|
Post by terriersyndrome on Jun 1, 2021 17:05:22 GMT 1
I wonder how much Stoke still owe us for Ince & Smith? Ince was £10m+ & Smith was around £4m. good business. Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours.
|
|
|
Post by bluestripe on Jun 1, 2021 17:12:04 GMT 1
good business. Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours. My take on this is that transfer fees in and out get inflated when the team is in the Premier League (or just dropping out with oodles of cash...supposedly). As you say, all mad. The ones I always think of are the Liverpool rejects. They always seem to do really well: £12m for Danny Ward to sit on the bench; Solanke £19m.
|
|
|
Post by Bassingham Terrier on Jun 1, 2021 17:57:15 GMT 1
Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours. My take on this is that transfer fees in and out get inflated when the team is in the Premier League (or just dropping out with oodles of cash...supposedly). As you say, all mad. The ones I always think of are the Liverpool rejects. They always seem to do really well: £12m for Danny Ward to sit on the bench; Solanke £19m. Not forgetting Rhian Brewster, Victims to Sheffield United: £23.5m for 27 appearances and 0 goals.
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Jun 1, 2021 17:58:06 GMT 1
good business. Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours. Grant sale, Billing, there are others, parachute payments, Premier League money. Yes of course we made financial errors / signings with such as all the names we know and their wages. I am not though buying it that on paper a few poor signings have made all this money disappear. Something stinks with the finances at our club. There is no way we should be skint.
|
|
|
Post by Baby Ate My Eight Ball on Jun 1, 2021 18:06:17 GMT 1
Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours. Grant sale, Billing, there are others, parachute payments, Premier League money. Yes of course we made financial errors / signings with such as all the names we know and their wages. I am not though buying it that on paper a few poor signings have made all this money disappear. Something stinks with the finances at our club. There is no way we should be skint. We pissed a load up the wall in the premier league. Then the previous owner has taken the rest with him, haven’t you been paying attention?
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Jun 1, 2021 18:14:45 GMT 1
Grant sale, Billing, there are others, parachute payments, Premier League money. Yes of course we made financial errors / signings with such as all the names we know and their wages. I am not though buying it that on paper a few poor signings have made all this money disappear. Something stinks with the finances at our club. There is no way we should be skint. We pissed a load up the wall in the premier league. Then the previous owner has taken the rest with him, haven’t you been paying attention? Your first comment is what is being cited as the reason, with paying Hoyle back secondary. Hoyle never viewed this Club as an investment, it was a selfless gift when he was financing us, money he was never getting back. His head in his hands at Wembley was relief, relief that he could take every penny out and some. It was nothing to do with his beloved Town being promoted. Phil has bought the Club with the Clubs money, I could have done that. We should not though blame poor transfers for this fucking financial mess. They contributed but are not the reason.
