an advance of circa £35m from the Premier League first instalment
it is already recorded fact that since then and aside to other operational costs £10m was advanced to VSL, Dyche and Co were sacked and there is a substantial cost resulting, £20m has had to be paid to MSD (granted no staying up bonuses) There has been a stage payment of a minimum of £11m in April but reports more was paid so put off a June payment in excess of £20m until September, a conflicting report says that the June payment has already been made.

Collins Inward £20,5m - Outstanding transfer fee £9m plus a reported sell on fee of 10% or £850k allows us to collect £10.65m cash from the sale over a period - This is a rare occasion of not being very different to how it will be reflected in the accounts because we are flipping his registration so quickly is book value will be 0.8 of his initial transfer fee (plus agents fees and other costs of his acquisition).

McNeil Inward £15m (or is it £20m + add ons) transfer will be virtually all profit (there will be a residual book value based on the cost of his agent fees but that will be almost negligible) - Does Dyche still qualify for the profit share on this deal our was it written out of his contract in the new deal he signed last year?

Pope Inward £11m - book value circa £300k - there was a reported large sell on clause (Charlton fans say circa 27.5%) and at least a £700k (assuming 5% interest) to Macquarie) so a deal profit of no more than £7.25m

Cornet Inward £17.5m - book value in the region of £9m and a suggested incoming fee of circa £11m and a sell on clause of 10% - profit booked less than £8m

General reports suggesting we have spent £16m so far and probably another £4m + in agent fees

Kompany was right when he said there is not that much flexibility (even with a substantially reduced wage bill) given the other cash outflows

NB you can apply tour own numbers if you do not agree with mine re transfers in and out - it won't make too much difference - the biggest outflow is for non football reasons and looks to remain so for a while yet

[Chester Perry]

Can't be bothered reading that book you wrote but if we get promoted like I said then we could comfortably pay off the remaining loan straight away

fag packet demonstration please

[bumba]

While undertaking the necessary investments in our squad?

That's a different side completely. Maybe they'd invest maybe they wouldn't.
The question was how can we be debt free in 12 months, my answer is simple get promoted and pay it off in full it can be done but the squad would stay as it is that's not for me to sort.

[NewClaret]

ok
Cash balance at July 21 2021 included an advance of circa £35m from the Premier League first instalment
it is already recorded fact that since then and aside to other operational costs £10m was advanced to VSL, Dyche and Co were sacked and there is a substantial cost resulting, £20m has had to be paid to MSD (granted no staying up bonuses) There has been a stage payment of a minimum of £11m in April but reports more was paid so put off a June payment in excess of £20m until September, a conflicting report says that the June payment has already been made.

Collins Inward £20,5m - Outstanding transfer fee £9m plus a reported sell on fee of 10% or £850k allows us to collect £10.65m cash from the sale over a period - This is a rare occasion of not being very different to how it will be reflected in the accounts because we are flipping his registration so quickly is book value will be 0.8 of his initial transfer fee (plus agents fees and other costs of his acquisition).

McNeil Inward £15m (or is it £20m + add ons) transfer will be virtually all profit (there will be a residual book value based on the cost of his agent fees but that will be almost negligible) - Does Dyche still qualify for the profit share on this deal our was it written out of his contract in the new deal he signed last year?

Pope Inward £11m - book value circa £300k - there was a reported large sell on clause (Charlton fans say circa 27.5%) and at least a £700k (assuming 5% interest) to Macquarie) so a deal profit of no more than £7.25m

Cornet Inward £17.5m - book value in the region of £9m and a suggested incoming fee of circa £11m and a sell on clause of 10% - profit booked less than £8m

General reports suggesting we have spent £16m so far and probably another £4m + in agent fees

Kompany was right when he said there is not that much flexibility (even with a substantially reduced wage bill) given the other cash outflows

NB you can apply tour own numbers if you do not agree with mine re transfers in and out - it won't make too much difference - the biggest outflow is for non football reasons and looks to remain so for a while yet

Agree & understand the £50m had Sky advance. But it’s the only barometer of cash we have. It will go up (probably above the £50m) and down over the course of the season as in any business. Let’s see what the next accounts say when published because obviously that won’t have the same up front Sky payment.

