Well ????

[allbluelenny]

hate to be negative and when a side is not doing well, supporters jump on the back of the back room staff and the gaffer.
well when was the last time we won ?? or got a point ?????, now out of the FA Cup.
I do not know what else to say , as some will reply, we do not have money we do not have this or that !!!!!!!
Having seen the money situation, same as 90% of the league clubs , we do have the FA thingy hanging over our heads, BUT we as all clubs have a Director.
Mr Scally you saved my club for a £! which I am sooo grateful, and thousands of others are also.
But do not pretend to be the big man parading around with the Kent badge on your shoulder, you where for what ever reason the man that put your money where your mouth is. a £!
You have put some money back into the club, and kept it a live.But I bet it is not as much as the normal working man who has and does support the Gills thick and thin over a large number of years.
Hold your head up and be positive,be strong, what ever it costs, sort this out and move on, and bare the cost before it is to late.

 

[BelfastBlue]

Thought you would be more upbeat Lenny. You predicted a thrashing but the game was quite tight? Is it more a case of disappointment that you weren't proved right? I dare say there might be a few opportunities to get on tailors back over coming weeks but not sure today was one.

 

[allbluelenny]

I agree, as my learned friend has pointed out, but the FA Cup always brings out the best in teams maybe we should take all games as being FA Cup matches.
Yes I thought we where in for a dicking and for the grace we did well, but we did get beat again.
Belfast this is not about slagging our side, but football leadership in general, ceo,s, owners, directors and football management.
Until someone takes charge of a team( Generally ) , puts their money where there mouth is and continue to do so, no matter what, support will follow.And so should results.
Mr Scally saved our club, but where is the financial support to take us further ? we are doing everything on the cheap because that is all we can afford.
In my opinion if you purchase a club ( Business )you should do so on the grounds to provide experience or finance or both.
This is not a toy, play with it for a while then put it in a box to play with tomorrow. I have been in business for over 40 years and have been and am still successful , because I put my money where my mouth is.
And I have faith in whom I employ and they in me.
I am not a negative person ( It may seem i am ) but I see things as they are, and say what I see.
I so want to see us survive, even under PT, I strongly feel we have the strength in our team not just to stay up but fight for a top flight place.
But we need to get into the players heads as well, they them selves need to help the situation, as the better we do the better the chance they have to stay or move on to higher plains.
But the Buck stops with the guy who owns the company and until he does something to change things, if only for his own pride, We are sadly on the track of relagation

 

[WINDYROG]

I am not a Scally knocker but Lenny's perspective of business and management,not just in football, is accurate.
All successful teams have a fairly disproportionate level of investment (to our eyes) to gain success. However....being well off and tinkering does not cut it.
Any really wealthy guys out there with a decent business model and track record want to buy Gillingham FC?.......Mmmmm didn't think so.

Yet Rotherham and Bournemouth found someone..........

 

[alwaysright]

Firstly - Pragmatism
Mr.Scally 'saved' the club by paying a £ 1 and persuading the creditors to accept a few pennies for EACH £ 1 they were owed. From what I can tell, I am unsure as to how 'very' much of his own money he has invested - and money that he has not insulated and capable of reaping vast dividends if he leaves - and goes to live in Dubaii on a permanent 'tax-avoidance' based basis. ----- how many C.E.Os of football clubs are in the country for just a few days a year ?
To defend Mr.Scally - maybe I don't entirely blame him - but it does show where his responsibilities lie - himself.

Perhaps the biggest danger. - bigger than relegation.
Whilst I do not claim to possess enough information relating to the club's accounts - I still 'believe' that the debt that we had / have has not gone away. I believe that the finances are structured in such a way that if Scally decides to leave, it ( the millions of £ ) of debt will resurface - to sink the Club.

The immediate prospect ( other than almost certain relegation.)
Nothing - No investment. No change in our style of football ( so negative ) No obvious motivation from the manager . No change in results.
What do we do - I don't know - but just to start I have no confidence in Taylor being able to stir the player to perform -beyond the pain barrier - as demonstrated by Warrington's manager & his teams' reaction in their FA cup game v Exeter on Friday. Taylor just stands at or sits in the dugout with practically NO inspiration to the players - who, for there part, have seldom played with any pain - let alone through it.

 

[BelfastBlue]

I think the orient game will be the decider. The most overused and misused word in football is must win so I won't use that but a good performance is essential.

As for the business side of it I share allwaysrights concerns over the debt status take lenny's points on board but don't think our current form can be put at our chairmans door. Everyone was generally happy with the team put together early season and were largely optimistic. Also I have I found running my business that whilst you need to able to make tough decisions when needed loyalty to staff generates it's own rewards. Taylor deserves a few more fixtures yet.

Lastly as a businessman why would scally sell up unless he was to personally make a significant sum. He draws a healthy salary each year and would need to be appropriately compensated financially to relinquish that.

