Philip Day

I hate to post on the trust board here, but there is an obvious answer you're all missing.

PD says he's a rugby man (fine, so did FS) and doesn't wish control. I believe him and don't believe the loan is an attempt to assert some sort of sneaky control.

Why not loan the club a capital amount / or at least the facility first off "to help" cover cashflow etc and then take it back over time, season by season - in lieu of sponsorship? Maybe some of the items they're planning or wishing to sponsor are still sponsored by other businesses and PD, quite rightly, doesn't want to step on any toes until these deals have expired

You have to satisfy the EWM shareholders for the initial capital amount / facility, so you take a token debenture on BP, to show you aren't pissing the cash up the wall while keeping yourself looking responsible.

This way the club gets access to the funds it needs upfront, EWM gets paid back in sponsorship for the amount of the loans - for a considerable few years - and PD can carry on sipping his cocktails, on his patio, in the sun without any of the muppets who support our club giving him grief. Everyone's a winner in this scenario....

Apart from our toothless and apathetic supporters, of course.

Piglet_Phoenix wrote: I hate to post on the trust board here, but there is an obvious answer you're all missing.

PD says he's a rugby man (fine, so did FS) and doesn't wish control. I believe him and don't believe the loan is an attempt to assert some sort of sneaky control.

Why not loan the club a capital amount / or at least the facility first off "to help" cover cashflow etc and then take it back over time, season by season - in lieu of sponsorship? Maybe some of the items they're planning or wishing to sponsor are still sponsored by other businesses and PD, quite rightly, doesn't want to step on any toes until these deals have expired

You have to satisfy the EWM shareholders for the initial capital amount / facility, so you take a token debenture on BP, to show you aren't pissing the cash up the wall while keeping yourself looking responsible.

This way the club gets access to the funds it needs upfront, EWM gets paid back in sponsorship for the amount of the loans - for a considerable few years - and PD can carry on sipping his cocktails, on his patio, in the sun without any of the muppets who support our club giving him grief. Everyone's a winner in this scenario....

Apart from our toothless and apathetic supporters, of course.

Hmmm, that may be the case and time will tell, well stated Piggy. Welcome to the trust board, now [censored] off!

I think Piglet is right. EWM are providing a loan facility in the same way that a bank might, EWM will receive monthly management accounts and the business plan like a lending bank would. EWM are clearly looking at a major sponsorship deal - shirts, stand maybe even the stadium, The EWM Brunton Park perhaps? They then deduct the cost of the sponsorship from the outstanding loan amount. Everything is being done on a commercial basis.

I don't think Piglet is right that this is the trust board, I think at one stage it wanted to be but everyone came to their senses and realised that the people who run the club and the trust are a closed shop and are basically useless.

Laffy wrote: So I'm 'sad' for not posting the Day article on here.Well that would have involved me photocopying the article and then pasting it-I don't have a copier at home.If that constitutes 'sad' God save us.

The interesting fact in the article for fans is that PD spends less than 10 days a year in the UK having relocated to Dubai-that may change of course in the future.

He also says that he thinks there will be a lot of casualties on the High Street-mainly down to rates and weak sterling.I agree-there will be some surprise names in difficulty unless the government addresses the issue of business rates in particular.

Debenhams could be one of the next down the shitter.

They sold off the last of the stores they owned about 10 years ago, on leaseback with the rent increasing year on year, to fund a takeover that happened them.

Lad I know that works there claims that it's now got to the point that the rent is more than some stores profit, hence why they are now looking at closures.

M&S; will more than likely realise they aren't going to be able to turn around their clothing side and only do food and home stuff.

Next share price has almost halved in the last 2 years. My Mrs works there and a lot of her colleagues invested heavily in their share save programme because for a couple of years it was basically buying money, but now a few who didn't sell when the getting was good have seen a few grand knocked off their shares. The last one she did she ended up jist withdrawing the money because the share price was lower than the initial offering.

munchymagic wrote: I don't think Piglet is right that this is the trust board, I think at one stage it wanted to be but everyone came to their senses and realised that the people who run the club and the trust are a closed shop and are basically useless.

Thought you'd have known about the secret meetings CCU and Mouldy had with Norman Steel and John N***n

DeckchairBlue wrote:

Laffy wrote: So I'm 'sad' for not posting the Day article on here.Well that would have involved me photocopying the article and then pasting it-I don't have a copier at home.If that constitutes 'sad' God save us.

The interesting fact in the article for fans is that PD spends less than 10 days a year in the UK having relocated to Dubai-that may change of course in the future.

He also says that he thinks there will be a lot of casualties on the High Street-mainly down to rates and weak sterling.I agree-there will be some surprise names in difficulty unless the government addresses the issue of business rates in particular.

