|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Feb 9, 2020 16:45:17 GMT 1
I genuinely struggle to understand why Dean Hoyle would hinder the progress of the club to such an extent by getting all his money back in such a small space of time. Why not sell to the other multimillionaire? I fail to see how selling to phil was the better choice. I have no I'll feeling towards Phil but Dean Hoyle has completely gone down in my estimation. Because by selling to PP it meant that Dean was able to take back all of his 50m This is done by PP not having the money to buy the club off his mate, so the parachute payments are used to pay dean back. The best players are then sold to keep the club afloat. A normal investor wouldn't accomodate this of course, but it's phil getting the club essentially for free by using our parachute money to buy it, and DH gets all his cash back. Sadly that's the reality of it. It reeks, So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. |
|
|
|
Post by brighousebandbred on Feb 9, 2020 20:49:25 GMT 1
Because by selling to PP it meant that Dean was able to take back all of his 50m This is done by PP not having the money to buy the club off his mate, so the parachute payments are used to pay dean back. The best players are then sold to keep the club afloat. A normal investor wouldn't accomodate this of course, but it's phil getting the club essentially for free by using our parachute money to buy it, and DH gets all his cash back. Sadly that's the reality of it. It reeks, So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. He might not have had an offer from a multi millionaire to pay him back his 50 million. |
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Feb 9, 2020 23:16:30 GMT 1
So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. He might not have had an offer from a multi millionaire to pay him back his 50 million. He must probably didn't. But PP seems to be suggesting that DH he would have done and delibrately chose not to accept it for personal financial reasons, rather than what was best for HTAFC. |
|
|
|
Post by brighousebandbred on Feb 10, 2020 0:03:25 GMT 1
He might not have had an offer from a multi millionaire to pay him back his 50 million. He must probably didn't. But PP seems to be suggesting that DH he would have done and delibrately chose not to accept it for personal financial reasons, rather than what was best for HTAFC. I think it’s all a bit of a raw subject. As a town fan reaching the premier league was a moment in my life which gave me so much pleasure, and I thank everyone at the club who made that happen, life has ups and downs , that was a major up. What has happened since as been a major down, we as fans feel the pain as we live and breath the club, it feels a little like money was what mattered most which might be completely wrong but I can and do see how fans feel a little bit let down / abandoned by someone we maybe saw as a little bit of our local saviour. He has / had every right to do so , but as a fan it feels quite sad. Outside the Wigan stadium is a statue of their previous owner , this is a rare thing as owners don’t deserve that accolade. Dean was in that category to me, not even close now as yes he deserves to take his money back and thankyou for everything you have done, but your stature of been remembered as like the Wigan owner would be wrong. As for fans giving him a rough ride re the sale that’s because they are hurting at our top flight gains being evaporated so quickly so DH can get out with his money. No hard feelings from me cheers for the memories . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2020 9:09:40 GMT 1
Because by selling to PP it meant that Dean was able to take back all of his 50m This is done by PP not having the money to buy the club off his mate, so the parachute payments are used to pay dean back. The best players are then sold to keep the club afloat. A normal investor wouldn't accomodate this of course, but it's phil getting the club essentially for free by using our parachute money to buy it, and DH gets all his cash back. Sadly that's the reality of it. It reeks, So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. |
|
|
|
Post by Farsley Terrier (UK product) on Feb 10, 2020 9:17:26 GMT 1
So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. I'm sorry but you are incorrect. there WERE other interested parties (I know this for a fact). Why don't you go back to supporting Southport rather than spouting total and utter bollocks on this forum you clown. |
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Feb 10, 2020 9:51:57 GMT 1
So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. DH could've stayed on as chairman and taken the money back anyway, using a chunk of the parachute payments. Why did he need to sell to Phil for that to happen? |
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Feb 10, 2020 10:36:46 GMT 1
So DH gave the club away for free to get his Money back rather than sell it for £50m to a multi-millionaire? What a load of deluded codswallop. Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. never done this before. Not even Nick. #blocked |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2020 10:48:06 GMT 1
Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. never done this before. Not even Nick. #blocked Me too . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2020 12:37:16 GMT 1