Nobody really knows if the other payments due on the sale will come from club funds, albeit I accept that is likely given historic trends, but not certain. It’s also likely that there will be performance-related clauses & negotiations on timing given circumstances. That or the ownership structure may revert back more in Garlick’s favour. Which I wouldn’t be against vs him continuing to use BFC as an ATM.

Re: Collins there was also a big rumour Stoke owed us for Vokes. Nobody know the sell on fees. Plus Norwich will likely be paying us for Gibson on the drip.

What I think we can say with absolute certainty is that even before the recent £53m incoming, we’d paid a third off our debt. Debt is much lower now. It will likely be reduced even further following the more recent sales to comply with the loan. We’ve also massively reduced our wage bill, yet have a younger & more exciting team. We’re certainly looking in much better shape than we were and most can see a path now to being in a position of relatively good shape again.

The fact it was ever necessary is a shame, however.

[Chester Perry]

Re: Collins there was also a big rumour Stoke owed us for Vokes.

As I have posted before, that is a rumour that the accounts have totally quashed

[Childzy]

Gone very far off track from the fact the away shirt is sponsored by a made up company. Which on it’s made up website has investments in multiple other seemingly made up companies.

Run by a man who seems to have only been notable as a mildly successful scam artist in a MLM company (and all MLM companies are scams).

With the only tangible connection to the club being both him and Pace are associated with Salt Lake.

Literally rather give the away shirt to a charity than what is clearly total ******** and I by definition of it’s sketchy existence cannot be commercially valuable. Be more PR value in charity sponsor than the financial value of a made up company.

[Chester Perry]

I have been asked on the MMT (in relation to a post about Manchester City's betting partner 8XBet) if anymore had been found about EMA Capital/Equity partners - my response actually seems more appropriate for this thread

No, but don't you find it interesting that we have never worn it for a game - given Pace's previous on not allowing advertising if it has not been paid for (at least 13 boards taken down around the side of the pitch during Covid Lockdown after the takeover) it does make you wonder if we have been paid.

[Chester Perry]

again from the MMT - trying to keep the conversation here

I don’t think we’ve needed it yet, Saturday was the first time we’d worn anything other than the home kit and the second kit would have clashed with Coventry’s strip. Sunderland away will be the real tell.

and my response

I transferred the post to the EMA Equity thread, but I just cannot remember the time we played so many away games in the home shirt, and certainly not consecutively from the start of the season

[Chester Perry]

this is a very good point

It’s also worth noting that the EMA ads are still cycling through on the LED boards around the ground at the Turf. I remember them from the last home match as we were discussing ‘who are EMA’ when they appeared.

[Fretters]

(and all MLM companies are scams)

Well, that bit just isn't true. You might not agree with their structure, but plenty are reputable businesses. Are you thinking of a pyramid scheme/scam where the person at the bottom loses their cash?

[Mattster]

At least they actually have a website now.

[Childzy]

Nope, fully aware of what MLMs are and they are scams.

[daveisaclaret]

This thread is still their third result on Google.

[Leisure]

Gone very far off track from the fact the away shirt is sponsored by a made up company. Which on it’s made up website has investments in multiple other seemingly made up companies.

Run by a man who seems to have only been notable as a mildly successful scam artist in a MLM company (and all MLM companies are scams).

With the only tangible connection to the club being both him and Pace are associated with Salt Lake.

Literally rather give the away shirt to a charity than what is clearly total ******** and I by definition of it’s sketchy existence cannot be commercially valuable. Be more PR value in charity sponsor than the financial value of a made up company.

Is this statement that it is a made up company actually accurate?

[Fretters]

Nope, fully aware of what MLMs are and they are scams.

