' 3 YEARS & STILL WAITING '

I don't accept the argument that the debt to equity is off the agenda as we are back to blue. Tan turned us back to blue because we was about to lose a lot of income. Simple as that. So why should it be off the agenda?

Correct Ian

Our club is now far worse than before Tan arrived, fed up fans, an empty stadium and a far worse debt than before Tan came. Sadly all facts.

It was hardly full when he took over and in fact we were days from being liquidated.

I have a fact Annis. The only time CCS has been full is under Tan and in red.

Debt is relative to what we can pay. When debt was 40 or 50 million including debt to HMRC we were in a far, far worse position than now with a billionaire looking after us. No matter what you say he is doing that.

Not quite true though.

1) the debt wasn't anywhere near as high as £40m or £50m when VT took over majority ownership.

2) CCFC is no longer being "looked after" by a billionaire. He remains a very wealthy man , but his wealth ( according to Forbes who monitor such things) is now around £700 m having lost over 25% of his wealth between 2014 and 2015.

3) The main debt would have been to Langston and was repayable over a number of years. The debt due to VT is repayable immediately on demand. The debt due to HMRC would have had to be dealt with in any case as the League no longer allows clubs to owe HMRC arrears - they have to report monthly on this.

4) VT is not the only remaining substantial creditor. Mehmet Dalman and his fellow consortium members are owed over £10m

Keith.
I've just checked the accounts.
Tan took over around May 2010.

The debts then were

Within 1 year £26.9m
Over 1 year £36.7m
Over £60m total

Thanks Tim. I stand corrected. What was the net debt level at that time compared to now?

Not sure I have a copy of the accounts going back that far, but the debt repayable within one year was just under £27m according to your figures compared to over £130m by the end of May 2014 just four years later.

No worries Keith.
I had to check as I've had this argument on here before and was worried I was going mad !
I think the net debt AFTER the share issue was about £4m, at the time there was a promise of a further share issue which was going to take us near to having a zero net debt .

Didn't take long for that optimism to be crushed

The net debt of £4m was before the share issue.

There was one share issue in the year to 31 May 2011 but that was only £368k and , from memory , was largely a conversion of directors` loans into shares.

Then , at the end of July 2011 (following an EGM giving the power to allot new shares)there was a resolution passed which would have allowed another debt to equity conversion of £8.84m but only £900k of that conversion actually took place that year - to 31 May 2012. The same resolutions allowed for a total of over 204m shares of approx. value £32m to be issued up to 31 July 2016.

In the year to 31 May 2013 , a further debt to equity conversion under the above powers took place of £2m , plus a £200k new share issue.

Finally , in the year to 31 May 2014 there was another debt to equity conversion of £2.5m

In summary , of the £8.84m debt to equity conversion approved back in July 2011 , £5.4m had been taken up by 31 May 2014.

In the year to 31 May 2013

So there has been debt to equity conversion?

Yes , but just £5.4m over 4 years and not all by Vincent Tan.

Even before Vincent Tan`s arrival , there was some debt to equity conversion as a number of professional advisers etc. converted their fees into shares, including law firms Nabarro Nathanson and M & A.

I don't accept the argument that the debt to equity is off the agenda as we are back to blue. Tan turned us back to blue because we was about to lose a lot of income. Simple as that. So why should it be off the agenda?

Correct Ian

Our club is now far worse than before Tan arrived, fed up fans, an empty stadium and a far worse debt than before Tan came. Sadly all facts.

It was hardly full when he took over and in fact we were days from being liquidated.

I have a fact Annis. The only time CCS has been full is under Tan and in red.

Debt is relative to what we can pay. When debt was 40 or 50 million including debt to HMRC we were in a far, far worse position than now with a billionaire looking after us. No matter what you say he is doing that.

Not quite true though.

1) the debt wasn't anywhere near as high as £40m or £50m when VT took over majority ownership.

2) CCFC is no longer being "looked after" by a billionaire. He remains a very wealthy man , but his wealth ( according to Forbes who monitor such things) is now around £700 m having lost over 25% of his wealth between 2014 and 2015.

3) The main debt would have been to Langston and was repayable over a number of years. The debt due to VT is repayable immediately on demand. The debt due to HMRC would have had to be dealt with in any case as the League no longer allows clubs to owe HMRC arrears - they have to report monthly on this.

4) VT is not the only remaining substantial creditor. Mehmet Dalman and his fellow consortium members are owed over £10m

Keith.
I've just checked the accounts.
Tan took over around May 2010.

The debts then were

Within 1 year £26.9m
Over 1 year £36.7m
Over £60m total

Thanks Tim. I stand corrected. What was the net debt level at that time compared to now?

Not sure I have a copy of the accounts going back that far, but the debt repayable within one year was just under £27m according to your figures compared to over £130m by the end of May 2014 just four years later.

No worries Keith.
I had to check as I've had this argument on here before and was worried I was going mad !
I think the net debt AFTER the share issue was about £4m, at the time there was a promise of a further share issue which was going to take us near to having a zero net debt .

Didn't take long for that optimism to be crushed

The net debt of £4m was before the share issue.

There was one share issue in the year to 31 May 2011 but that was only £368k and , from memory , was largely a conversion of directors` loans into shares.

Then , at the end of July 2011 (following an EGM giving the power to allot new shares)there was a resolution passed which would have allowed another debt to equity conversion of £8.84m but only £900k of that conversion actually took place that year - to 31 May 2012. The same resolutions allowed for a total of over 204m shares of approx. value £32m to be issued up to 31 July 2016.

In the year to 31 May 2013 , a further debt to equity conversion under the above powers took place of £2m , plus a £200k new share issue.

Finally , in the year to 31 May 2014 there was another debt to equity conversion of £2.5m

In summary , of the £8.84m debt to equity conversion approved back in July 2011 , £5.4m had been taken up by 31 May 2014.

In the year to 31 May 2013

So there has been debt to equity conversion?

Yes , but just £5.4m over 4 years and not all by Vincent Tan.

Even before Vincent Tan`s arrival , there was some debt to equity conversion as a number of professional advisers etc. converted their fees into shares, including law firms Nabarro Nathanson and M & A.

But by Tan?