Debenhams could be one of the next down the shitter.

They sold off the last of the stores they owned about 10 years ago, on leaseback with the rent increasing year on year, to fund a takeover that happened them.

Lad I know that works there claims that it's now got to the point that the rent is more than some stores profit, hence why they are now looking at closures.

M&S; will more than likely realise they aren't going to be able to turn around their clothing side and only do food and home stuff.

Next share price has almost halved in the last 2 years. My Mrs works there and a lot of her colleagues invested heavily in their share save programme because for a couple of years it was basically buying money, but now a few who didn't sell when the getting was good have seen a few grand knocked off their shares. The last one she did she ended up jist withdrawing the money because the share price was lower than the initial offering.

Department stores were always a middle class sort of stuffy store anyhow with a mish mash of stuff that was sold at three times the price you get in The Range but hey ho you get a nice bag.

I just hope that they don't blame the demise of Debenhams on Brexit, people still do have money but they do not want to waste it on over priced tat.

I noticed there are not as many tobacconists in Carlisle as there used to be because it is an outdated concept just like the department store.

Times change I get all my clothes and footwear online I'm very brand loyal so very rarely send anything back as I know sizing

all electricals for the house are bought online and virtually all presents bought online toys jewellery perfumes ect

not sure the high st as we know it has a future

most town centers will be for eating out socialising and living in majority of shopping done on line

I bought a drill other week same day delivery ffs

I see it like this and have said so right from the start

Its common knowledge that around christmas time Jenkins was begging him to put some money in by whatever method

Now having seen what happened with the shambles around the transfer window and Curles ridiculous offloading of players to meet the protocol to bring the new players in that he wanted we now know was because the other way of affecting it by putting new cash in wasnt going to happen because Jenkins wife had hidden the cheque book it looks as if this arrangement took a little longer to sort out and was done this way as it gives PD a little control over how its spent.

It seems pretty clear that EWM are to be the new shirt sponsors which means that the next big question will be are EWM handing over a sum of money for that each year which will positively affect the protocol figure or will the sponsorship be paid for by writing down the loan by say 100k each year which would be fine but wouldnt unfortunately positively affect the protocol figure as loaned funds dont count towards it.

My Guess is that this is simply a 10 year shirt sponsorship deal which EWM have paid for upfront in exchange for having a couple of checks in place to ensure that Jenkins doesnt just go out and spunk it all in the next transfer window [ much as we might like him to ] and is used to alleviate the very problem that Jenkins went to Day with at the end of last year namely one of cash flow.

And for whoever it was that asked yes there are ways EWM could use this to their advantage tax wise but i.m sure there are accountants and people like Laffy who could explain that for you better than me.

Dancingbear wrote:

munchymagic wrote: I don't think Piglet is right that this is the trust board, I think at one stage it wanted to be but everyone came to their senses and realised that the people who run the club and the trust are a closed shop and are basically useless.

Thought you'd have known about the secret meetings CCU and Mouldy had with Norman Steel and John N***n

The Duck Parfait was nice mind...

So cash flow problem sorted for now. Still the debt problem which wont go away unless a billionare comes in. Sounds similar to Laffy's proposal, except it's one company putting the cash up, oh and we are stuck with the current owners for the forseable future

If it is a sponsorship deal with a notional set off each year like the Pioneer Stand,it will hurt long term cash flow as no cash being paid on the drip.

Having a facility from EWM is very helpful short term but how much has been spent so far as the chat is they needed it quick to sort out creditors

Something will have to give here-too quiet on all fronts

So, clinging on, worried, head in the sand, desperate, in denial, all words that can be used to describe the BOD. Hope something gives sooner rather that later as we head towards yet another season in the basement league.

Looking increasingly like the club is heading towards a terminal decline if the situation and owners remain the same. They still won't accept that it's their doing and refusal to step aside when AL and others have made bids to take over is only speeding up the final curtain. How much longer can we go on as we are in a ground no longer up to what is required to generate income for the club.

Maybe investing in promotion has cost dearly, who knows ?

Given the magnitude of PD's businesses, maybe having a foot in CUFC gives an inside track into the FA and a potential future supply business ?

International brand awareness is one thing, sponsoring CUFC is another.

It may be as simple as personal relationships, and giving help when asked.............

Has PD not just given a politician's answer though (or been advised by a PR man what to say) - he does not answer the question/point of "are you buying CUFC2. He merely goes off at a tangent, like they all do, and says he does not like football.
Still don't buy it that he is buying the club it is to offset tax losses. If he is buying it, it will be to put people in place to make it a successful business venture.
On the down side, and worryingly (and probably glaringly obvious sign he is not buying it) is that he does not have a representative on the board which has just agreed the budgets for next season.

