Maynardblue
Jimmy Nicholson Terrier
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Maynardblue on Jan 13, 2020 20:50:28 GMT 1
No Dean is entitled to his money back. This is happening and is irrespective of any takeover. As I said Dean was getting his money back whether PH, Dean or Yankee Doodle was in charge Understood. But what would have happened with regards to the loan if we hadn't been promoted, or indeed, stayed up a second year? (genuine question, not a dig) I would guess no promotion = no repayment of loan Didn't you see how ill he looked during the pens? A lot of money was at stake |
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Jan 13, 2020 20:50:49 GMT 1
Well done Allan, you clearly do have an understanding of 'the budget game' and the variables that can affect whether you are performing under/over budget. However - there is 1 fixed sum of income (parachute payment) that should mean fluctuation in merchandise sales, cup runs etc. are largely irrelevant. In short - how the fuck are we operating on a shoestring transfer pot when we received £42.6 million from the PL?! Very little of it is yet proven, we dont know what is on the financial horizon. The other variable is the tax situation of both parties, having briefly looked at pure legal accounts they may not be where the new owner thought they would be. In short we dont know and are very unlikely ever to find out. The one thing that is clear is that Dean is alife long fan with the club close to his heart. If we did, then Phil shouldn't have come out saying we didn't need to sell anyone |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jan 13, 2020 20:56:06 GMT 1
I do numbers for a living and have done for over 40 years. Not trying to show off but it gets under my skin when people make naive assumption. In short a budget: - It is constructed on assumptions that may or may not be correct, we the fans did our bit by buying season tickets & merchandise.
- A budget produces an end production, to make a profit or increase a profit by certain criteria. Equally to reduce losses etc
- It could be to generate a certain amount of cash
- Budgets are some times constructed optimistically to "aid" a sale or "help" finance some extraordinary activity
- It will include cup runs, league position finish,running costs, transfer income / expenditure et
- If any of the above variables aren't achieved all the other elements can lead you to be "over budget"
This budget game falls under the dark arts skill set. You can be a sound business and in stable condition and never meet a budget/Target. In my experience the number of budgets that are met or beaten are probably around 25-35%.
Phil is a business man not a communicator (and it shows), he was talking finance to supporters, never a good idea. The simple point made earlier by someone was that the parachute payment should be more than enough to cover the wages of our players including the wasters and thats before we even consider some of the fees for Billing et al, I think those of us who can be bothered thinking about it are a little bit curious as to how we're over budget. My guess is the budget was way lower than it ordinarily would be because we're £50M down but we have to guess because nothing has been communicated about the terms of the sale etc. I think we all get the fact that budgets can change but money from a cup run for example is a drop in the ocean in comparison to parachute payments. If someone could sum up the situation with a few figures we could just accept our lot and accept the situation, as it stands its all a bit puzzling to anyone who knows how the club was run in the PL and the message that was drummed into supporters about not over spending and securing the clubs future. In my simple head it seems any legacy and long term benefit a football club gets from a season or two in the PL has been taken away and all we have to show for it are memories; obviously way better than nothing but not what any of us were expecting, especially since we spent the 2 years shopping in the bargain basement and buying sub standard players, it wasn't exactly boom or bust. Often the most obvious conclusion is the correct one; in simplistic terms it seems Dean sold the club to someone who couldn't really afford it which is fair enough if there were no other suitors and even if there were its his decision. I Being naive is not an issue, in many areas naivety is a thing of beauty. The naivety lies in people, innocently, who don't understand the purpose of a budget. If you have not been personally active in the process you can not know. I have never change spark plugs on a car or changed the oil, i am naive and it is bloody expensive  Also Phil was naive to talk financial language to people not experienced in that discipline. He was new at the job he talked the language he under stands. I once worked for a man called Ian Matheison, he was a brilliant communicator, he could pick the language that the canteen lady could understand and in the next moment speak to the head of ICI.