They really aren't. But go on, who do you think is being scammed?

[aggi]

At least they actually have a website now.

They've had a website since at least a week (possibly even two) before the sponsorship deal was announced.

[aggi]

Well, that bit just isn't true. You might not agree with their structure, but plenty are reputable businesses. Are you thinking of a pyramid scheme/scam where the person at the bottom loses their cash?

Are plenty reputable businesses? It may be that some MLM is legit but I can't say I can think of any.

[aggi]

Is this statement that it is a made up company actually accurate?

No one knows. There is probably more evidence that they are a made up company than evidence that they aren't but maybe they were just previously a company with minimal presence which is doing a big push and sponsoring BFC is part of that.

[daveisaclaret]

They really aren't. But go on, who do you think is being scammed?

I don't think I've ever come across someone who didn't think MLMs are scams who wasn't either scamming or getting scammed, I must confess.

[Childzy]

One of the top 5 strangest stances I’ve seen an internet person take

[Childzy]

Is this statement that it is a made up company actually accurate?

It’s just my somewhat hyperbolic take on what I can work out. Takes about 30 min to find all relevant information on Spencer Hunn - the person involved with EMA and on the press release.

Clearly made some decent cash via an MLM and EMA is likely a personally seeded investment vehicle. Looking at the website in terms of what it’s invested in and 70% of them look a bit sketchy themselves - real lack of substance about them.

So then you consider how a very minor private investment fund ends up sponsoring a high profile championship club and the only link is both Pace and Hunn are associated with Salt Lake City. Almost guaranteed to be nepotism - rightly or wrongly. For me wrongly as just give the shirt to charity rather than this waste of a farce.

It’s been a while since it was announced and it’s barely been leveraged by EMA at all. Perhaps in private circles, pitch deck and investor rounds it is being used to establish trust or credibility.

I just think it’s dead weird that this empty, suspect and bodiless entity is the club sponsor. Equally we haven’t wore the away shirt either!!

[Fretters]

One of the top 5 strangest stances I’ve seen an internet person take

You've heard of Avon though, right? Huge, legal MLM company. Just making the point that MLM aren't scams, I think you're getting confused with pyramid schemes.

[Mattster]

They've had a website since at least a week (possibly even two) before the sponsorship deal was announced.

A quick check shows their website was published on the same day the club announced them as sponsor - 4th August. It didn't show on searches on the day (the similarly titled EMA Partners site (https://www.ema-partners.com/) the top result on the day, closely followes by the club announcement and this thread. Maybe it wasn't showing in searches that day as it was brand new or published later than tbe announcement. The earliest snapshot of the site on the wayback machine is 1st September.

[Fretters]

Should have said not ALL of them are, as you stated. Obviously some pyramid schemes mascarade as legit MLM companies.

[Childzy]

Avon is also an MLM scam. The less dangerous end of the spectrum but it’s still a scam. The offer being a self employed individual that rarely earn enough to make minimum wage.

MLMs are scams. Pyramid schemes are illegal scams.

I think you are getting confused with MLMs not being **** of the earth and weirdly defending them

MLMs should be called out and shamed, never defended.

[aggi]

A quick check shows their website was published on the same day the club announced them as sponsor - 4th August. It didn't show on searches on the day (the similarly titled EMA Partners site (https://www.ema-partners.com/) the top result on the day, closely followes by the club announcement and this thread. Maybe it wasn't showing in searches that day as it was brand new or published later than tbe announcement. The earliest snapshot of the site on the wayback machine is 1st September.

I was looking at when it was registered on whois. Wayback can be a bit sporadic. It definitely showed on searches on the day.

Regardless, it didn't exist for long before the announcement. I'm pretty sure the two were linked

[Fretters]

Avon is also an MLM scam. The less dangerous end of the spectrum but it’s still a scam. The offer being a self employed individual that rarely earn enough to make minimum wage.