Yes! That's exactly right. can't you understand that? The ONLY way for Dean to get his 50m back is to sell it to a buyer that had no money to buy it from him - thus using the parachute payemnts to pay back the loan No buyer in the world with the money at hand would buy it then give away 50m! There most likely wasn't another buyer understand - this was DEANS buyer, that facilitated his requirement. A buyer from elsewhere certainly wouldn't have agreed to such terms. PP is the best buyer for DH, not for HTAFC in a financial sense. How people don't get this is beyond me. I like PP, since September he has done very well. But the above needs to be transparent to the #blindmasses. DH could've stayed on as chairman and taken the money back anyway, using a chunk of the parachute payments. Why did he need to sell to Phil for that to happen? Good point. He could have stayed and paid himself back. He could also have sold to anyone for 50 million and had them pay the loans back over a relatively short period not just Phil as the idiot above keeps insisting. I am as disappointed as anyone that there does not seem to be much of a legacy from our time in the Premier League, to the point I have said if that is what is going to happen then I don't care if we ever get back up. However the story is not over yet. Lets just say we are paying back the entire 50 million. We get a total of 120% of our last years earnings in the Premier League over 3 years. According to Wiki we got 42.6 million this year which is almost enough to pay Dean back. Based on that we should get 34 million next season and 15 million the season after that. This is based on 55% the first year, 45% the second and 20% the third year and assumes the number for this year is accurate. If we just say for arguments sake that between the sale of Mooy, Billing, and this years parachute payment we have paid back or have enough money to pay back DH it leaves us with a significant amount of money still to come in. The key though has to be getting rid of the bigger earners which we have done pretty well at, although a few of them will be back unless we can sell them in the summer. There is still a lot of guess work, some additional money will have gone to support salaries, but I hope that my scenario is reflective of where we actually are. If so we should be able to be competitive in the Championship and maybe get another bite at the Premier League cherry someday. I still however do not expect us to be paying 10 million for players while we are a Championship club. |
|
|
|
Post by Mastercracker on Feb 10, 2020 15:15:39 GMT 1
DH could've stayed on as chairman and taken the money back anyway, using a chunk of the parachute payments. Why did he need to sell to Phil for that to happen? Good point. He could have stayed and paid himself back. He could also have sold to anyone for 50 million and had them pay the loans back over a relatively short period not just Phil as the idiot above keeps insisting. I am as disappointed as anyone that there does not seem to be much of a legacy from our time in the Premier League, to the point I have said if that is what is going to happen then I don't care if we ever get back up. However the story is not over yet. Lets just say we are paying back the entire 50 million. We get a total of 120% of our last years earnings in the Premier League over 3 years. According to Wiki we got 42.6 million this year which is almost enough to pay Dean back. Based on that we should get 34 million next season and 15 million the season after that. This is based on 55% the first year, 45% the second and 20% the third year and assumes the number for this year is accurate. If we just say for arguments sake that between the sale of Mooy, Billing, and this years parachute payment we have paid back or have enough money to pay back DH it leaves us with a significant amount of money still to come in. The key though has to be getting rid of the bigger earners which we have done pretty well at, although a few of them will be back unless we can sell them in the summer. There is still a lot of guess work, some additional money will have gone to support salaries, but I hope that my scenario is reflective of where we actually are. If so we should be able to be competitive in the Championship and maybe get another bite at the Premier League cherry someday. I still however do not expect us to be paying 10 million for players while we are a Championship club.Maybe not but we cannot go back to £1m here and £1.5m with add ons there. The market has moved on and barring exceptional circumstances ie out of contract like Toffolo that sort of money no longer buys championship quality footballers on the whole. Regressing back to £12m wage bills and £750k signings will see us back in one place fast, League 1. We need to sort out our scouting and be prepared to speculate to accumulate ala Brentford. They aren't afraid of 3/4/5m pound deals cos they know they'll get enough right to make money on them. |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Feb 10, 2020 20:41:23 GMT 1
I genuinely struggle to understand why Dean Hoyle would hinder the progress of the club to such an extent by getting all his money back in such a small space of time. Why not sell to the other multimillionaire? I fail to see how selling to phil was the better choice. I have no I'll feeling towards Phil but Dean Hoyle has completely gone down in my estimation. Because by selling to PP it meant that Dean was able to take back all of his 50m This is done by PP not having the money to buy the club off his mate, so the parachute payments are used to pay dean back. The best players are then sold to keep the club afloat. A normal investor wouldn't accomodate this of course, but it's phil getting the club essentially for free by using our parachute money to buy it, and DH gets all his cash back. Sadly that's the reality of it. It reeks, Many apologies for early disrespectful analysis of your posts I didn’t realise you were an investment broker |
