No melodrama: we've lost our club

[dww]

The club debt was paid off as part of the initial takeover. This was paid for through a loan (some towards the debt, the rest to moores). This loan is being repaid by the club not G&H. All we've done is swap one debt for another.

When have we ever had so much money before? As was mentioned above this summer was always going to be different than previous ones due to tv, cl and big sales. We had much more money (nothing to do with the take over) and so could behaving differently in the transfer market.

But Moores obviously had less financial flexibility to pay of the loan and move the stadium plan forward or he would not have sold a club he loves. Therefore that either the extra money would previously have gone into repaying our existing debt or into the stadium without G&H seems likely.

The fact is that they originally paid for the deal including removing the debt from personal loans (i.e. not debt on the club). Whether that changes in the future is still a matter of debate but it is not currently the case so at least at present this payment has to be factored in to what they have put into the club.

Only a few clubs (and nearly all of those have had recent take overs) spent bigger than previously last summer. It seems likely to me that this indicates that any huge income improvement can't have filtered through as yet. Otherwise I suspect teams like Wigan and Middleborough would have spent more.

I'm yet to make my mind up about the new owners but I think they deserve a couple of years (or a major act of insanity like sacking Rafa) before I start reaching for the pitchfork and flaming torch.

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

Why is going back on promises being sensible?

That promise should never had been made, that was a mistake.

He's desperate to sign, so I don't see him going anywhere.

We aren't Chelsea, who knows what other targets we have? Signing him now while we still have 4 others seems OTT to me. Sell Momo first.

[redblood]

Yes. That's why it's a possibility.

Have you heard something mate, need we be worried.
Sorry just read your post above. Ta mate.

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

I have to say that the truth is clearly more complex than either side want to portray. From G&H's point of view they paid back £45m of debt including the £10m to Moores for Kuyt and then we went ahead and made record buys in the summer.

The nett spend argument is hard to pin down as a/ we wouldn't see all of the nominal fees come back to us after agents etc. take their cuts and b/ there is the increased wages to take into account. In my opinion there was a step change in buying style and power this summer - when have we ever made two £10m+ buys in a summer? When have we spend £6m on a youngster who might not see much first team action immediately (Lucas)?

To me this "the Count was right and G&H have done nothing" argument is equally ludicrous as an exaggeration of what has happened as the claims that we are on a par with Man United in spending terms.

I also think that maybe we should look towards the old Arsenal model of spending rather than that of United as a realistic and sustainable one which we can move forward with. We can then spend more when a new stadium is available.

Moderators, change this mans custom title to "Est's Voice of Reason".

Very well said sir.

[Roboklopp]

That promise should never had been made, that was a mistake.

He's desperate to sign, so I don't see him going anywhere.

We aren't Chelsea, who knows what other targets we have? Signing him now while we still have 4 others seems OTT to me. Sell Momo first.

I agree we need to offload Momo simply from a logistical viewpoint, let alone financial.

However, there seem to be a few promises that have been made recently which have been broken & that is of serious concern to me.

[bazza76]

Yes. That's why it's a possibility.

Mascher said he wouldn't contemplate joining another English club out of respect to us. I know that is not a binding contract or anything.

[Alpha]

Sounds like the club being sensible to me.

Yes he's a good player, but he plays a position in which we really don't need to be spending £10m plus on.

I still think we'll sign him, but we'll wait until June when we can sell Sissoko.

Not only would it be understandable if the club want to wait until Mascherano's current loan deal expires before sorting a permanent contract, it would also be understandable if they want to wait until the loan deal expires before they even make a decision whether or not to keep him at all.

Personally, I think Masher has done more than enough already to earn himself a contract but that doesn't mean the club have an obligation to offer it to him early. I wish they would but I don't blame them for preferring to wait. £17 million is a significant fee.

Having said that, I'll be absolutely livid if the club let him slip through their fingers.

[blacky]

If we wait till the summer and his loan contract extention expires does the 17 million clause expire also?

[DannyMan2006]

If the option on Mascher remains until the end of the season, why would anyone buy him now?

He could get a serios injury between now and the summer. It was their decision to loan him for 18 months so they should shut the **** up.

