'Football fortune' this season

The thread on Branthwaite got me thinking about the potential cash windfall in the next 12 months or so.

Off the top of my head, it's rumoured that there's a clause in Dean Henderson's contract at Sheffield United that we'll receive a fee if/when he makes his full England debut and again rumoured that there's a good sell-on clause in Sam Cosgrove's contract at Aberdeen if/when he moves on. Given Sheffield United's form and Cosgrove's goalscoring run, it's possible that we'll receive a sum of money for both in the next 12 months or so. We've recently received a fee for the two young players who moved to Leeds and will be set for £100k+ if we beat Dulwich on Friday. On top of that, if the rumours are true that Branthwaite is being monitored by PL clubs and we choose to sell, we'll also receive a decent amount of money for him.

I'm not sure of the exact nature of those clauses and any amounts we'd receive, but it's potentially a lucrative period for us. With a bit of luck we'll be looking much healthier financially in the next year or so.

Dean Henderson future No.1 @ Old Trafford...

Whatever football fortune we might receive certainly won't be invested in players that's for sure

I don't want us to get any windfalls for the next couple of seasons .
Any money coming in will just put the 3 reluctant custodians in a stronger and more comfortable position.

If that's the case, begrudgingly yes

I think any football fortune will see a call by the debt reduction department -and I don’t blame them as I would do the same myself.As would most of us.

CCU wrote:

cufcmike wrote: It's pretty common when Championship Clubs sign players to offer a further windfall to the selling club after promotion. Could we want Leeds to go up?

Yes we would...

Dirty Leeds can stay in the championship for me!

I'd tend to agree Mush but would also like to see them get humped every other week and go straight back down with less than 25 pts.

Leeds united goalkeeper has been charged with using racist language against Charlton.

If there is money in it for us i hope they win the champions league. Who cares about these premier teams and their glory hunting fans?

ParcelPete wrote: Leeds united goalkeeper has been charged with using racist language against Charlton.

Bobby or Jack?

Burneside Blue wrote:

ParcelPete wrote: Leeds united goalkeeper has been charged with using racist language against Charlton.

Bobby or Jack?

Made me laugh, but Pete is the one supposed to make the jokes, not have them against him.

Markovitch wrote: If there is money in it for us i hope they win the champions league. Who cares about these premier teams and their glory hunting fans?

You seemingly if you're quite happy to go and watch games in a lower league competition into which their B teams have been shoe-horned.

I'm there to watch Carlisle United. I don't choose games based on the opposition, just going to the big games

Laffy wrote: I think any football fortune will see a call by the debt reduction department -and I don’t blame them as I would do the same myself.As would most of us.

But if you let football fortune money be used to invest in the club, like trying to get better players in or offer something better than one year contracts, then the club is more likely to be successful and generate more income, which can then be used to pay debts surely?

Correct Kessler-precisely why I wanted all debt converted or written off.No debt, no call on football fortune-so it all stays in club.If you are owed money and it’s subject to a PG, you are bound to grab cash when it comes in

cufcmike wrote: It's pretty common when Championship Clubs sign players to offer a further windfall to the selling club after promotion. Could we want Leeds to go up?

No

Laffy wrote: Correct Kessler-precisely why I wanted all debt converted or written off.No debt, no call on football fortune-so it all stays in club.If you are owed money and it’s subject to a PG, you are bound to grab cash when it comes in

Can you explain what that means? Because I thought from reading your last post it sounded like you were saying if the club owed you money and it got a football fortune income, you'd want them to use some of it to pay down their debt rather than reinvest in the club?

Why do you call it a loan Kes?Because you believe you will it want to be repaid.

If not, it’s either an investment in equity or a gift.

So-faced with being frogmarched out of BP but being still owed a couple of million, what would you do?

Note my proposal was always equity-not repayable.Good old fashioned long term cash.

I await your learned response with interest.

I'd invest it in the stewards and maybe give patty a couple of quid.

Laffy wrote: Why do you call it a loan Kes?Because you believe you will it want to be repaid.

If not, it’s either an investment in equity or a gift.

So-faced with being frogmarched out of BP but being still owed a couple of million, what would you do?

Note my proposal was always equity-not repayable.Good old fashioned long term cash.

I await your learned response with interest.

If I understand correctly, you said that football fortune money would be used to pay down debt and that you would want the same if the debt was owed to you. But then you said debt should be written off or converted. I'm confused, if the club debt was owed to you would you want them to use football fortune money to repay you or would you write off that debt/convert it, and let the football fortune be used for investing in the club? Seems to be a bit of crossed wires and I'm wondering if I've misunderstood something?

FFS Kes

The club owes the stakeholders £3m?They are hanging around showing no sign of leaving.They have PGs on the loans.

A surprise sale of a player creates a cash pot.You know you will be leaving soon so do you

A-leave all the money in the club and carry on with loans hanging over you or

B.Use the cash to pay down some of the debt and reduce your PGs

I reckon 99pc will go for option B

My proposal involved writing off all debt so B was not an option or temptation.And why would I invest in a broken business to see my money be used to pay off dead loans?