The trick being both understood him. |
|
|
|
Post by Mastercracker on Jan 13, 2020 20:57:23 GMT 1
Understood. But what would have happened with regards to the loan if we hadn't been promoted, or indeed, stayed up a second year? (genuine question, not a dig) I would guess no promotion = no repayment of loan Didn't you see how ill he looked during the pens? A lot of money was at stake TBF I think a lot of us looked just as ill and no money was at stake. |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jan 13, 2020 21:01:38 GMT 1
Did we budget to sell certain players who are very expensive to keep around doing sweet fa. My only contention with all the guessing is that people quote as fact.Very little of it is yet proven, we dont know what is on the financial horizon. The other variable is the tax situation of both parties, having briefly looked at pure legal accounts they may not be where the new owner thought they would be. In short we dont know and are very unlikely ever to find out. The one thing that is clear is that Dean is alife long fan with the club close to his heart. If we did, then Phil shouldn't have come out saying we didn't need to sell anyone If he said that i believe him it just means something else has to be reduced. Eg the guys and girls at John lewis may have planned a trip to Florida on the annual bonus, this year it may be to Spain on a coach so they can still have a holiday but not the big flight to trump land. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2020 21:18:28 GMT 1
He did well, didn't he? Lived the dream, got lauded, got every penny he spent back and emerged owning a huge training complex on top.
|
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Jan 13, 2020 21:42:15 GMT 1
Take the money back on promotion and budget with the remainder of the money. Fair enough
What seems to have happened. Not so fair enough
|
|
King Curtis
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Bacon is good for me
Posts: 4,844
|
Post by King Curtis on Jan 13, 2020 22:02:50 GMT 1
Well done Allan, you clearly do have an understanding of 'the budget game' and the variables that can affect whether you are performing under/over budget. However - there is 1 fixed sum of income (parachute payment) that should mean fluctuation in merchandise sales, cup runs etc. are largely irrelevant. In short - how the fuck are we operating on a shoestring transfer pot when we received £42.6 million from the PL?! Did we budget to sell certain players who are very expensive to keep around doing sweet fa. My only contention with all the guessing is that people quote as fact. Very little of it is yet proven, we dont know what is on the financial horizon. The other variable is the tax situation of both parties, having briefly looked at pure legal accounts they may not be where the new owner thought they would be. In short we dont know and are very unlikely ever to find out. The one thing that is clear is that Dean is alife long fan with the club close to his heart. Ok Allan, You said yourself you're good with numbers. What are Diakhaby and Mbenza worth combined? |
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Jan 13, 2020 22:31:08 GMT 1
Didn't 'expect' was my recollection, but not certain. He definitely said he wasnt daft enough to expect to see any of it again.. But it was an interest free loan to helo get the club into a financialy viable state. I think the parachute payments plus last 2 years payments justify him getting his money back if he wants it. I dont at all. He has taken too much too soon sending us right back where we started. It was all for nothing and I cant even say I enjoyed the ride...bar the promotion season. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2020 22:41:57 GMT 1
He definitely said he wasnt daft enough to expect to see any of it again.. But it was an interest free loan to helo get the club into a financialy viable state. I think the parachute payments plus last 2 years payments justify him getting his money back if he wants it. I dont at all. He has taken too much too soon sending us right back where we started. It was all for nothing and I cant even say I enjoyed the ride...bar the promotion season. We don't know whether he has taken anything yet. And the 18/19 financial year accounts due by March 20th will only tell us if he was repaid any monies before 30th June 2019. It could be years before we know how much the club and he have agreed is due from the £49m we owe him, and when the final tranche will be paid. |
|
|
|
Post by space hardware on Jan 13, 2020 22:45:12 GMT 1
I dont at all. He has taken too much too soon sending us right back where we started. It was all for nothing and I cant even say I enjoyed the ride...bar the promotion season. We don't know whether he has taken anything yet. And the 18/19 financial year accounts due by March 20th will only tell us if he was repaid any monies before 30th June 2019. It could be years before we know how much the club and he have agreed is due from the £49m we owe him, and when the final tranche will be paid. I'd suggest that us spending the square root of jack shit, despite us being a "Parachute Payment" club, would strongly imply that the payback has already started. |
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Jan 13, 2020 22:49:19 GMT 1
We don't know whether he has taken anything yet. And the 18/19 financial year accounts due by March 20th will only tell us if he was repaid any monies before 30th June 2019. It could be years before we know how much the club and he have agreed is due from the £49m we owe him, and when the final tranche will be paid. I'd suggest that us spending the square root of jack shit, despite us being a "Parachute Payment" club, would strongly imply that the payback has already started. A parachute payment club that is also up over £15 million in transfer deals this season |