C'mon Phil man eh. Git yer an in yer pockit an blow yer luar on the blues.
Yer only live once fella. Nee regrets.

Hopefully he'll come in. Give a nice thanks but no thanks to the current regime. Spend a few years putting the club on a decent footing, then sell to someone good when it's a much more attractive proposition. If only FS had written the debt off there and then. Not just off loaded the club for 4 quid but put it up for sale properly when we were steadily progressing.

Piglet_Phoenix wrote: I hate to post on the trust board here, but there is an obvious answer you're all missing.

PD says he's a rugby man (fine, so did FS) and doesn't wish control. I believe him and don't believe the loan is an attempt to assert some sort of sneaky control.

Why not loan the club a capital amount / or at least the facility first off "to help" cover cashflow etc and then take it back over time, season by season - in lieu of sponsorship? Maybe some of the items they're planning or wishing to sponsor are still sponsored by other businesses and PD, quite rightly, doesn't want to step on any toes until these deals have expired

You have to satisfy the EWM shareholders for the initial capital amount / facility, so you take a token debenture on BP, to show you aren't pissing the cash up the wall while keeping yourself looking responsible.

This way the club gets access to the funds it needs upfront, EWM gets paid back in sponsorship for the amount of the loans - for a considerable few years - and PD can carry on sipping his cocktails, on his patio, in the sun without any of the muppets who support our club giving him grief. Everyone's a winner in this scenario....

Apart from our toothless and apathetic supporters, of course.

Pretty much spot on Tim except for the EWS shareholding bit its a private limited company and the shares over which PD has proxy means that if he says its Christmas then its christmas as far as EWM are concerned.

carwash wrote: I think Piglet is right. EWM are providing a loan facility in the same way that a bank might, EWM will receive monthly management accounts and the business plan like a lending bank would. EWM are clearly looking at a major sponsorship deal - shirts, stand maybe even the stadium, The EWM Brunton Park perhaps? They then deduct the cost of the sponsorship from the outstanding loan amount. Everything is being done on a commercial basis.

Which is exactly what i.ve been saying for the last two months

The fly in the ointment is that the million pounds came in the form of a loan and if the sponsorship payments are just used to write down the loan then neither they or the original amount could be used to affect the protocol percentage amount.

The current aim has to be to use various financial instruments to increase the protocol not come up with ways to reduce it

One way i could see that they could do that would be if someone say Pioneer bought one of the houses for 250k the money would up the protocol amount by 140k then once the figures are agreed pre season the club buy it back with money from the loan do it 4 times and youve upped the protocol amount by nearly 600k either in one season or over a number of them.

carwash wrote: I think Piglet is right. EWM are providing a loan facility in the same way that a bank might, EWM will receive monthly management accounts and the business plan like a lending bank would. EWM are clearly looking at a major sponsorship deal - shirts, stand maybe even the stadium, The EWM Brunton Park perhaps? They then deduct the cost of the sponsorship from the outstanding loan amount. Everything is being done on a commercial basis.

The EWM Stadium at Brunton Park sounds classier and is easier to lose the first bit when needed

If he is non domiciled it means the bulk of his money is offshore, Any profits or investment income he earns on that offshore money is tax free unless he transfers the money to the UK. He will pay tax at 40% on transfers in to the UK. Gifting CUFC £1m will cost him £1.4m. Allowing the club to run up a million debt then writing it off costs £1M

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

carwash wrote: I think Piglet is right. EWM are providing a loan facility in the same way that a bank might, EWM will receive monthly management accounts and the business plan like a lending bank would. EWM are clearly looking at a major sponsorship deal - shirts, stand maybe even the stadium, The EWM Brunton Park perhaps? They then deduct the cost of the sponsorship from the outstanding loan amount. Everything is being done on a commercial basis.

Which is exactly what i.ve been saying for the last two months

The fly in the ointment is that the million pounds came in the form of a loan and if the sponsorship payments are just used to write down the loan then neither they or the original amount could be used to affect the protocol percentage amount.

The current aim has to be to use various financial instruments to increase the protocol not come up with ways to reduce it

One way i could see that they could do that would be if someone say Pioneer bought one of the houses for 250k the money would up the protocol amount by 140k then once the figures are agreed pre season the club buy it back with money from the loan do it 4 times and youve upped the protocol amount by nearly 600k either in one season or over a number of them.

NS - all quite laudible, but they are budgeting to lose £500K per year, last year and presumably this.
You can only do that for so long, so quite why you think they should increase the losses and give Curly Keith more to piss away I am not sure.
For me, 1 or 2 of his back room staff need to go, Clibbins is a no brainer (if it means seeing Nixon's ugly mug a bit more so be it - he can be challenged a lot more as well), and King needs to be on an incentivised deal.
Reinvest the money in the team.