MLMs are scams. Pyramid schemes are illegal scams.

I think you are getting confused with MLMs not being **** of the earth and weirdly defending them

MLMs should be called out and shamed, never defended.

Ah, so your definition of scam isn't really scam. I get it now, you just don't agree with the setup. Fair enough.

[Childzy]

Stop baiting, you are very much the outlier of thinking MLMs aren’t scams. Weird hill to die on.

Back to the matter at hand, as it’s literally a tangential point as while the EMA founder made money via an MLM scam, EMA itself is not an MLM.

So what is it!? Has anyone found more interesting links between Pace and Hunn - must know each other.

Why has either the club or EMA bothered with doing it. I’ve been completely and utterly suckered into and would love to know more from anyone who knows anything!!

[Chester Perry]

Back to the matter at hand, as it’s literally a tangential point as while the EMA founder made money via an MLM scam, EMA itself is not an MLM.

So what is it!? Has anyone found more interesting links between Pace and Hunn - must know each other.

Why has either the club or EMA bothered with doing it. I’ve been completely and utterly suckered into and would love to know more from anyone who knows anything!!

We could be asking the same kinds of questions about our Official Partner Pesci Sports - a Private company established in 2015 but still only 2 employees (Greg Pesci the founder and Marco Pesci) based in Alpine Utah

https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/con ... sci-sports

https://pescisports.com/

[Nonayforever]

We could be asking the same kinds of questions about our Official Partner Pesci Sports - a Private company established in 2015 but still only 2 employees (Greg Pesci the founder and Marco Pesci) based in Alpine Utah

https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/con ... sci-sports

https://pescisports.com/

Whichever way one looks at it, whether through analysing his contacts, pouring over his debt, acclaiming his current management team or speculating on his media absence, the current vehicle moving forward has far more pot holes to negotiate than long smooth winding roads to travel.
I still think quick buck rather than solid foundations.

[Chester Perry]

I have to say I am beginning to see a possible way through this for Pace and co, whether it is luck or judgement doesn't really matter, in fact that is almost irrelevant. the point being is that if they succeed it is a rather horrible precedent for the game in general, though probably good for Burnley fans, the vast majority of whom will have contributed to their success and profit.

[dsr]

EMA is an investment vehicle dedicated to strategic investment and partnership with growing middle market companies and emerging high-growth enterprises. Our unique investment thesis is focused on sustainable enterprise and a proven model to strengthen our position as the partner of choice for companies with forward thinking leadership and disruptive technologies that are seeking flexible capital solutions, and broader product distribution.

This is literally all their website says. And Google Translate doesn't help detect any meaning to that verbiage.

The only clue is that if you want to know more, they need your email address - perhaps they sell email addresses as one of their core businesses?

[CharlieinNewMexico]

I have to say I am beginning to see a possible way through this for Pace and co, whether it is luck or judgement doesn't really matter, in fact that is almost irrelevant. the point being is that if they succeed it is a rather horrible precedent for the game in general, though probably good for Burnley fans, the vast majority of whom will have contributed to their success and profit.

What does this post mean specifically?

Your comments are vague and need outlining (imho)

[aggi]

We could be asking the same kinds of questions about our Official Partner Pesci Sports - a Private company established in 2015 but still only 2 employees (Greg Pesci the founder and Marco Pesci) based in Alpine Utah

https://www.burnleyfootballclub.com/con ... sci-sports

https://pescisports.com/

You can see more of a story to them though. Greg Pesci seems to have a reasonable track record, there's involvement in a few related companies which also have a bit of a profile, a reasonably professional looking website has been around for a few years, they have released an app, etc. It's not the black hole that EMA is.

Whether they are of sufficient "stature" to be an official partner at Burnley then people will have to make their own judgement. Personally I'd say that it isn't anything unusual. Even the biggest clubs have loads of random official partners (some which they clearly haven't done due diligence on). I can't imagine they're paying much, if anything, but we may be getting some expertise for free.