|
|
deepc
Iain Dunn Terrier
Posts: 590
|
Post by deepc on Jun 1, 2021 19:58:29 GMT 1
I’m surprised he hasn’t taken ownership of their training ground as collateral! Joking aside, that’s £4m that we will be paying him back out of our coffers that he decided to give to another club. By the time we’ve paid him off he’ll have invested more money in Reading than us. Please whoosh me if I am wrong, but wasn't that a sweetener for the loser? If Town had lost, then Town would have benefited similarly. If so, he didn't decide as you say, it was just a bet, and a fine way to mitigate slightly the 'winner takes all' nature of the final. I thought that this "arrangement " had been in place for a few years and was seen as the "done thing " to do. Otherwise winner would get £ 100 million plus half of the profit from the final and the loser the other half. Seems fair to me
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jun 1, 2021 20:45:05 GMT 1
Considering Ince only scored 3 goals in 37 appearances for us averaging a goal every 915 minutes I'm amazed we managed to get our money back on him. I'm even more amazed we managed to get our money back for Sobhi. I always liked Tommy Smith but £4m? Stoke's recruitment is as bad as ours. Grant sale, Billing, there are others, parachute payments, Premier League money. Yes of course we made financial errors / signings with such as all the names we know and their wages. I am not though buying it that on paper a few poor signings have made all this money disappear. Something stinks with the finances at our club. There is no way we should be skint. The auditors will pronounce on the substance of the accounts We as fans know nowt it's not really our concern 😚
|
|
|
Post by dm on Jun 2, 2021 13:57:01 GMT 1
We pissed a load up the wall in the premier league. Then the previous owner has taken the rest with him, haven’t you been paying attention? Your first comment is what is being cited as the reason, with paying Hoyle back secondary. Hoyle never viewed this Club as an investment, it was a selfless gift when he was financing us, money he was never getting back. His head in his hands at Wembley was relief, relief that he could take every penny out and some. It was nothing to do with his beloved Town being promoted. Phil has bought the Club with the Clubs money, I could have done that. We should not though blame poor transfers for this fucking financial mess. They contributed but are not the reason. I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not even saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by Teddington Ted on Jun 2, 2021 14:14:58 GMT 1
Your first comment is what is being cited as the reason, with paying Hoyle back secondary. Hoyle never viewed this Club as an investment, it was a selfless gift when he was financing us, money he was never getting back. His head in his hands at Wembley was relief, relief that he could take every penny out and some. It was nothing to do with his beloved Town being promoted. Phil has bought the Club with the Clubs money, I could have done that. We should not though blame poor transfers for this fucking financial mess. They contributed but are not the reason. I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter. There won’t be one. It wasn’t a leveraged deal like Man Utd and Burnley which put those clubs into debt. Instead, PH got the club for a nominal fee on the proviso that he got £60m out of the future revenue. The other sale options would have meant substantial cash being paid to DH for the club with him writing the debt off. Sadly for our outlook, it meant no money going into the club and shed loads going out. DH got paid and PH got a club for next to nothing but had to run it as a vehicle to repay DH first and foremost.
|
|
|
Post by joburgjon on Jun 2, 2021 14:24:50 GMT 1
Your first comment is what is being cited as the reason, with paying Hoyle back secondary. Hoyle never viewed this Club as an investment, it was a selfless gift when he was financing us, money he was never getting back. His head in his hands at Wembley was relief, relief that he could take every penny out and some. It was nothing to do with his beloved Town being promoted. Phil has bought the Club with the Clubs money, I could have done that. We should not though blame poor transfers for this fucking financial mess. They contributed but are not the reason. I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter. It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had.
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man on Jun 2, 2021 14:27:14 GMT 1
I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter. It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had. But the price he paid was clearly contingent on Hoyle being repaid, which came out of the club's money, not Phil's.
|
|
|
Post by Big Ern on Jun 2, 2021 14:36:35 GMT 1
I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter. It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had. So how much did Phil actually pay for the club? I'm guessing it was next to nothing. Why would anybody pay good money for a club saddled with over 50 million quid worth of debt? You say Phil paid 75% out of his own money but that could have been a nominal fee.
|
|
crux
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,842
|
Post by crux on Jun 2, 2021 15:21:07 GMT 1
It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had. So how much did Phil actually pay for the club? I'm guessing it was next to nothing. Why would anybody pay good money for a club saddled with over 50 million quid worth of debt? You say Phil paid 75% out of his own money but that could have been a nominal fee. His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind.
|
|
|
Post by Teddington Ted on Jun 2, 2021 15:39:20 GMT 1
So how much did Phil actually pay for the club? I'm guessing it was next to nothing. Why would anybody pay good money for a club saddled with over 50 million quid worth of debt? You say Phil paid 75% out of his own money but that could have been a nominal fee. His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind. So DH gets every penny back he put in, keeps Canalside and makes ‘8 figures’ (£10m) profit from selling us on? Very nice for him.