|
|
|
Post by Mecha Corte on Feb 10, 2020 21:29:07 GMT 1
Because by selling to PP it meant that Dean was able to take back all of his 50m This is done by PP not having the money to buy the club off his mate, so the parachute payments are used to pay dean back. The best players are then sold to keep the club afloat. A normal investor wouldn't accomodate this of course, but it's phil getting the club essentially for free by using our parachute money to buy it, and DH gets all his cash back. Sadly that's the reality of it. It reeks, Many apologies for early disrespectful analysis of your posts I didn’t realise you were an investment broker Nick could be an annoying so and so, more often than not if the truth be known but at least some times his posts were ok, this clown is just unrelenting and I swear if if see #blindmasses at the end of one of his long winded diatribes I'll scream. Admins can you do a swap please, Nick for the self proclaimed #all knowing one ? |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Feb 10, 2020 21:37:45 GMT 1
Many apologies for early disrespectful analysis of your posts I didn’t realise you were an investment broker Nick could be an annoying so and so, more often than not if the truth be known but at least some times his posts were ok, this clown is just unrelenting and I swear if if see #blindmasses at the end of one of his long winded diatribes I'll scream. Admins can you do a swap please, Nick for the self proclaimed #all knowing one ? You reap what you so |
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Feb 10, 2020 21:48:32 GMT 1
DH could've stayed on as chairman and taken the money back anyway, using a chunk of the parachute payments. Why did he need to sell to Phil for that to happen? Good point. He could have stayed and paid himself back. He could also have sold to anyone for 50 million and had them pay the loans back over a relatively short period not just Phil as the idiot above keeps insisting. I am as disappointed as anyone that there does not seem to be much of a legacy from our time in the Premier League, to the point I have said if that is what is going to happen then I don't care if we ever get back up. However the story is not over yet. Lets just say we are paying back the entire 50 million. We get a total of 120% of our last years earnings in the Premier League over 3 years. According to Wiki we got 42.6 million this year which is almost enough to pay Dean back. Based on that we should get 34 million next season and 15 million the season after that. This is based on 55% the first year, 45% the second and 20% the third year and assumes the number for this year is accurate. If we just say for arguments sake that between the sale of Mooy, Billing, and this years parachute payment we have paid back or have enough money to pay back DH it leaves us with a significant amount of money still to come in. The key though has to be getting rid of the bigger earners which we have done pretty well at, although a few of them will be back unless we can sell them in the summer. There is still a lot of guess work, some additional money will have gone to support salaries, but I hope that my scenario is reflective of where we actually are. If so we should be able to be competitive in the Championship and maybe get another bite at the Premier League cherry someday. I still however do not expect us to be paying 10 million for players while we are a Championship club. I think it's too soon & very probably wrong to say that there is no legacy from our time in the top flight. We went up as a club previously strugglung to stay out of Div 1, with £50m of debt and very poor training and medical facilities compared to other championship clubs. Assuming your figures above are correct and The player sales so far this year, plus yr 1 parachute payments pay DH back. We are now a club that is debt free with a squad worth more than it was last time we were in this division. We have invested in the ground and the pitch (with lighting rigs) and will soon have better training and medical facilities (compare with Bradford who still train on a high school playing field - now that is lack of a legacy) We have a guaranteed £40m+ income due over the next 2 years with starting point if a squad worth more than What DH started with. So if we are run in a similar way to while DH was in charge, it would cover the annual budget losses for the next 8 years regardless of any income from future player sales. {and bare in mind that much of DHs losses were as a result if trying to get out if Div 1} The intangibles are such things like we will be seen as a club that had recently been in the premier league which may help with recruitment as a club that could do it again and has improved players who have been here before. Start up this year, and we will have every chance of being a stable top half championship side. |
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Feb 19, 2020 14:18:15 GMT 1
There were other offers....2/3. The foreign bids were not seen as reliable nor fitting.