The loans are currently worthless but would have some value if a player was sold for cash-it then depends what the stakeholders would do with the cash.

My structure involved no debt so it made the club investable and frankly allow the directors to not just sell players on the first offer

Laffy wrote: FFS Kes

The club owes the stakeholders £3m?They are hanging around showing no sign of leaving.They have PGs on the loans.

A surprise sale of a player creates a cash pot.You know you will be leaving soon so do you

A-leave all the money in the club and carry on with loans hanging over you or

B.Use the cash to pay down some of the debt and reduce your PGs

I reckon 99pc will go for option B

My proposal involved writing off all debt so B was not an option or temptation.And why would I invest in a broken business to see my money be used to pay off dead loans?

The loans are currently worthless but would have some value if a player was sold for cash-it then depends what the stakeholders would do with the cash.

My structure involved no debt so it made the club investable and frankly allow the directors to not just sell players on the first offer

I don't know why you are saying ffs as all I did was ask you a question. I don't know much about the business side of things, when you say things like PG I'm not really sure what you mean by that, or what it stands for. Would help if you could explain it in a way that I understand. When I read your post it looked to me like you were saying that if the club owed you money and they got some football fortune cash, you would want that money to go to you. But now it seems like you weren't saying that and I got it wrong?

Firstly you need to look to clear the club of debt , making a it a far more attractive business to invest in , secondly you need to invest in the infrastructure , better commercial revenues , better training facilities, That makes is stronger in the long run.
Offering player players big contracts without a long term source of income is like winning the lottery and spending all on flash cars will be great for a few years but no fun when your broke and can't afford to fill them up.

Happyblue wrote: Firstly you need to look to clear the club of debt , making a it a far more attractive business to invest in , secondly you need to invest in the infrastructure , better commercial revenues , better training facilities, That makes is stronger in the long run.

Where is the money going to come from to invest in the infrastructure and better facilities if any income you get has gone towards paying off debt? A football club isn't exactly like an average business, but it's still true that it needs money in order to invest and generate income. A club having debt isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as that debt is being used in the right way, generating future income.

Kessler wrote:

Laffy wrote: FFS Kes

The club owes the stakeholders £3m?They are hanging around showing no sign of leaving.They have PGs on the loans.

A surprise sale of a player creates a cash pot.You know you will be leaving soon so do you

A-leave all the money in the club and carry on with loans hanging over you or

B.Use the cash to pay down some of the debt and reduce your PGs

I reckon 99pc will go for option B

My proposal involved writing off all debt so B was not an option or temptation.And why would I invest in a broken business to see my money be used to pay off dead loans?

The loans are currently worthless but would have some value if a player was sold for cash-it then depends what the stakeholders would do with the cash.

My structure involved no debt so it made the club investable and frankly allow the directors to not just sell players on the first offer

I don't know why you are saying ffs as all I did was ask you a question. I don't know much about the business side of things, when you say things like PG I'm not really sure what you mean by that, or what it stands for. Would help if you could explain it in a way that I understand. When I read your post it looked to me like you were saying that if the club owed you money and they got some football fortune cash, you would want that money to go to you. But now it seems like you weren't saying that and I got it wrong?

Personal Guarantees ......same as a loan if needed

Baffled me for ages as well.

seesaw50 wrote:

Kessler wrote:

Laffy wrote: FFS Kes

The club owes the stakeholders £3m?They are hanging around showing no sign of leaving.They have PGs on the loans.

A surprise sale of a player creates a cash pot.You know you will be leaving soon so do you

A-leave all the money in the club and carry on with loans hanging over you or

B.Use the cash to pay down some of the debt and reduce your PGs

I reckon 99pc will go for option B

My proposal involved writing off all debt so B was not an option or temptation.And why would I invest in a broken business to see my money be used to pay off dead loans?

The loans are currently worthless but would have some value if a player was sold for cash-it then depends what the stakeholders would do with the cash.

My structure involved no debt so it made the club investable and frankly allow the directors to not just sell players on the first offer

I don't know why you are saying ffs as all I did was ask you a question. I don't know much about the business side of things, when you say things like PG I'm not really sure what you mean by that, or what it stands for. Would help if you could explain it in a way that I understand. When I read your post it looked to me like you were saying that if the club owed you money and they got some football fortune cash, you would want that money to go to you. But now it seems like you weren't saying that and I got it wrong?

Personal Guarantees ......same as a loan if needed

Baffled me for ages as well.

So what exactly is meant by reducing your PG? If the debt is owed to you, and you want that debt to be written off and for the club to keep the money, surely there's some mechanism you can use and formally declare that you don't want that money back? Sorry if it seems a silly question, I just don't really understand the business side of it and even the terminology is a bit confusing for me.

