city debt

Who is the money actually owed to?

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

With all the cost cutting and 40 million of player sales and sky money I'd be amazed if it's over 60 million now anyway.
Oh that's right the money in from player sales seemed to evaporate and not go against the debt.....

Ok thanks so if tan wants to recoup most of his money we need to be in the Premier league.if we go down the pan he could lose millions?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/foot ... se-8727278

Ok thanks so if tan wants to recoup most of his money we need to be in the Premier league.if we go down the pan he could lose millions?

He's into it us too much now

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

With all the cost cutting and 40 million of player sales and sky money I'd be amazed if it's over 60 million now anyway.
Oh that's right the money in from player sales seemed to evaporate and not go against the debt.....

The club lost £12m in the Premier League season despite having £83m of income. Last season that income would have halved due to the big fall off in the club's share of TV money. So costs will have had to have been reduced by over £50m just to have broken even. So no way could a debt of £130m have been reduced down to anything like £60m

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

With all the cost cutting and 40 million of player sales and sky money I'd be amazed if it's over 60 million now anyway.
Oh that's right the money in from player sales seemed to evaporate and not go against the debt.....

The club lost £12m in the Premier League season despite having £83m of income. Last season that income would have halved due to the big fall off in the club's share of TV money. So costs will have had to have been reduced by over £50m just to have broken even. So no way could a debt of £130m have been reduced down to anything like £60m

Even with the wage bill slashed and parachute payments I expect a large loss for 2014/2015

Now as for this season not too sure like to think we would be close to breaking even which we really need to do

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

Tend you agree although I do not have much knowledge on the subject.

I recall when BT opened up to the public to raise money by creating more shares people were advised to wait for the Wednesday after the Monday when the shares were on offer. Why because the experts were expecting them to lose about 50% of their value with a sudden influx of new shareholders.

Although Tan is just one person the amount he woul dbe converting would I expect have the same effect.

With all the cost cutting and 40 million of player sales and sky money I'd be amazed if it's over 60 million now anyway.
Oh that's right the money in from player sales seemed to evaporate and not go against the debt.....

you are so stupid
how can that money dissapear from the accounts ffs
Im going to let you into a secret but ffs keep it to yourself as I cant expose my source
the money from player sales was not paid in readies and in readies I mean cash
think you will find it was paid by bank draft or bax payment or even by cheque but defo not cash
now if you know how to lose that kind of payment from our accounts , I suggest you open an accountancy firm , as you could make a fortune

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

I don't follow. How is whether the debt is secured or unsecured relevant to the ability to convert it to equity?

With all the cost cutting and 40 million of player sales and sky money I'd be amazed if it's over 60 million now anyway.
Oh that's right the money in from player sales seemed to evaporate and not go against the debt.....

you are so stupid
how can that money dissapear from the accounts ffs
Im going to let you into a secret but ffs keep it to yourself as I cant expose my source
the money from player sales was not paid in readies and in readies I mean cash
think you will find it was paid by bank draft or bax payment or even by cheque but defo not cash
now if you know how to lose that kind of payment from our accounts , I suggest you open an accountancy firm , as you could make a fortune

:lol:

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

Why?

He would be able to get a far higher price for his shares if it was a debt free club so the effect would be neutral for him if there is a buyer out there.

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

Why?

He would be able to get a far higher price for his shares if it was a debt free club so the effect would be neutral for him if there is a buyer out there.

I'm confused you said earlier that the ammount of assets doesn't cover the debt owed so everyone is asking to be debt free for equity ,as an accountant would you advise your clients to take such a hit writing 10s of millions off Like everyone is saying ?

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

Why?

He would be able to get a far higher price for his shares if it was a debt free club so the effect would be neutral for him if there is a buyer out there.

I'm confused you said earlier that the ammount of assets doesn't cover the debt owed so everyone is asking to be debt free for equity ,as an accountant would you advise your clients to take such a hit writing 10s of millions off Like everyone is saying ?

Also your saying it's neutral if a buyer and it's a big if buyer will pay higher share price, on that logic are you say the club is worth 150 million

Who is the money actually owed to?

All owed to tan now everyone one else apart from a disputed 6 million to Langston is paid up

Plus a sum of about £10m to a consortium in which Mehmet Dalman has an interest according to the 2014 accounts.

I've missed that seems strange then that dalman is ment to hate slade and still keeps him on when he's got money invested, is his money a secured debt

No it was unsecured. As of course , in practice, is most of Vincent Tan's debt as the CCFC assets are worth far less than the loan amount.

So how is he going to convert it to equity?

It would be financial suicide for him to convert debt to equity

Why?

He would be able to get a far higher price for his shares if it was a debt free club so the effect would be neutral for him if there is a buyer out there.

I'm confused you said earlier that the ammount of assets doesn't cover the debt owed so everyone is asking to be debt free for equity ,as an accountant would you advise your clients to take such a hit writing 10s of millions off Like everyone is saying ?

Also your saying it's neutral if a buyer and it's a big if buyer will pay higher share price, on that logic are you say the club is worth 150 million

No I am not at all.

Vincent Tan is owed about £130m and the assets that could be realised if he attempted to sell them off worth maybe £30m ( £10m for the players and say £20m for the stadium as it has big restrictions on its sales value). So, as a debt it might be worth £30m to him. If he wrote off all the debt , someone may well be willing to pay that much for a debt free club with the stadium lease transferred to it by the Council who own the freehold. So a neutral recovery position for him.

I am not his accountant , nor is my firm ( his corporate businesses were audited by Ernst Young according to the latest filed accounts) but it is quite likely that they have down valued his investment in the club to around the levels I quote. So he has already taken the write- off. It is not a question of advising a client to take a write- off, it is a requirement to insist he shows the assets at their true value.