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Jan 13, 2020 22:50:41 GMT 1
I dont at all. He has taken too much too soon sending us right back where we started. It was all for nothing and I cant even say I enjoyed the ride...bar the promotion season. We don't know whether he has taken anything yet. And the 18/19 financial year accounts due by March 20th will only tell us if he was repaid any monies before 30th June 2019. It could be years before we know how much the club and he have agreed is due from the £49m we owe him, and when the final tranche will be paid. Pretty much confirmed by the one poster on here who knows anything. "Dean was taking his money back irrespective of the owner". If this is the case I have lost all respect for him. Used the club as his play thing and took every penny back at a time we should be consolidating. Money squandered on shit signings and rinsing our best source of income. The club is spiralling fast yet the one person to come out of this shining is Dean Hoyle. Those who are lauding him saying he deserved it would be absolutely fuming now if Ken Davy had done the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Jan 13, 2020 22:50:50 GMT 1
Perhaps there's going to be a big twist and Dean is going to use a large chunk of the cash he is getting back to purchase the stadium and leave it in Huddersfield Town's name forever
|
|
|
|
Post by Up the Duff. on Jan 13, 2020 23:02:38 GMT 1
So is dean getting for his initial investment and loans:
* 25% shares in the club
* 100% of canalside
* £50m
Not daft isn't Mr Hoyle.
|
|
|
|
Post by colnevalleyblue on Jan 13, 2020 23:10:09 GMT 1
So is dean getting for his initial investment and loans: * 25% shares in the club * 100% of canalside * £50m Not daft isn't Mr Hoyle. Joined the Club when it was finishing about 16th in League one. Moved the Club from a field at Storthes Hall and some portable cabins to Canalside. Leaves the Club in a far better place than that he joined. Worth alot more than when he joined. He loaned £50 million and has every right to take that cash back. |
|
Maynardblue
Jimmy Nicholson Terrier
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Maynardblue on Jan 13, 2020 23:12:41 GMT 1
I'd suggest that us spending the square root of jack shit, despite us being a "Parachute Payment" club, would strongly imply that the payback has already started. A parachute payment club that is also up over £15 million in transfer deals this season Don't forget to subtract 4m sacking Jan and co and paying compo to get the Cowleys |
|
|
|
Post by htfcfcfc on Jan 13, 2020 23:17:42 GMT 1
A parachute payment club that is also up over £15 million in transfer deals this season Don't forget to subtract 4m sacking Jan and co and paying compo to get the Cowleys Wow. Sorry to go all Nick but £4m to get rid of Jan and co. Horrific |
|
|
|
Post by Up the Duff. on Jan 13, 2020 23:19:22 GMT 1
So is dean getting for his initial investment and loans: * 25% shares in the club * 100% of canalside * £50m Not daft isn't Mr Hoyle. Joined the Club when it was finishing about 16th in League one. Moved the Club from a field at Storthes Hall and some portable cabins to Canalside. Leaves the Club in a far better place than that he joined. Worth alot more than when he joined. He loaned £50 million and has every right to take that cash back. Yes and he owns canalside Yes and he owns 25% still in a club worth more than what he paid (how much did it cost him at the outset and what are his share worth now ?) One thing we dont know is if he actually also got a price for the shares he sold Looks like he got plenty on top of his loans. |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jan 13, 2020 23:19:28 GMT 1
Did we budget to sell certain players who are very expensive to keep around doing sweet fa. My only contention with all the guessing is that people quote as fact. Very little of it is yet proven, we dont know what is on the financial horizon. The other variable is the tax situation of both parties, having briefly looked at pure legal accounts they may not be where the new owner thought they would be. In short we dont know and are very unlikely ever to find out. The one thing that is clear is that Dean is alife long fan with the club close to his heart. Ok Allan, You said yourself you're good with numbers. What are Diakhaby and Mbenza worth combined?  Price is determined by the demand and supply curves, .......................so about £3. |
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Jan 13, 2020 23:19:44 GMT 1
A parachute payment club that is also up over £15 million in transfer deals this season Don't forget to subtract 4m sacking Jan and co and paying compo to get the Cowleys I assumed we were paying Jan about £5k a week given he had achieved the square root of naff all in his coaching career. Don't tell me he was on £20k plus |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jan 13, 2020 23:21:23 GMT 1
Joined the Club when it was finishing about 16th in League one. Moved the Club from a field at Storthes Hall and some portable cabins to Canalside. Leaves the Club in a far better place than that he joined. Worth alot more than when he joined. He loaned £50 million and has every right to take that cash back. Yes and he owns canalside Yes and he owns 25% still in a club worth more than what he paid (how much did it cost him at the outset and what are his share worth now ?) One thing we dont know is if he actually also got a price for the shares he sold Looks like he got plenty on top of his loans.  please stop its embarrassing.................  has it got to do with the fans |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2020 23:23:21 GMT 1
A ludicrous appointment on a ludicrous contract by the sound of things!