Yeah of course it is Kessler, I reckon you know more than you’re letting on.

Funnily enough, I was thinking the same thing-good job he’s not in charge and commanding a big salary eh.

Kes-the loans are called loans because you expect to get it back.The structure of the club is such that the Trust will not allow share subscriptions because they have no money-implication being that new shares dilute the existing shareholdings.For the Trust, that would mean them dropping below 25pc and losing a lot of power.

So over the years, new money has been injected by Fred, directors etc as loans-non dilutive on equity but essentially making the club look ever more insolvent-because loans are temporary.

Now the club owes around £3m?in loans.As the club is loss making, the chances of repayment are remote-unless a windfall comes along A sale of a player would hopefully create surplus cash-that cash would be tempting to the lenders to recover value.

As an potential investor, you look at the balance sheet.Its stuffed full of debt so the danger is obvious-putting money in could see your money simply being used to repay debt when the intention was to invest for the long term benefit of the club.A weak balance sheet stuffed full of debt makes it uninvestable.

So to the current stakeholders owed millions.If a windfall comes along, it’s a great opportunity to recover value-I wouldn’t blame them for doing it.Remember my view is EWM are simply acting like a bank-banks like to see loans being repaid.

Hope this makes sense.My view is that the club cannot move forward without these loans being cleared out-written off or repaid.

Kessler wrote:

Happyblue wrote: Firstly you need to look to clear the club of debt , making a it a far more attractive business to invest in , secondly you need to invest in the infrastructure , better commercial revenues , better training facilities, That makes is stronger in the long run.

Where is the money going to come from to invest in the infrastructure and better facilities if any income you get has gone towards paying off debt? A football club isn't exactly like an average business, but it's still true that it needs money in order to invest and generate income. A club having debt isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as that debt is being used in the right way, generating future income.

Kessler read the order. You clear the debt then you invest in the club so it can create revenue streams and then you use the money to invest in players.

Kessler it's quite simple you invest in the long term future not the the short term.

Think of being short of money so you use your credit card for day to day spending and other stuff, so racking up a balance over time.
Your income doesnt increase to allow you to pay off enough to bring down the balance significantly, and you keep using the card so adding to your debt to the credit card company.
Then you have a bit of a win on the lottery, what do you do ? Paying a chunk off the ever increasing card would make sense.

Bit simplistic I know.......not sure about the other bits laffy talks about.

When do we expect to get any cash for McCarron and Galloway, should we have had any up front....so some paying down must have taken place already

I'm not surprised Kessler is confused. The next accounts will show only two significant loans outstanding, EWM for about £2 million and the Pioneer loan which shrinks each year as sponsorship payments are deducted. AJ and JN will have converted all their loans to B shares. Laffy's point is quite simple. The custodians have personally guaranteed the repayment of the EWM loan so paying some of that off with any windfall would reduce their potential obligation. It would be nice if there was money to invest in the club but keeping it going is the priority.

Laffy wrote: So to the current stakeholders owed millions.If a windfall comes along, it’s a great opportunity to recover value-I wouldn’t blame them for doing it.Remember my view is EWM are simply acting like a bank-banks like to see loans being repaid.

I understand that bit. But in order to pay off loans you need to be generating income. If any windfall the club gets just goes into paying down existing debt rather than investing in long term growth, how does the club generate enough income to keep paying that debt once the windfall has run out? If that money was instead used on trying to get better players in, that might mean better results on the pitch, higher attendances, more money coming in, and then you're in a better financial position to pay down debts. Short term I suppose it makes sense to see football fortune money as a way to pay down debt, but what's the plan when that money runs out?

Laffy wrote: Hope this makes sense.My view is that the club cannot move forward without these loans being cleared out-written off or repaid.

Yeah thanks, and sorry if it seems a silly question, I just find it quite a confusing subject and had no idea what a PG was until today.

Kessler wrote:

Laffy wrote: So to the current stakeholders owed millions.If a windfall comes along, it’s a great opportunity to recover value-I wouldn’t blame them for doing it.Remember my view is EWM are simply acting like a bank-banks like to see loans being repaid.

I understand that bit. But in order to pay off loans you need to be generating income. If any windfall the club gets just goes into paying down existing debt rather than investing in long term growth, how does the club generate enough income to keep paying that debt once the windfall has run out? If that money was instead used on trying to get better players in, that might mean better results on the pitch, higher attendances, more money coming in, and then you're in a better financial position to pay down debts. Short term I suppose it makes sense to see football fortune money as a way to pay down debt, but what's the plan when that money runs out?

Laffy wrote: Hope this makes sense.My view is that the club cannot move forward without these loans being cleared out-written off or repaid.

Yeah thanks, and sorry if it seems a silly question, I just find it quite a confusing subject and had no idea what a PG was until today.

You should have said,i could have given you some PG Tips.

PG means nee tits in the film.

thetashkentterror wrote: PG means nee tits in the film.

Explains it all - There all in the boardroom instead