|
|
|
Post by keithAM11532 on Jun 2, 2021 15:42:25 GMT 1
So how much did Phil actually pay for the club? I'm guessing it was next to nothing. Why would anybody pay good money for a club saddled with over 50 million quid worth of debt? You say Phil paid 75% out of his own money but that could have been a nominal fee. His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind. why would you assume it was 7 or 8 figures. Ken Bates once bought Chelsea for a Pound.
|
|
|
Post by terriersyndrome on Jun 2, 2021 16:08:36 GMT 1
His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind. So DH gets every penny back he put in, keeps Canalside and makes ‘8 figures’ (£10m) profit from selling us on? Very nice for him. Didn't DH say in that random podcast that if he gets all his money back he'll hand over Canalside to the club FOC?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2021 16:11:49 GMT 1
His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind. why would you assume it was 7 or 8 figures. Ken Bates once bought Chelsea for a Pound. Remember this documentary? Sadly, it looks like the whole documentary is no longer online, but this classic bit is ("And you can bring your fucking dinner")
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Jun 2, 2021 16:34:09 GMT 1
why would you assume it was 7 or 8 figures. Ken Bates once bought Chelsea for a Pound. Remember this documentary? Sadly, it looks like the whole documentary is no longer online, but this classic bit is ("And you can bring your fucking dinner") Straightforward management meeting, no drama for the cameras there...
|
|
|
Post by Teddington Ted on Jun 2, 2021 16:56:36 GMT 1
What an absolute bell end.
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Jun 2, 2021 17:17:53 GMT 1
His 'nominal' fee was probably 7 or 8 figures and also included writing off his £2m investment in Southport as well as underwriting future investment and/or debts as DH takes his money back. Folk on here talk about it as though he paid £3.50 and a packet of smarties for the club. He may not come across as likeable as DH did, but at least he's willing to take the job on - plus look at the shit show DH has left behind. So DH gets every penny back he put in, keeps Canalside and makes ‘8 figures’ (£10m) profit from selling us on? Very nice for him. No idea of the detail but I’d be fairly sure he’s not getting ‘every penny’ back. He’s also left the club in a far better state, infrastructure and earning capability wise than when he took it on. Surely people don’t think he should’ve given Phil the club for free?
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jun 2, 2021 17:35:52 GMT 1
I've seen this said on DATM several times (and Facebook and Twitter) and have twice asked for a link to the evidence (I don't like believing something just because I have heard it). So could you provide me with a link to where I could read or hear about this please? I'm not saying it isn't true, just lots of people regurgitate it but when asked for evidence they suddenly have nothing more to say on the matter. There won’t be one. It wasn’t a leveraged deal like Man Utd and Burnley which put those clubs into debt. Instead, PH got the club for a nominal fee on the proviso that he got £60m out of the future revenue. The other sale options would have meant substantial cash being paid to DH for the club with him writing the debt off. Sadly for our outlook, it meant no money going into the club and shed loads going out. DH got paid and PH got a club for next to nothing but had to run it as a vehicle to repay DH first and foremost. Wild over simplification Dean showed his mettle investing in league 1 if he hadn't there may not have been a club in Huddersfield we were ripe to become an early version of Bury
|
|
|
Post by Mr Breitside on Jun 2, 2021 17:44:16 GMT 1
So DH gets every penny back he put in, keeps Canalside and makes ‘8 figures’ (£10m) profit from selling us on? Very nice for him. Didn't DH say in that random podcast that if he gets all his money back he'll hand over Canalside to the club FOC? [br He said alot of things.
|
|
|
Post by portugalterrier on Jun 2, 2021 17:47:33 GMT 1
It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had. But the price he paid was clearly contingent on Hoyle being repaid, which came out of the club's money, not Phil's. Absolutely incorrect, any money he paid for the 75% shareholding in HTFC would have been to DH, as he owned the shares, nothing paid for the shares would impact on the club. Th only thing PH did was purchase a majority holding in the club which then enabled him , as owner to repay Hoyle his Directors Loans. Hoyle could just have kept a majority shareholding and authorised the repayment himself, with the resultant torrent of abuse staining his hero status.
|
|
|
Post by bluestripe on Jun 2, 2021 17:58:46 GMT 1
F*****g Groundhog Day 😫😫😫😫.
