82m in debt

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

£82m sounds about right to me. If we were £70m in debt this time last year and have lost £1m a month since. I suppose if Langston / SH settle for £10m instead of the reported £26m due then it'll be a bit less.

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

proof?

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

proof?

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

I don't know what the figure is at the moment (nor will we know until the accounts are published), but total liabilities figure in the 2011 accounts was just under £70m.

Of this £70m around £14m related to money owed to the Malaysians.

Some smaller debts have been converted to equity (PMG/Borley/Isaacs) which will have reduced it slightly, and some smaller debts have probably been cleared, but the £14m owed to the Malaysians has now grown to a reported £40m.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the figure has grow fairly substantially.

Dont worry were about to become bigger than Man Utd in Asia

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

proof?

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

i saw the accounts and it was not anywhere near 82 million

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

proof?

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

i saw the accounts and it was not anywhere near 82 million

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

i saw the accounts and it was not anywhere near 82 million

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

Exactly, nobody really knows what's happened in 12 months, but see my post a bit further up for some rough figures.

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.[/quote]

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them[/quote]
You have been provided with as much proof as is reasonable, and yet you're still in denial. Sycophantic nonsense yet again, dig a massive hole in the ground, put your head in and fill the rest with Malaysian money (charged at 7% interest, of course).

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

Anything put in at present is a loan which equals more debt. The figures have therefore risen under them so why would you back them for that?

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them[/quote]

WHAT!!!! 'if' it is 82 million then surely it the Malaysians fault!!!! So why support them further as potentially this deal could put us in more debt if promotion isn't achieved.

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

You have been provided with as much proof as is reasonable, and yet you're still in denial. Sycophantic nonsense yet again, dig a massive hole in the ground, put your head in and fill the rest with Malaysian money (charged at 7% interest, of course).[/quote]

Someones guesswork is not reasonable proof. (try it with the tax man)

Even so though he has a point. The bigger the debt, the more we have to back the current investors.

Last edited by SBF1 on Sat Jun 09, 2012 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

WHAT!!!! 'if' it is 82 million then surely it the Malaysians fault!!!! So why support them further as potentially this deal could put us in more debt if promotion isn't achieved.[/quote]

how can you say for sure it is there fault, this club was losing a hell of a lot more money per month before they got there, they are steadying the ship.

i thought a man of your interlect you see a bit more sense here. if you take over a company with massive monthly losses they dont just disapear as a new owner comes in, they carry over

we are paying for years and years of bad spending and it doesnt get fixed over night, honestly guys some of you baffle me

The fact is, no one on here knows exactly what the figures are.

Guess away.

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

WHAT!!!! 'if' it is 82 million then surely it the Malaysians fault!!!! So why support them further as potentially this deal could put us in more debt if promotion isn't achieved.

how can you say for sure it is there fault, this club was losing a hell of a lot more money per month before they got there, they are steadying the ship.
i thought a man of your interlect you see a bit more sense here. if you take over a company with massive monthly losses they dont just disapear as a new owner comes in, they carry over

we are paying for years and years of bad spending and it doesnt get fixed over night, honestly guys some of you baffle me[/quote]

that is completely untrue!!!

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

Its Bullshit the person who started this rumour should take a serious look at himself as without any proof or substance to this claim is talking nonsense and just trying to destabilies the Club whilst behaving in a spiteful manner trying to turn fan against fan just so he can think he is some kind of Prophet leadingb the blind .

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

You have been provided with as much proof as is reasonable, and yet you're still in denial. Sycophantic nonsense yet again, dig a massive hole in the ground, put your head in and fill the rest with Malaysian money (charged at 7% interest, of course).

Someones guesswork is not reasonable proof. (try it with the tax man)

Even so though he has a point. The bigger the debt, the more we have to back the current investors.[/quote]
No, but if you're told by the club that it is making a substantial loss, is it not fair to assume that the monthly loss is at least equal to what it has been in the last published set of accounts?

Have anyone got proof of this. Or is it more made up bullshit to try turn people against our owners ?

made up

Behave!!!

proof?

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

I am so glad they are because your plans to rid us of our losses can only be based on pure fantasy. I take it your hoping for administration or do you have some other super ideas that a billionaire hasn't thought of? You do know we can't go the administration route don't you, it's liquidation you do know that yes?