 

[AshfordGill]

The scoreline didn’t show it to be a thrashing, but City won at a canter really and I felt that they won without ever having to really push themselves too hard. Other than the penalty their keeper didn’t have to make a real save, the stats said we had 3 shots on target well I don’t recall the other two.

In the past I have stood up for Scally, but I find myself today firmly agreeing with Lenny and Always, but I just don’t see anyone with amount of money that would be needed coming forward so I cannot see Scally going anywhere, but change is needed if we are going to have any chance of being a league 1 team season and unfortunately that means the manager and his coaching team.

The manager has lost all support from the fans, the stadium was the quietest I have known it for years yesterday. In the past a late goal reducing the deficit to just one would have been greeted by a huge noise from the fans and the team would be visibly lifted by both the goal and the response of the fans and we would lay siege the opponents goal to the end of the game (we wouldn’t normally equalise), but yesterday there was still no atmosphere after we scored, and yes we had 3 corners in quick succession but did we actually create a chance?

 

[alwaysright]

BelfastBlue
If I may just concern myself with the business side of the situation.
I can agree that Scally is funding his lifestyle - at the expense of the paying fans ( in one of the world's most expensive countries) - and might be unwise to 'walk away'.

I actually feel that he couldn't 'give away' the Club ! I'd be very surprised if anyone was foolish enough to even think about buying the club or investing in it.

My concern in my previous post relates to the debt that we had / have !! -- I believe that a figure of £12 Million was quoted. Where has it gone ? I have seen NO assurances that the Club owe NOTHING -and that NOBODY ( Scally ?? ) can at ANY time in the future restore the debt against the Club. IF THAT situation is possible, GFC's financial future hangs by a thread- and is at the whim of whomsover (Scally) stands to gain by calling in the debt and concreting over the pitch.

 

[MadJack]

I share your concern Mr alwaysright. It's worth taking a look at the company accounts for Priestfield Developments Ltd, which you can find on the Companies House website. The balance sheet value and the legal charge are interesting, as are the shareholders.

 

[alwaysright]

I share your concern Mr alwaysright. It's worth taking a look at the company accounts for Priestfield Developments Ltd, which you can find on the Companies House website. The balance sheet value and the legal charge are interesting, as are the shareholders.

GFC Holdings Ltd.
No telephone number available
No e mail address available.
No contact person available.
Lots of huge negative numbers -££££
smoke and mirrors
Nothing found to allay my fears that if Scally walks, he comes out of it quids in and GFC cease to be.

 

[itstimupnorth]

As I have mentioned on previous occasions, there is a lot of debt attributed to PS's activities in GFC, but most of that debt is outside the actual Football Club itself. There are 5 companies that are of material interest here. The most recent available accounts in each case are for the year ended 31st May 2013. The 2014 accounts need to be filed with Companies House by the end of February 2015 :

Gillingham Football Club Limited. This is what we think of as the Club. At 31/5 the club was actually worth £1.467m. The only significant creditor is Three Directors Limited (see below) which is owed £1.8m. This is money that was loaned to the club to buy back the ground from Priestfield Developments Ltd. The ground currently is valued on the books at £3m. GFC Holdings is the controlling shareholder.

GFC Holdings Ltd. is PS's company (owned 100% by him). The accounts that are submitted are consolidated accounts of those companies in which PS has a major interest, namely GFC (which is declared at 75% shareholding), and Priestfield Developments Ltd (declared at 100%). Effectively what GFC Holdings is is the nett value of PS's interest in GFC, which in May 2013 was -£5.829m. This is really no more than a summary of other accounts, and as Holdings is a just that, a holding, non-trading company in its own right there's no great point on dwelling on it further. I've covered GFC above so if we look at

Priestfield Developments Ltd. These accounts don't change very much as it was the company that PS used to buy the ground from GFC (for, if I remember, something of the order of £10m). He obviously borrowed that money from somewhere, and as he sold the ground back for only just over £1m there is a stonking great debt on the books. I only have the accounts from 2012, but those show a net debt of £9.05m, financed by a secured loan that is due for repayment after more than one year. What the Accounts do not state is who is giving the security for the loan.

Three Directors Ltd was formed by Messrs Scally, Quarrington and Anderson to lend the club £1.8m to buy back the ground (for £1.05m) and cover legal disbursments resulting therefrom. I haven't ever got hold of Three Directors accounts, but would expect to see a net valuation of -£1.8m in the company.

and finally, Larchpoint Ltd. I thought I had accounts from this company but can't find them, but I believe it was used as the vehicle that the nett debt of GFC was transferred into when the ground was bought back by the club and the financial restructuring took place - you might remember that the nett debt also 'disappeared' (at least off the books of GFC) at that time.