Can the admins set up a new sub board, then get Proboards to create the same posts in there every day to stimulate the same posts every day and keep it from the rest of us?
What's going on with Derby? It's gone quiet. Are they definitely staying up? Or might we be playing Wycombe next season?
|
|
|
Post by drumriggend on Jun 2, 2021 19:46:38 GMT 1
I were there when they carved it up ..
It were at merrie England at oakes..
I’d popped in for a cheese special..
Fooookin Phil and Dean were huddled in one o t, medieval booths..
I overheard Dean saying he could ave club for a rare roast beef sarnie and a rocky road..
As long as he kept his parking spot..
Plus £45 million in instalments..
😳
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2021 19:51:56 GMT 1
There won’t be one. It wasn’t a leveraged deal like Man Utd and Burnley which put those clubs into debt. Instead, PH got the club for a nominal fee on the proviso that he got £60m out of the future revenue. The other sale options would have meant substantial cash being paid to DH for the club with him writing the debt off. Sadly for our outlook, it meant no money going into the club and shed loads going out. DH got paid and PH got a club for next to nothing but had to run it as a vehicle to repay DH first and foremost. Wild over simplification t Dean showed his mettle investing in league 1 if he hadn't there may not have been a club in Huddersfield we were ripe to become an early version of Bury Under Davy, We would have been a mid table 3rd tier team that spent our brass wisely, With a regular 9k turning up, We may have lacked ambition but there isnt a cat in hells chance we would have been anything like Bury. Nor would i imagine we would owe very much in directors loans to him either.
|
|
wigster
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,157
|
Post by wigster on Jun 2, 2021 20:34:21 GMT 1
Wild over simplification t Dean showed his mettle investing in league 1 if he hadn't there may not have been a club in Huddersfield we were ripe to become an early version of Bury Under Davy, We would have been a mid table 3rd tier team that spent our brass wisely, With a regular 9k turning up, We may have lacked ambition but there isnt a cat in hells chance we would have been anything like Bury. Nor would i imagine we would owe very much in directors loans to him either. Think you'll be struggling to say too much negative about Dean Hoyle - I think Allanetc might accept he's one of Deano's staunchest defenders.
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Jun 2, 2021 21:38:24 GMT 1
Under Davy, We would have been a mid table 3rd tier team that spent our brass wisely, With a regular 9k turning up, We may have lacked ambition but there isnt a cat in hells chance we would have been anything like Bury. Nor would i imagine we would owe very much in directors loans to him either. Think you'll be struggling to say too much negative about Dean Hoyle - I think Allanetc might accept he's one of Deano's staunchest defenders. Yep but accept criticism when in context he was far from perfect! I have been going to town since early 60s never experienced an atmosphere at town like it and 10 k plus staying behind after game to cheer the team unheard-of Aged from 85 to 5. Getting that stadium rocking and I mean rocking was a fans fantasy It's the I'll informed and unbalanced posts that do my head in. That's social media. Profoundly flawed
|
|
|
Post by joburgjon on Jun 2, 2021 22:18:07 GMT 1
It's not true... PH bought 75% of the shares in HTAFC using his own money....not the clubs. All that has happened is that DH has requested that HTAFC repay the majority of the loans he lent the club. As a lender he is 100% entitled to do this. PH bought the club with his own money The club is repaying the majority of the loans it has to it's major lender. PH hasn't used a penny of the clubs money to buy the club.....He's just had to use some of the revenue the club has received over the last couple of years to repay some loans the club had. But the price he paid was clearly contingent on Hoyle being repaid, which came out of the club's money, not Phil's. The accusation is that PH used HTAFC's money to buy the club....He quite simply didn't. So it's wrong for anyone to say that PH used HTAFC's money to buy 75% of the shares in the club. He used his own money to buy the shares on the club. The clubs money is being used to pay the club's debt. Not buy the club
|
|