Deano chose his preferred party.
In essence a management type buy-out.
Phil and team took it on offering payment from future income i.e. parachute payments.
75% of the club for I believe £45 million.
I don't know all the tiny facts...just the outline.
Not an ideal situation but Deano was ill, the club was in free-fall and it was time to groove on.
|
|
|
|
Post by workshyfop on Feb 22, 2020 21:18:03 GMT 1
Quite simply, Hoyle has hamstrung the club at a time when we should have been much stronger. We threw any advantage we had from the Premier League experience away and once more find ourselves unable to compete at even this level. In short, a total disaster. Call it mismanagement, greed, ill health, bad advice, whatever, but it’s clearly an absolutely monumental fuck-up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on Feb 22, 2020 22:12:53 GMT 1
Quite simply, Hoyle has hamstrung the club at a time when we should have been much stronger. We threw any advantage we had from the Premier League experience away and once more find ourselves unable to compete at even this level. In short, a total disaster. Call it mismanagement, greed, ill health, bad advice, whatever, but it’s clearly an absolutely monumental fuck-up. Hoyle was smart and took his £50m back when he knew the club could pay it back to him. If he have left it in and we spent it, and didn't go back up then the chance of him getting his money back would have vanished. Easy to say he shouldn't have recalled the loan when it isn't our money. Would you lend a mate a large sum of money for a celebration/wedding/holiday on the proviso its paid back 'when they can'and then when they can pay it back, allow them to gamble it away and risk never seeing it again? I certainly wouldn't, I get my money back when I could and I that meant my mate had to live on a shoestring for a while then so be it. Hoyle is blame for quite a lot of this mess we are in, but getting his money isn't one of them, because it's what eveyone would have done given his circumstances in regard to his health. |
|
|
|
Post by workshyfop on Feb 22, 2020 22:24:40 GMT 1
Quite simply, Hoyle has hamstrung the club at a time when we should have been much stronger. We threw any advantage we had from the Premier League experience away and once more find ourselves unable to compete at even this level. In short, a total disaster. Call it mismanagement, greed, ill health, bad advice, whatever, but it’s clearly an absolutely monumental fuck-up. Hoyle was smart and took his £50m back when he knew the club could pay it back to him. If he have left it in and we spent it, and didn't go back up then the chance of him getting his money back would have vanished. Easy to say he shouldn't have recalled the loan when it isn't our money. Would you lend a mate a large sum of money for a celebration/wedding/holiday on the proviso its paid back 'when they can'and then when they can pay it back, allow them to gamble it away and risk never seeing it again? I certainly wouldn't, I get my money back when I could and I that meant my mate had to live on a shoestring for a while then so be it. Hoyle is blame for quite a lot of this mess we are in, but getting his money isn't one of them, because it's what eveyone would have done given his circumstances in regard to his health. Whether he’s entitled to it or not, and of course he can ask for his “loans” back, it’s undoubtedly left us in a terrible position. It sounds as if he wants it back sooner rather than later whereas over a longer period might have left the club in a better state to compete. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2020 22:53:48 GMT 1
There were other offers....2/3. The foreign bids were not seen as reliable nor fitting. Deano chose his preferred party. In essence a management type buy-out. Phil and team took it on offering payment from future income i.e. parachute payments. 75% of the club for I believe £45 million. I don't know all the tiny facts...just the outline. Not an ideal situation but Deano was ill, the club was in free-fall and it was time to groove on. You’re suggesting the handover of the club effectively committed around £95m of future revenue to go directly to Dean Hoyle? (£45m for 75% control plus repayment of ~£50m of the directors loan account) |
|
|
|
Post by Up the Duff. on Feb 22, 2020 23:31:50 GMT 1
If Phil paid 45m for 75% with the loans remaining then he must have been mad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on Feb 22, 2020 23:33:17 GMT 1
