Gotcha. Always thought it was an older lady still worth the pipe. Always be learning ha. Good though, I assumed but good to know, them and Micky and Fuhrman’s big bag of money might be the dream ticket.
I thought young Mucky had links with a different consortium. He certanly wasn't getting a mention when this news broke originally, not linked with Furnham anyways. I might be wrong and things might have changed but not convinced he'll have owt to do with it.
It could well be, certainly leaning that way for me, when they were talking about the nufc collapse yesterday they said the exclusivity period is usually up to 6 weeks and that it had long lapsed, so we are coming up to the end of week 1 the Micky gray silence is deafening mind
It’s just trying to connect the dots mate, the consortium Micky had together last time didn’t appear to have funding, Stu offers contact info to RAWA, Micky talks up chasing money men, Fuhrman separate now from FPP. It’s calculated speculation if you like. Club accounts released for 18/19 now, showing an £11.5 million loss. Sounds dire, but that excludes the ‘missing’ £20 million and credit where it’s due on the cost base, slashed by over £18 million, credit to current owners for that. Interestingly, turnover only £7million or so down on the Championship season. The club truly does look massively sustainable and potentially hugely profitable.
From what i remember off last time it was Furnham on his own who 'bought' the club and O'Briens were with him at some point the weekend he was over. I still think it's this bid that went south last time that is in now as they're isn't an issue with DD, which I'm assuming means it's someone who has already had access to the books. Again, nowt but speculation on my part and probably a bit wishful thinking, especially when it came to the whole re-development of the surrounding area. Had a proper hard hump on over that tbh as the signified to me someone who was coming in for the long haul and with enough dollar to fund it.
You’re on the same thought path as me, and several others. Fuhrman seemed to be the one who was all in, then he separates from the rest as they decide to invest in Southampton. Like you say he was at the game with the O’Briens, who we all know have long held an interest and would be in it for right reasons, but for all they are super wealthy and successful in real terms, probably not ‘take a team to the PL’ level. I see a bit of Drumaville in the OB’s, they really want to do something with the club, really take it on. Given Fuhrman’s immense wealth, the lot of them together just ticks every box. You’d imagine the OB’s being the more ‘hands on’ part and Fuhrman being the money man. Wealth at his level mixed in small circles, he will have seen the money in the game at Premier League clubs with US owners, that’s Liverpool, that’s Arsenal, Man United, big chunks of Palace and Bournemouth, and a slice of West Ham. They know the marketing potential of the English game in the US is outrageous.
Apart from the fact that a £10m operating profit includes £35m of parachute income? Apart form the fact we have net current liabilities (bad) of £18m? Not to mention that £20.5m of money owed to it from SD etc has been written off. Apart from that, hunky dory!
But the £20million is supposedly included in the following years figures, the current year that any prospective owners will be viewing now. The parachute payment isn’t shown as an income on these. Hence if it was, no losses. The £35 million and the £20 million are the same thing. All comes down to ‘has that £20 million gone back in now, as claimed’ If it has, or is, or is being taken from purchase price, then we are fine.
Income (and profit) includes parachute money received in the year of £35m, regardless of the fact some of it was paid to Ellis Short - that's a separate transaction. So the amount paid to Ellis Short becomes an amount receivable from Madrox. The £20m is the amount receivable from Madrox written off. Turning a £10m operating profit into a £10m loss.
Which is exactly what I said in initial post? I just looked at it as an £11.5million loss but with £20million theoretically owed covering those losses. Whichever way you slice it that £20million stays in the club then the club made a profit in the 3rd tier. Even with parachute payments going forward, with £20million off the wage bill alone we are in good shape, the Nike and GAS deals are very decent for the level. The key to the club is getting fans back in the SOL and getting the new merchandise released, in staggered this hasn’t happened yet.
I don't want to derail this thread so I'll make this my last reply. My point was that a £10m operating profit includes £35m of parachute income (nothing to do with the £20m loan write off). In 2019/20 the parachute money reduced by £20m to £15m. Potentially changing a £10m profit in 2018/19 into a £10m loss in 2019/20. In 2020/21 there are no parachute payments (£15m less). Potentially changing a £10m loss in 2019/20 into a £25m loss in 2020/21. The loss will be less if they have cut costs further and at least maintained other income. No wonder SD is desperate to sell now - he can't afford that loss once let alone every year.
It’s not detailing anything it’s directly linked to the likelihood of a takeover. Point I am making is that £20 million write of goes back into the club, meaning a loss of maybe around £5million, which is quite impressive for the league. It does, like you say, mean Stu needs out right now and we need out of the league this season or it could be catastrophic. The wage bill will have come down further of course, if it was £27 million be far less now, it’s all a mess but it’s not a mess that isn’t manageable by money men who are financially savvy. I recall Stu saying the £20 million had been removed at request of the buyers, I’d imagine they’d do that for tax purposes or similar.
Apparently it wasn't the case that Micky grays consortium didn't have the funding according to this. https://www.sunderlandecho.com/spor...he-could-help-buy-club-stewart-donald-2890000
Dunno if you noticed but the date on the article is 19th June, wonder if he went back in with either the same consortium or a new one