Maybe not, but the accounts were for 2011? We're over a year down the line. The debt increases daily. It really isn't hard to work it out, unless you are trying to ignore it.

theres nothing to ignore, the debt may have increased the debt may have reduced as we dont know how much money the owners have been putting in. the fact is nobody knows and were all guessing.

but even if the debt is 82 million it surely shows the need to back the malaysians rather than try and scupper them

You have been provided with as much proof as is reasonable, and yet you're still in denial. Sycophantic nonsense yet again, dig a massive hole in the ground, put your head in and fill the rest with Malaysian money (charged at 7% interest, of course).

Someones guesswork is not reasonable proof. (try it with the tax man)

Even so though he has a point. The bigger the debt, the more we have to back the current investors.

No, but if you're told by the club that it is making a substantial loss, is it not fair to assume that the monthly loss is at least equal to what it has been in the last published set of accounts?[/quote]

Of course they are going to tell us they are making a loss, because we are.
So the answer is to get rid of them? The very ones who are paying "The Substantial Loss"
We need them because no-one else wants us.
Now that is a fact!!!

So where does raping the identity of a football club fit in with reducing losses at a football club?

So where does raping the identity of a football club fit in with reducing losses at a football club?

it could easily be by making it more attractive to a chinese investor who is going to pump the 100mil to come on board. the point is nobody knows, and nobody will know until it happens so just enjoy the ride and get over the changes

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

I am so glad they are because your plans to rid us of our losses can only be based on pure fantasy. I take it your hoping for administration or do you have some other super ideas that a billionaire hasn't thought of? You do know we can't go the administration route don't you, it's liquidation you do know that yes?

My plans, as stated elsewhere would be to run the club properly. Living within the means of the business and if that means playing at a lower level and being in the black then so be it.

Administration is always an option and no amount of scaremongering from anyone can change that.

Throwing money after money and increasing the debt is the worst option of the lot.

You don't spend what you don't have, basic business sense. Very basic.

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

I am so glad they are because your plans to rid us of our losses can only be based on pure fantasy. I take it your hoping for administration or do you have some other super ideas that a billionaire hasn't thought of? You do know we can't go the administration route don't you, it's liquidation you do know that yes?

My plans, as stated elsewhere would be to run the club properly. Living within the means of the business and if that means playing at a lower level and being in the black then so be it.

Administration is always an option and no amount of scaremongering from anyone can change that.

Throwing money after money and increasing the debt is the worst option of the lot.

You don't spend what you don't have, basic business sense. Very basic.

Very, very true. And that is from a Clydebank fan that knows

Look at the last set of accounts and do the sums.

We're losing over a million a month, it ain't hard to work out. It's ok though, the Chinese are about to bail us out when they buy a trillion jerseys.

I am so glad they are because your plans to rid us of our losses can only be based on pure fantasy. I take it your hoping for administration or do you have some other super ideas that a billionaire hasn't thought of? You do know we can't go the administration route don't you, it's liquidation you do know that yes?

My plans, as stated elsewhere would be to run the club properly. Living within the means of the business and if that means playing at a lower level and being in the black then so be it.

Administration is always an option and no amount of scaremongering from anyone can change that.

Throwing money after money and increasing the debt is the worst option of the lot.

You don't spend what you don't have, basic business sense. Very basic.

And you honestly think that isn't what VT is planning to do? You honestly think he throwing his money at a sinking ship? You really think this guy has no idea what he is doing and you do?

Run the club properly - excellent idea so how would you plan on getting rid of the debt to allow us to be able to live within our means because we will never generate sufficient profits to cover the interest let alone repayments at lower league level. So glad you are as rich as VT and able to pay the debts off, finally a rich local benefactor

Administration - how many times to people have to state this, an administrator has two options to sell the club to a new investor if the creditors are happy with the terms or alternatively put the club into liquidation. We have two much debt for this club to be of interest to any investor, except a rich local benefactor like you of course

Throwing money after money - yes VT must be mad to do this but hey he has suggested a plan to get rid of the debt and to bring in additional income to enable us to trade profitably so that one day he would get his money back and more. I am so glad as a local benefactor your so happy to lose all your £82 million investment to enable us to trade comfortably in the lower leages

Basic business sense, you don't spend what you don't have - excellent theory, lets not borrow money to build a stadium for instance because you don't have the money. Glad your not in charge of successful business where borrowing is the norm. I can tell you have never run a business so how did you make your millions?

Whatever the debt why get do worked up about it when the bulk of it is owed to our Malaysian backers and they have just announced they are in it for the long term. Let them worry about the finances and we can worry about the team

Whatever the debt why get do worked up about it when the bulk of it is owed to our Malaysian backers and they have just announced they are in it for the long term. Let them worry about the finances and we can worry about the team

What you are forgetting is that it has tripled because they have just sat back and let it accumulate.Its their debt so they can pay.