Skip to main content

£46Million debt

  • Thread starter Thread starter villager
  • Start date Start date

£46Million debt

billymac said:
keith, as long as the tax and vat are being paid (something Ridsdale has a problem with) then HMRC would have no iterest in us.

I just struggle to accept ANYTHING Ridsdale comes out with, he is a cheat and is banned from running a business for many years and if you look at the accounts relating to our club that were published last year then debt was about £23m and when the plc was bought the overdraft was some £6m, now in only a very short period the debt has increased by £7m and the o/d by £1m, not great budgeting.
Click to expand...

OK Thanks
 
sliper said:
Doesn't the above assume he is drawing the interest ?

You sound like you know what you're talking about accounting wise ? Am I right in thinking he can offset at least some of these amounts elsewhere in his business ?

I could see him putting money into PNE and offsetting it against profits elsewhere which is fair enough.. his businesses aren't run as charities.

The only other realistic conclusion is that TH wants to bankrupt the club.. if that's the case then why keep putting money in... I think he still puts money in.. maybe not as much as before but I think he still puts money in. He could have bankrupted the club for the 20 million shortly after he took outright control... I don't see the point of running up a further 20 plus million when he could bankrupt the club in an instant.

I think there is evidence he has tried to make us successful.. rather than bankrupt the club.
He brought in Son of Fergie because I think he thought his Man U connections might just make a difference.. it doesn't really look like a strategy for failure.
Click to expand...

If TH keeps the club ticking over in a loss making situation (taking his interest would surely help) then as an astutue businessman you would have to expect there to be a tax offset somewhere else in his portoflio.
 
billymac said:
keith, as long as the tax and vat are being paid (something Ridsdale has a problem with) then HMRC would have no iterest in us.
Click to expand...

If TH took £20 mill from TH Ltd and handed to PNE.. HMRC would have a right to ask why TH Ltd's money was not being used to benefit TH Ltd ? There are rules for how money is used.. if the money is in a business it has to be shown to used to benefit the business.. he can't just give it away !

He would either get a big tax bill on top of the money he draws out for PNE as say a dividend to give to PNE.. or if its provided as as an unpaid commercial loan this might reduce that companies corporation tax bill ?

Is a loan not the most tax efficient way of moving money out of one of his companies and into PNE ?
 
Last edited:
billymac said:
If TH keeps the club ticking over in a loss making situation (taking his interest would surely help) then as an astutue businessman you would have to expect there to be a tax offset somewhere else in his portoflio.
Click to expand...

And won't it be more beneficial to him to have a good interest rate.. even if there is no intention he will ever get receive that money back from PNE. In other words the debt is real.. he has put substantial amounts into PNE but he has done it in a way that means he can claw some of it back against more profitable businesses !

Seems a sense able way of doing it to me..
 
sliper said:
If TH took £20 mill from TH Ltd and handed to PNE.. HMRC would have a right to ask why TH Ltd's money was not being used to benefit TH Ltd ? There are rules for how money is used.. if the money is in a business it has to be shown to used to benefit the business.. he can't just give it away !

He would either get a big tax bill for drawing money as say a dividend to give to PNE.. or if its provided as as an unpaid commercial loan which might reduce that companies corporation tax bill ?
Click to expand...

but he didn't, the plc was "loaned" money by Guild Ventures at an agreed rate of return (if TH chose not to take the interest payments than that is his issue) he has however saddled the Limited company with £23m of debt why, when the Limited company had no debts prior to it being our football club. You would have to assume that this debt is his way of keeping the club in a loss making postion which can be used positively in other of his companies.

Manure's debt was peanuts compared to the debt the Glaziers handed to the club once they had taken over, we should have gone down the road of official administration and not Hemmings administration because we now dance to his tune.
 
As far as I'm concerned PNE owe Hemmings no money whatsoever. I see all monieshe has provided as benevolent donations and not loans.
If the reality is that Hemmings expects a refund on what he sees as his 'investment', then he is single handedly holding the club back from ever progressing.
Westley and Ridsdale are the symptoms of the Hemmings ball and chain, unable, as the debt ridden club is, to make itself a worthwhile acquisition for prospective and ambitious owners. Like at Reading, Swansea, Donny, and Fleetwood
 
After reading what PR has said about our current wage I get the feeling that are actual wage bill now must be significantly lower than the 65% rule due to pay offs being included in the 65% .
That has to put us in a reasonably healthy position for next season .
 
sliper said:
And won't it be more beneficial to him to have a good interest rate.. even if there is no intention he will ever get receive that money back from PNE. In other words the debt is real.. he has put substantial amounts into PNE but he has done it in a way that means he can claw some of it back against more profitable businesses !

