Toonpack 6837 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 From the Guardian today, beneath an article on Bolton's plight. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/se...bts-gary-cahill About us: Last month Barclays loaned Newcastle their season's Premier League monies in advance, having apparently also extended their overdraft in March That seems very strange, unless "you know who" has recouped a huge lumper, wonder where that came from ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Your Name Here Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 (edited) From the Guardian today, beneath an article on Bolton's plight. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/se...bts-gary-cahill About us: Last month Barclays loaned Newcastle their season's Premier League monies in advance, having apparently also extended their overdraft in March That seems very strange, unless "you know who" has recouped a huge lumper, wonder where that came from ! How much is that, about £25m before additional per televised match fees? With a net transfer profit of £30m it’s hard to see why they’d need the money up front. Edited September 23, 2011 by Your Name Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6837 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 (edited) From the Guardian today, beneath an article on Bolton's plight. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/se...bts-gary-cahill About us: Last month Barclays loaned Newcastle their season's Premier League monies in advance, having apparently also extended their overdraft in March That seems very strange, unless "you know who" has recouped a huge lumper, wonder where that came from ! How much is that, about £25m before additional per televised match fees? With a net transfer profit of £30m it’s hard to see why they’d need the money up front. Agree, it's very strange. Edit re the bold bit, it's more than that (depending on the definition of Premier League money): Last Season each club received £13.8million as the equal share of domestic TV rights and £17.9million as the equal share of overseas TV rights. Facility fees of £582,000 are paid to a club every time they play in a live TV match - with a minimum income of £5.82million even if a club has been involved in fewer than 10 live games. (from the Telegraph) All of it together is the thick end of £40 Mill Edited September 23, 2011 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEADMAN 0 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 well its the only way to hurt ashley he own sports direct but he also owns jjb sports to and others. so its time to hit em where it hurts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 From the Guardian today, beneath an article on Bolton's plight. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/se...bts-gary-cahill About us: Last month Barclays loaned Newcastle their season's Premier League monies in advance, having apparently also extended their overdraft in March That seems very strange, unless "you know who" has recouped a huge lumper, wonder where that came from ! How much is that, about £25m before additional per televised match fees? With a net transfer profit of £30m it’s hard to see why they’d need the money up front. Relegation to the Championship cost Newcastle £33.5m of revenues. Costs were cut by £23.6m but at the same time Barclays sought repayment of £25m of loans. That dual impact of reduced revenues and squeezed finance would have killed most other clubs, but, housed within Mike Ashley's £1.6bn-a-year turnover MASH Holdings that also contains Sports Direct, Newcastle survived. Ashley advanced £38m that year to ensure the Magpies a smooth rebound to the top flight. Things have clearly improved. Last month Barclays loaned Newcastle their season's Premier League monies in advance, having apparently also extended their overdraft in March. Growing debt is normally a sign of distress; Newcastle's paradox is that the level of their external debt is a thermometer for their on-pitch health. If you didnt know better you'd read that as we'd borrowed to strengthen the team well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26269 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Let me get this clear. We took out a massive loan from Barclays last month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Thats definitely the way it reads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26269 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Fuck me, that's some pricey undersoil heating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6837 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Let me get this clear. We took out a massive loan from Barclays last month? It's not that definitive tbh possibly's a better word, be good to know the journo's source. It's a throwaway line in a down the page piece. If true, the timings interesting (clever) as we'll not know for sure until the accounts after next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Barclays pulled in the £25m and then maybe when the finance from MASH was apparent, extended it plus a bit more to cover any expenses based on this year's income. Just remind yourself, the club was £77m in debt, had millions in transfer fees to pay out and had a wage bill at 95% in the championship. We were and have been in a disgraceful state financially. That said i dont get it either and the final sentence in the piece on us is garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Barclays pulled in the £25m and then maybe when the finance from MASH was apparent, extended it plus a bit more to cover any expenses based on this year's income. Just remind yourself, the club was £77m in debt, had millions in transfer fees to pay out and had a wage bill at 95% in the championship. We were and have been in a disgraceful state financially. That said i dont get it either and the final sentence in the piece on us is garbage. Thats the bit I couldnt get, its the one that I was referring to that could be seen as "were doing well because we borrowed money to strengthen the team" (something I advocate btw, as seen by this thread). Its not even possible to say how much this loan is for. "Advancing the seasons Premier League money", Im assuming could refer to the basic £14m or so that every team gets. Anything more is an unknown although it could go up as far as what? £40m (the amount we got from League position and TV revenue last season) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 All I can think is its a trick to use the banks money in leu of monies coming in anyway (Give back to bank). Not sure why that would be necessary though. Or have I missed something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2188 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 (edited) The only way that piece makes sense to me is if Ashley's decided to substitute some of his personal debt with bank debt. Something he's not wanted to do up to now. Edited September 23, 2011 by Kitman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 it seems to me its just to cover running costs for the season. Ashley has had to do that every year without security to borrow against. Now we have the security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 it seems to me its just to cover running costs for the season. Ashley has had to do that every year without security to borrow against. Now we have the security. Surely the £30m+ leftover from Carroll sale should do that though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Maybe the person on the cold call was really persuasive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 it seems to me its just to cover running costs for the season. Ashley has had to do that every year without security to borrow against. Now we have the security. Surely the £30m+ leftover from Carroll sale should do that though the sale of bassong, beye, duff and Martin's didn't. 30m is about half the running costs at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 it seems to me its just to cover running costs for the season. Ashley has had to do that every year without security to borrow against. Now we have the security. Surely the £30m+ leftover from Carroll sale should do that though the sale of bassong, beye, duff and Martin's didn't. 30m is about half the running costs at best. not saying we won't turn a profit, but you don't get all your money in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally 0 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Come on guys, the club needs to be able to wipe it's own nose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now