|
|
E4b
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,413
|
Post by E4b on Jan 13, 2020 23:30:58 GMT 1
He might have bags of money in his empire but he still has to watch the same shit we do every week.
|
|
wigster
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,342
|
Post by wigster on Jan 13, 2020 23:34:22 GMT 1
Yes and he owns canalside Yes and he owns 25% still in a club worth more than what he paid (how much did it cost him at the outset and what are his share worth now ?) One thing we dont know is if he actually also got a price for the shares he sold Looks like he got plenty on top of his loans. please stop its embarrassing................. has it got to do with the fans Everything ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2020 23:35:24 GMT 1
Are Town getting back the £20m they loaned to redevelop Dean Hoyle’s Canalside?
|
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Jan 13, 2020 23:44:58 GMT 1
Not sure why some on here, just because we had 2 seasons in the greedy league, should all of a sudden be outraged that we've not spaffed all that money and gone for broke?
The PL as an entity, over the last nigh on 30yrs, has demonstrated that there are a handful of clubs that will be almost guaranteed to remain there in its current form (an entertainment business, played out for subsidiary industries such as gambling etc.). Then there will be the ones that are there through the simple fact of longevity (Everton). After that you have the yo-yo clubs. Collectively, taking aside the Plc's of the PL, how much have the yo-yo clubs, plus the Town's, the Wigan's, the Bradford's etc. spent in order to try and maintain their place at the top table.
The fact that the PL can afford to pay piss poor performing football clubs scores of £m's for abject failure should give you a clue as to their true motives. It's about brand integrity, they don't want to be accused of incentivising these clubs to spend way beyond their means for a season or three at the casino table, so they give them enough cash & spread it across 2-3 seasons so that any negativity is dissipated.
For those so pissed off by the current situation, pop down Barclays, get yourself a £100m loan and crack on.
If we were debating something that smells a bit fraudulent, then I could understand these threads, but at the moment some people don't seem to be able to detach themselves from the heady days of 2 seasons in the PL and their default view of what should follow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2020 23:52:03 GMT 1
Take the money back on promotion and budget with the remainder of the money. Fair enough What seems to have happened. Not so fair enough
Absolutely, Nothing wrong with " right guys and girls, You now owe me nothing, I have always said we have to be self sufficient, Am having my loans back and the club still has 50M to spend wisely in our first season in the top flight for 40 years "
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2020 0:09:19 GMT 1
So is dean getting for his initial investment and loans: * 25% shares in the club * 100% of canalside * £50m Not daft isn't Mr Hoyle. Joined the Club when it was finishing about 16th in League one. Moved the Club from a field at Storthes Hall and some portable cabins to Canalside. Leaves the Club in a far better place than that he joined. Worth alot more than when he joined. He loaned £50 million and has every right to take that cash back.
Current League position apart, Are we in a better position than when he took over ?
We were nigh on self sufficient (skint), We didn't own our training ground (we still don't), We didn't own the stadium (we still don't), We didn't have unsustainable outgoings on wages (we have now ).
A poor end to the season and another relegation would see us in a similar situation to that when Hoyle took over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2020 1:49:34 GMT 1
We don't know whether he has taken anything yet. And the 18/19 financial year accounts due by March 20th will only tell us if he was repaid any monies before 30th June 2019. It could be years before we know how much the club and he have agreed is due from the £49m we owe him, and when the final tranche will be paid. I'd suggest that us spending the square root of jack shit, despite us being a "Parachute Payment" club, would strongly imply that the payback has already started. Your suggestions are mere conjecture. Only as the annual accounts roll out from 18/19 onwards will we see the true facts. |
|
please stop its embarrassing................. 
has it got to do with the fans