Seems a sense able way of doing it to me..
Click to expand...

And if Hemmings has a good tax adviser; which he is bound to have; he will in all probability be settlng off the losses he incurs on PNE against the profits his businesses make elsewhere: efficient tax planning.
 
europne said:
You can twiddle with figures all you like.

W ho was the £10 million debt to in the 08/09 accounts, and should that not have been reduced by £4 million for the sale of St Ledger?

And the club was set up to lose £3 million a season with a player sale every 2 years to offset the deficit, that had worked well for a number of years.

The increase in the deficit as many people know coincided with additional funds and backing from Hemmings with his full consent for the signings of Mellor and others.

And 2008 was the year of the start of the credit crunch which affected most clubs in the championship, we lost far less than many other clubs in that league that season.

Different perspectives Eddie and Raefil.
Click to expand...
Its nothing to do with perspective, these are audited accounts FFS.
 
Fibber McGee said:
Delegation is not the same as abrogation.
Click to expand...

Thats a good point Fibber. Very good. But whats the alternative? Do you want an owner, or even a chairman who is judging every signing from a football perspective (i.e. they veto a signing if they dont think hes good enough)? Judging whether we can afford the deal, or whether it fits in our strategic plan, yes, but judging whether they fit in the team? not for me, its what we spend thousands on bringing in a manager and coaching staff for.

Though saying that, Id be very happy with a Director of Football coming in, or in lieu of that trying to create a transfer committee similar to that that Forest had before their current owner.
 
billymac said:
keith, as long as the tax and vat are being paid (something Ridsdale has a problem with) then HMRC would have no iterest in us.

I just struggle to accept ANYTHING Ridsdale comes out with, he is a cheat and is banned from running a business for many years and if you look at the accounts relating to our club that were published last year then debt was about £23m and when the plc was bought the overdraft was some £6m, now in only a very short period the debt has increased by £7m and the o/d by £1m, not great budgeting.
Click to expand...

Horrible budgeting, but in terms of whether its lies or not (like you I wouldnt put it past the riddler), we did essentially run 2 first teams from January - May last season given the amoutn of players we let Westley bring in. We've also paid off numerous players in the summer and recruited (and continue to recruit) loads and as you know, free transfer arent actually free, theres agents costs and signing on fees to take into account.

Would these things account for the lions share of the 8m do you think?
 
I thought it would get round to being Westleys fault eventually. We are in this mess purely due to bad Chairmanship and Directorship in the past I blame the goggle-eyed freak for the majority of this. When we were kids and he was thrown into the canal I should have put my foot on his head, it would have saved a lot of problems.
Eddie's Johnson said:
Horrible budgeting, but in terms of whether its lies or not (like you I wouldnt put it past the riddler), we did essentially run 2 first teams from January - May last season given the amoutn of players we let Westley bring in. We've also paid off numerous players in the summer and recruited (and continue to recruit) loads and as you know, free transfer arent actually free, theres agents costs and signing on fees to take into account.

Would these things account for the lions share of the 8m do you think?
Click to expand...
 
survey said:
I thought it would get round to being Westleys fault eventually. We are in this mess purely due to bad Chairmanship and Directorship in the past I blame the goggle-eyed freak for the majority of this. When we were kids and he was thrown into the canal I should have put my foot on his head, it would have saved a lot of problems.
Click to expand...

What a nasty horrible thing to say.
 
billymac said:
You are a complete cock, if you think that for one minute John Kay (on behalf of TH) didn't know how the "soft loans" as you cannot invest in a plc were being spent you are either a wum or deluded.
Click to expand...

Can't invest in a PLC? Isn't that called "owning shares", 28% of them being owned by Hemmings at that point?

...and I'm sure Hemmings via Kay knew exactly that the money was being spent on players, but I doubt he'd ever heard of Schumi, never mind know he was a complete crock of shit.
 
marketsqhero said:
Can't invest in a PLC? Isn't that called "owning shares", 28% of them being owned by Hemmings at that point?

...and I'm sure Hemmings via Kay knew exactly that the money was being spent on players, but I doubt he'd ever heard of Schumi, never mind know he was a complete crock of shit.
Click to expand...

Did it not occur to either go them then to take advise then?
 
Back
Top