Hoyle was smart and took his £50m back when he knew the club could pay it back to him. If he have left it in and we spent it, and didn't go back up then the chance of him getting his money back would have vanished. Easy to say he shouldn't have recalled the loan when it isn't our money. Would you lend a mate a large sum of money for a celebration/wedding/holiday on the proviso its paid back 'when they can'and then when they can pay it back, allow them to gamble it away and risk never seeing it again? I certainly wouldn't, I get my money back when I could and I that meant my mate had to live on a shoestring for a while then so be it. Hoyle is blame for quite a lot of this mess we are in, but getting his money isn't one of them, because it's what eveyone would have done given his circumstances in regard to his health. Whether he’s entitled to it or not, and of course he can ask for his “loans” back, it’s undoubtedly left us in a terrible position. It sounds as if he wants it back sooner rather than later whereas over a longer period might have left the club in a better state to compete. 100%, but it could have left him in a position where by he didn't get his money back. As much as a football club means to him/us, sometimes you have to put yourself and your family first. |
|
|
|
Post by brighousebandbred on Feb 22, 2020 23:55:54 GMT 1
Whether he’s entitled to it or not, and of course he can ask for his “loans” back, it’s undoubtedly left us in a terrible position. It sounds as if he wants it back sooner rather than later whereas over a longer period might have left the club in a better state to compete. 100%, but it could have left him in a position where by he didn't get his money back. As much as a football club means to him/us, sometimes you have to put yourself and your family first. If someone is worth hundreds of millions does the 50 really matter as much as you say ie. putting his family first. If your that rich ? |
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on Feb 23, 2020 8:17:03 GMT 1
100%, but it could have left him in a position where by he didn't get his money back. As much as a football club means to him/us, sometimes you have to put yourself and your family first. If someone is worth hundreds of millions does the 50 really matter as much as you say ie. putting his family first. If your that rich ? He could probably afford it, but why should he just write it off? It's all relative and his outgoings will be significantly higher than the average man. Percentage wise its around 20% of his wealth, could afford to write off 20% of your wealth? I know I couldn't. Also bear in mind the money was lent interest free, so Hoyle putting the money into Town has probably lost him around 8m/10m in interest payments. I can see why people are annoyed the parachute money had been swallowed up by Hoyles repayment, but the major debt is now off the books and it's up to PH to now do what he can to take the club forward. |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Feb 23, 2020 8:30:28 GMT 1
Quite simply, Hoyle has hamstrung the club at a time when we should have been much stronger. We threw any advantage we had from the Premier League experience away and once more find ourselves unable to compete at even this level. In short, a total disaster. Call it mismanagement, greed, ill health, bad advice, whatever, but it’s clearly an absolutely monumental fuck-up. Hoyle was smart and took his £50m back when he knew the club could pay it back to him. If he have left it in and we spent it, and didn't go back up then the chance of him getting his money back would have vanished. Easy to say he shouldn't have recalled the loan when it isn't our money. Would you lend a mate a large sum of money for a celebration/wedding/holiday on the proviso its paid back 'when they can'and then when they can pay it back, allow them to gamble it away and risk never seeing it again? I certainly wouldn't, I get my money back when I could and I that meant my mate had to live on a shoestring for a while then so be it. Hoyle is blame for quite a lot of this mess we are in, but getting his money isn't one of them, because it's what eveyone would have done given his circumstances in regard to his health. If he had have taken it back on initial promotion or staying up for a second season I doubt anyone would have cared. Sadly the cash was gambled on unproven imports with no plan in place for the inevitable relegation and yet the debt is still repayable in full That’s where the frustration lies. We’d have been debt free WITH parachute payments. |
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on Feb 23, 2020 8:35:15 GMT 1
Hoyle was smart and took his £50m back when he knew the club could pay it back to him. If he have left it in and we spent it, and didn't go back up then the chance of him getting his money back would have vanished. Easy to say he shouldn't have recalled the loan when it isn't our money. Would you lend a mate a large sum of money for a celebration/wedding/holiday on the proviso its paid back 'when they can'and then when they can pay it back, allow them to gamble it away and risk never seeing it again? I certainly wouldn't, I get my money back when I could and I that meant my mate had to live on a shoestring for a while then so be it. Hoyle is blame for quite a lot of this mess we are in, but getting his money isn't one of them, because it's what eveyone would have done given his circumstances in regard to his health. If he had have taken it back on initial promotion or staying up for a second season I doubt anyone would have cared. Sadly the cash was gambled on unproven imports with no plan in place for the inevitable relegation and yet the debt is still repayable in full That’s where the frustration lies. We’d have been debt free WITH parachute payments. You're probably right. We can call out Hoyle for the way the club was run after promotion, he oversaw a shit show from his board and the backroom staff. People with more experience should have been brought in (even if only shirt term) as, with respect to them, the folk at the club didn't know how to handle being in the big time. That was the downfall of HTFC, and that lies with Hoyle as chairman of the club. |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Feb 23, 2020 8:42:11 GMT 1
