The majority of the Close bros money was used to pay Ellis Short by Stewart Donald's words. That was for SD's shareholding in the club.
Serious takeover talk
- Thread starter Smug in Boots
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
The majority of the Close bros money was used to pay Ellis Short by Stewart Donald's words. That was for SD's shareholding in the club.
Ok, so who paid the salaries? Remember we had a huge wage bill last season. You’ve accounted for the parachute money etc. That’s fine.
Who paid the wages and running costs of the club, with reduced income, and Premier League costs?
Remember, you’ve accounted for the parachute payments. Who paid the wages, and did so whilst actively rescuing costs and retaining the low level of debt?
Who’s money paid these things, which were far above and beyond the £5million he paid, plus all gate receipts etc?
So you don't have access to the accounts? Thought not. Hopefully it is your last post on the matter.
C
Chunksafc
Guest
Enough now please?
You have made your point, so leave it.
As I said earlier on rtg your posts wouldn't have been up more than seconds, that should tell you enough that on a subject ad sensitive as this at a time when everywhere is under scrutiny that you shouldn't be posting on a forum you have no stake in
As you've stated, they've done nothing illegal so if that's the case they have no requirement to justify it to you, me nor any other bugger out there.
It does come across as if you have a vendetta against the owners with how often you bring these things up.
Probably time to give it a rest mate.
I know auditing has got a pretty bad reputation atm but come on! I'm sure they'll be checking a £8m payment to ES has gone to the Madrox loan account.
I wouldn't expect an answer marra s it doesn't fit the agenda.
Casually excluding the £20million plus running costs from all sums.
The mind boggles.
Revenue £20m
Costs £32m
£34m parachute payment
£25m to SBC = £9m left
£9m +20m revenue = £29m of £32m.
£3m from Sartori. Some money up front for Maja. He could have put it in. Lots of options.
I think it's because some think if he sells SAFC for £40m he'll then keep the money rather than replace the club's money from the parachute payments he used to buy the club.
It like me getting you to give me the £35 you got in bonus payments.
I then put this towards a £40 ticket your selling so I only pay £5 myself.
I then sell the ticket for £40 to someone else and keep it.
I don't pay you your £35 back as it was a bonus that came with the ticket.
Basically you're SAFC and I'm SD in this make believe ****e!
I don't believe it in any way of course but **** does happen in business.
Last edited:
You said it was your last post
For God sake man
£20 million revenue from where?
We still owed money out on players as well, there was an additional huge hit on Alvarez, and we did not get paid in a lump for Maja.
C
Chunksafc
Guest
I'd give it a rest as you have made your point over and over again.
I'd also remind you for the 3rd time that your posts wouldnt last 5 minutes on rtg, so don't take the piss here
But revenue in isn’t pure profit. You can have revenue of £100 million but outgoings of £105million.
That’s not cash in the bank. Revenue and turnover isn’t a pot of money.
That's why I said £32m costs?
The £20m left a £12m shortfall. £9m was covered by the parachute money
Are these cash inflows and outflows? Or historic sales and expenses? Or ongoing annual sales and expenses? Each one makes a huge difference.
Have you included the £10m NDong shaped hole in ES's cashflow forecast that needed plugging?
Last post on the matter, still babbling on.zzzzz
- Status