On the face of it therefore, any debt would appear to be the responsibility of PS, NOT GFC. But the great unknown is what, if any, level of guarantee has been given by GFC over the £9.05m loan on the books Priestfield Developments. In my view that is the ONLY matter that might be the undoing of us. It might be possible to find out through Companies House if GFC has actually given any guarantees on what is effectively a third party loan. I have no idea what the legal requirements are for reporting such matters, but would think there should be something in place as ultimately it represents a potential liability for the company, and in considering this ignore the PS connection - a law would cover all companies irrespective of ownership.

I have speculated in the past, certainly privately and possibly also on this board, that I believe the loss in Developments is being stored up somehow, and the Developments will be the major operating vehicle that PS will use when arranging finance for the new stadium.

I have in the past suggested that there must be qualified accountants out there who would be able to make more sense than me of what's going on - I'm not even a non-qualified accountant, but as far as I see it that is the bare bones of the situation.

 

[brb]

Excellent post itstimupnorth, imagine being the poor person trying to do the financial, KYC and sanction regulatory checks on that lot

 

[alwaysright]

Tim
Thanks for your post. It does break down the finances in the most 'simplest' terms possible - for any of us to have a chance of understanding the mechanics of the financial state of GFC.

It does not reveal anything that we didn't all probably knew or suspected - that Mr. Scally is (or in effect ) in total control of the money / and or the debt ( which is basically payable to him ).

Your informative post does NOTHING to allay my fears - that Mr. Scally can walk away from the Club - take his debt with him - for which the Club then becomes liable to him, and UNABLE to pay. MR.Scally could then call in the debt and force a winding up of the Club and get the contractors in to lay some concrete and bricks ahead of first and second fixing- and THEN you'll see the long awaited roof on the Brian Moore stand !
<you do know I mean tiles ?>

 

[MadJack]

And that is my worry also - at face value, it does seem that the Football Club feels vulnerable to whatever legal charge (as referenced in the latest accounts) is held over Priestfield Stadium.

In the meantime, if I look at the latest set of accounts, it seems that for his £1 investment, Mr Scally is able to draw a salary of at least £244,601pa and I would imagine that some other expenses, such as travel costs might also be paid for by the Football Club.

I will certainly not be putting any more of my money into Mr Scally's enterprises and will now only attend away matches.

 

[gfclukey]

From what I understand not being a particularly capable when it comes to money and debt is that Mr. Scally is in the nicest way, a tricky geezer (technical term) and hes found ways to distribute the clubs debts in a way that neither the club or him are particularly liable for them so I don't expect if Mr. Scally was to go that we would be lumped with huge debts.

 

[MadJack]

From what I understand not being a particularly capable when it comes to money and debt is that Mr. Scally is in the nicest way, a tricky geezer (technical term) and hes found ways to distribute the clubs debts in a way that neither the club or him are particularly liable for them so I don't expect if Mr. Scally was to go that we would be lumped with huge debts.

With respect, that seems pretty naïve. Somebody, somewhere, is owed a lot of money and the legal charge for that loan appears to be on Priestfield Stadium according to the company accounts (i.e. the bank can dispose of the stadium to recover the debt).

 

[itstimupnorth]

With respect, that seems pretty naïve. Somebody, somewhere, is owed a lot of money and the legal charge for that loan appears to be on Priestfield Stadium according to the company accounts (i.e. the bank can dispose of the stadium to recover the debt).

I don't see it that way. There is a charge on Priestfield Developments for the loan, but PD is owned by PS separately to GFC. The ground is owned by GFC, and GFC do have an outstanding charge, but I would guess that is to 3 Directors to cover the loan.

If the ground is only valued at £3m I can't see how a lender would accept it as collateral on a loan of more than 3 times that amount, especially if there is already a £1.8m charge against another loan.

 

[brb]

Looking at everything that has been discussed, is there not a possibility here that the bank wrote off the debt?...maybe the bank needed to clear its own books for want of better words...toxic debts....hence nothing to do with PS or the club...but an agreement reached of sorts, just thinking out loud.

 

[alwaysright]

Looking at everything that has been discussed, is there not a possibility here that the bank wrote off the debt?...maybe the bank needed to clear its own books for want of better words...toxic debts....hence nothing to do with PS or the club...but an agreement reached of sorts, just thinking out loud.

I'm sorry for laughing - but I doubt that GFC's debts qualify as toxic debt - we are not a 3rd World case - even if our football is 3rd rate.

 

[brb]

I'm sorry for laughing - but I doubt that GFC's debts qualify as toxic debt - we are not a 3rd World case - even if our football is 3rd rate.

by toxic i mean the banks had to write off a lot of debt that were unlikely to get repaid in the near future, I'm not saying GFC was one of them, just giving an alternative possibility. We all know the troubles the banks were in and may have wanted to get in more affordable debt then wait for debt that was never going to arrive, it's more beneficial to the banks when the regulators start looking at mergers and financial profitability.

so a quick repayment of 3M is better than say as example 10M that may never arrive as a mere scenario in any situation.

not sure but would it be classed as a non performing loan, and these are bad for the economy.