Laffy wrote: If it is a sponsorship deal with a notional set off each year like the Pioneer Stand,it will hurt long term cash flow as no cash being paid on the drip.

Having a facility from EWM is very helpful short term but how much has been spent so far as the chat is they needed it quick to sort out creditors

Something will have to give here-too quiet on all fronts

That would be some of the 900k worth of debtors that suddenly appeared on the last lot of accounts no doubt.

Markovitch wrote: If he is non domiciled it means the bulk of his money is offshore, Any profits or investment income he earns on that offshore money is tax free unless he transfers the money to the UK. He will pay tax at 40% on transfers in to the UK. Gifting CUFC £1m will cost him £1.4m. Allowing the club to run up a million debt then writing it off costs £1M

Its EWM not PD whos lent the money tho Marko and their money will be in the uk

Thanks Barry. They would have got further tax relief on a write off but I don't think they can write off if they have security, curiouser and curiouser

CarlisleWhite wrote:

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:

carwash wrote: I think Piglet is right. EWM are providing a loan facility in the same way that a bank might, EWM will receive monthly management accounts and the business plan like a lending bank would. EWM are clearly looking at a major sponsorship deal - shirts, stand maybe even the stadium, The EWM Brunton Park perhaps? They then deduct the cost of the sponsorship from the outstanding loan amount. Everything is being done on a commercial basis.

Which is exactly what i.ve been saying for the last two months

The fly in the ointment is that the million pounds came in the form of a loan and if the sponsorship payments are just used to write down the loan then neither they or the original amount could be used to affect the protocol percentage amount.

The current aim has to be to use various financial instruments to increase the protocol not come up with ways to reduce it

One way i could see that they could do that would be if someone say Pioneer bought one of the houses for 250k the money would up the protocol amount by 140k then once the figures are agreed pre season the club buy it back with money from the loan do it 4 times and youve upped the protocol amount by nearly 600k either in one season or over a number of them.

NS - all quite laudible, but they are budgeting to lose £500K per year, last year and presumably this.
You can only do that for so long, so quite why you think they should increase the losses and give Curly Keith more to piss away I am not sure.
For me, 1 or 2 of his back room staff need to go, Clibbins is a no brainer (if it means seeing Nixon's ugly mug a bit more so be it - he can be challenged a lot more as well), and King needs to be on an incentivised deal.
Reinvest the money in the team.

CW Lets say it was me the difference in TV money alone [ without the league payments and PL solidarity payments ] between Lge 1 and Lge 2 is nearly 500k which to me means its worth a shot at it which is clearly what the Mansfield owner had realised or more likely has had pointed out to him] but youre right about the 500k a year on year losses they need stemming by a variety of means [ cup receipts losing King and Clibbins salarys increasing crowds etc etc ] it just seems to me these idiots are on a headlong dive to the bottom and before long with come unstuck in a big way at which point we.ll be in serious shit.

We have about 500 people in the main stand who buy season tickets every year rain or shine so why the hell are we reducing prices for them [ they would probably buy if we doubled the price ] madness to me [ take a look at the cost of an ST at Morecambe for instance ] even Accy do a Hospitality ST thats nearly 900 quid and all they do is for every one who buys one they just ram another chair into the lounge and take another £30 a match in drinks and raffle tickets etc off each of the buyers.

Not sure which of the backroom staff you would get rid off [ presumably West ] but from what i can see we have a smaller one than most clubs of our size never mind clubs a lot smaller.

We just seem to carry on the way its been done for years so it must right sort of attitude take the wages we pay out for people you never hear of Evan Wood 30k a year and that idiot who doubles up as FLO 35k a year etc etc all money thats wasted when it could be done by volunteers for nothing as it is at many other clubs at this level.

I know of someone who could easily do the commercial manager job and plenty of the CEO work and is performing exactly that role at the minute on a salary of less that 50k his current employers think hes the best thing since sliced bread

I also know of a brilliant football administrator who is currently working at a PL club but who wants to invest in a lower league side in exchange for a salary of circa 100k so atleast if youre gonna pay someone that get 250k off them first to it.

I.d be very interested to know if anyone can say where Clibbins was yesterday afternoon because i.m told he wasnt where you might of expected him to have been.

He is UK domicile dd but likely non U.K. Resident-just for clarity

Laffy wrote: He is UK domicile dd but likely non U.K. Resident-just for clarity

But that wouldnt affect anything tho would it Laffy if its EWM money and not Days personal cash ?

Absolutely correct-EWM will be uk resident