[jayjay]

Unfortunately in the real world NOBODY would give written guarantees as to how their purchase would be financed

Thats private and personal to them, they would give verbal agreements (and even gave them publicly) but the structure of their finances is their own internal matter and not for Moores to dictate

Really AF you need to think in real world business terms not just in terms of the Utopian world you live in

As I stated at the time of the takeover Moores did all he could to ensure we would not be saddled with debt and any debt would be personally guaranteed by the yanks, DIC etc. Apparently DIC told Parry and Moores to get real were as the Yanks told em what they wanted to hear….. P.S I don’t have any contacts in the club, I work in the world of finance and an old colleague buddy works with some people close to the proposed initial financers of the takeover.

[sean_lfc]

Not only would it be understandable if the club want to wait until Mascherano's current loan deal expires before sorting a permanent contract, it would also be understandable if they want to wait until the loan deal expires before they even make a decision whether or not to keep him at all.

Personally, I think Masher has done more than enough already to earn himself a contract but that doesn't mean the club have an obligation to offer it to him early. I wish they would but I don't blame them for preferring to wait. £17 million is a significant fee.

Having said that, I'll be absolutely livid if the club let him slip through their fingers.

If the option on Mascher remains until the end of the season, why would anyone buy him now?

He could get a serios injury between now and the summer. It was their decision to loan him for 18 months so they should shut the **** up.

Are reasonable answers

[Tee]

How heironic eh? After all the crap said about letting Macca and Owen run down their contracts here we are saying it is ok to wait until Mascher's contract expires before closing the deal?

He has every right to sort out hisfuture before then, and we should show confidence in him and agree the deal - I am sure we would not have to actualy pay the fee until the summer anyway.

[MindGuerrillas]

But Moores obviously had less financial flexibility to pay of the loan and move the stadium plan forward or he would not have sold a club he loves.

He sold the club because we didn't have enough money to compete with the likes of United. To compete we needed an injection of new money, money that he must of hoped the new owners would provide. That, as you say, was the whole point of the takeover. This has not happened though. What we have now is simply a different name above the door. The financial situation of the club is no better due to no new money being put in.

The fact is that they originally paid for the deal including removing the debt from personal loans (i.e. not debt on the club). Whether that changes in the future is still a matter of debate but it is not currently the case so at least at present this payment has to be factored in to what they have put into the club.

Yes, they did buy the club with personally secured loans. However, just because they are in their name and secured on their assets it does not mean that they will be making the repayments from their own pockets. It will be the club making the repayments regardless of whose name the loan is in. Hicks is a man that has made his money in leveraged buyouts. In these leveraged buyouts, such as his purchase of the club, they always get the company they are buying to pay for it themselves, this is how they make their money - it will be no different here. They certainly won't be taking one cent out of their own pockets in this deal. Once the business has repaid the loan they used to buy it with they will then own the business with no outstanding debt. They then sell the business and pocket the full market value of it without having spent a penny.

The way to think of it is if you were to buy a house to rent on a buy-to-let mortgage. You take out the loan in your name but it is your tenants that pay the mortgage. Once they've paid rent for long enough, and paid off the loan, you can sell the house and pocket the full value of the house. You are now hundreds of thousands better off and haven't expended a penny of your own money. Obviously this example takes years to pay off unlike the business deals that will be repaid over a much shorter time period.

[desertscouser]

Moderators, change this mans custom title to "Est's Voice of Reason".

Very well said sir.

I concurr. Dww's post has to be the best on this thread.

[DannyMan2006]

How heironic eh? After all the crap said about letting Macca and Owen run down their contracts here we are saying it is ok to wait until Mascher's contract expires before closing the deal?

He has every right to sort out hisfuture before then, and we should show confidence in him and agree the deal - I am sure we would not have to actualy pay the fee until the summer anyway.

It's all about what makes financial sense.

There was no sense in letting Owen and Maccas deals run down - we lost millions. But it makes financial sense to wait until the summer with JM. At the end of the day, Mascher and his agents agreed the deal, as did we. There can be no complaints that he has to see out the rest of the deal.

If we have the cash in January, then why not complete the deal. But if the cash is better served elsewhere, then wait until the summer. Obviously Mascher wants his long term future sorted, just like everyone else, but a contract is a contract.