If he had have taken it back on initial promotion or staying up for a second season I doubt anyone would have cared. Sadly the cash was gambled on unproven imports with no plan in place for the inevitable relegation and yet the debt is still repayable in full That’s where the frustration lies. We’d have been debt free WITH parachute payments. You're probably right. We can call out Hoyle for the way the club was run after promotion, he oversaw a shit show from his board and the backroom staff. People with more experience should have been brought in (even if only shirt term) as, with respect to them, the folk at the club didn't know how to handle being in the big time. That was the downfall of HTFC, and that lies with Hoyle as chairman of the club. Totally agree. It feels harsh for various reasons and hindsight is a wonderful thing but.... The appointment of Siewert (and not interviewing anyone else) Not replacing Webber properly Seemingly not being supported by the various senior staff at the club in his absence because they probably just weren’t good enough or weren’t trusted Amongst other things has put us back to heading towards where we started. |
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Feb 23, 2020 9:30:08 GMT 1
There were other offers....2/3. The foreign bids were not seen as reliable nor fitting. Deano chose his preferred party. In essence a management type buy-out. Phil and team took it on offering payment from future income i.e. parachute payments. 75% of the club for I believe £45 million. I don't know all the tiny facts...just the outline. Not an ideal situation but Deano was ill, the club was in free-fall and it was time to groove on. You’re suggesting the handover of the club effectively committed around £95m of future revenue to go directly to Dean Hoyle? (£45m for 75% control plus repayment of ~£50m of the directors loan account) I think you may find Deano already had his money back from 2 years in the Prem. That's my belief. The buy-out is based on future earnings/parachute. |
|
|
|
Post by Mastercracker on Feb 23, 2020 9:38:21 GMT 1
If someone is worth hundreds of millions does the 50 really matter as much as you say ie. putting his family first. If your that rich ? He could probably afford it, but why should he just write it off? It's all relative and his outgoings will be significantly higher than the average man. Percentage wise its around 20% of his wealth, could afford to write off 20% of your wealth? I know I couldn't. Also bear in mind the money was lent interest free, so Hoyle putting the money into Town has probably lost him around 8m/10m in interest payments. I can see why people are annoyed the parachute money had been swallowed up by Hoyles repayment, but the major debt is now off the books and it's up to PH to now do what he can to take the club forward. Lets not pretend 20% of your or my wealth has anything like the same effect as 20% of someone worth £250m. You cant compare. |
|
|
|
Post by brighousebandbred on Feb 23, 2020 11:10:34 GMT 1
He could probably afford it, but why should he just write it off? It's all relative and his outgoings will be significantly higher than the average man. Percentage wise its around 20% of his wealth, could afford to write off 20% of your wealth? I know I couldn't. Also bear in mind the money was lent interest free, so Hoyle putting the money into Town has probably lost him around 8m/10m in interest payments. I can see why people are annoyed the parachute money had been swallowed up by Hoyles repayment, but the major debt is now off the books and it's up to PH to now do what he can to take the club forward. Lets not pretend 20% of your or my wealth has anything like the same effect as 20% of someone worth £250m. You cant compare. Why also did DH come out with the bullshit statement in January about not going down without a fight. He had given up on town and the proof was what has happened since. He wanted to be on a mantle when in charge but seems to me a lot of it was about himself. People always say stuff like would you give 20% of your wealth away. If I won the lottery I would give more than 50% of it away if over a million to family and friends? Why because in life only the greedy need to much wealth, giving to the things you love give u far more pleasure, not lending. |
|
