Window Cleaner

33 million was converted to equity when the Liebherr estate was still in probate, perhaps that was a sum that ML had earmarked for us. AS far as I know and I'm sure that those that follow the club account will confirm this all the rest (maybe about 60 million even if as Egg said she ploughed in another 28 million in April last) are loans and she obviously wants the money back. Other than that look at the thread I posted up, the wise men explain it there. Clapham Saint is a real illuminati on these things, whatever he says is 1000% gospel.

Of course she's loaned money to the company. 33 million was converted to equity about 3 years back, all the rest of the advances made by KL to St Marys Football Group or whatever is are loans, they can be taken back at will, she could even make the company borrow money from a bank or other lender and get her personal treasury reimboursed.

He'll deny everything and then tomorrow or the day after or the day after that some new fact will come to light which tends to suggest that he might have been economical with the truth yet again.

as far as I know, which is probably not enough, you can always take back sums that you've loaned to your company in the short term. You can even arrange it so that equity can be removed. Why did the company put out a solvency statemlent last year? Was it not explained to us at that time that it might even be a reduction in equity?. http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?46032-Cashing-In-Reduction-In-Share-Captial#.U9eb0Pl_ukw post 4.....still about are you ben ? and 22..now Clapham..there was a guy who knew his stuff.

No but even that amount is now in theory available through a manoeuvre in last years accounts.

........

they are bit part players from the Dutch league, De Vrij is a major international player who has just reached the semis of the WC. There is also a dearth of top class defenders, wiry wingers and non-international brick khazi CFs are more common.

Forster perhaps but we will not get Rojo, he has possibilities everywhere and Sporting want a lot of money for him.

Don't think we're interested in their cast offs actually. Do not forget that Mr Academy is running the football side of the club now. He probably believes in the hype about England being entirely populated by Saints players in 5 years time or that we're the next Barcelona..

Involved with what, selling successful players to the highest bidder. Don't think they've any power over that. If we can't field a team on opening Sunday they may give us a call to ask why, until then!!!!!!!.

Decent buyer, bolloakks I want one with shedloads of moolah that he throws around like pocket change whilst awarding us a 50 year 100 million per annum publicity contract with some iffy company over which he presides. If you're going to have an owner make it one with money, money that he doesn't mind spending. One that you can look up in forbes and it clearly states how much he or she has.

Well yes, it's called asset stripping.

Basically the club had too much liability, if we asked for say 200 million we probably wouldn't get it even with our old side. But if you sell some of the players for 100+ million and then the club for say 90/100 with no debt and some fine fixtures and fittings you might find a buyer. In our case I think you'll find the sum of the parts is worth more than the total. But you need to do that now because in a month or 2 the players might be worth far less.

Makes sense, probably didn't fancy 38 week-ends playing with kindergarten kids. We have no status in the game, we might have had for about 3 months but it has now left the building so players of a certain standing are reluctant to get on the bus.

Thomas Cooper have talked with arsenal on his behalf apparently but there is still a 3rd option available to him, big move, lot of upheaval . You cannot imagine how much the FFF weigh on these situations, they're very intrusive. Like Griezmann and Tottenham, didn't like that, Atletico on him like a flash.

Tottenham were after Stones, gone quiet, probably has something better in view.

they are professional footballers, career span at top level perhaps 8 years,if you start getting stuck in non-achievers your career prospects just suddenly disappear. Ask players stuck at Villa or Newcastle. Not in demand really and they end up taking backwards moves to get out of the spiral.

don't even know what the sanctions are on FFP, if they're anything similar to those operated by UEFA it's just a smack on the wrist and don't do it again until the next time. Liverpool must be breaching FFP regulations, what punishment do they risk.

We certainly aren't down, nothing is set in stone as of yet. However if we go with too many of the young academy players plus Hooieveld,Sharp,Mayuka etc on occasions we won't be far off at the end of the day. We seem to still be trying to sign players, whether they are of sufficient quality to ensure our survival remains to be seen. the PL is a hard league, there are no easy games and this is exactly what worries me with Koeman and some of the supposed recruits, they are used to steamrollering the opposition because they come from superior sides in their leagues. Saw Willem II against Marseille the other afty, now I know that Willem II are Dutch D2 but they were quite frankly atrocious, not even Sunday League quality, Bielsa doesn't have a great squad at Marseille and yet they just strolled past the Dutchmen.

But would i not be right in thinking that 52 million £ is (or was) the salarial mass for the whole club whereas FFP refers only to player salaries IIRC. As the FFP cap for this coming season is higher than 52 million anyway it is highly unlikely that we would have breached it under normal circumstances. Now it comes down to "have we increased non TV revenues" in any way at all because FFP salary cap is linked to that alone. Selling Shaw for instance, something I've always advocated because I truly believe there is better available for less, now that gives us more CAP space and we already had firm offers apparently because it is a non-broadcasting revenue. Making our own shirts, that probably increases commercial revenue a bit as well, perhaps Veho pay a bit more tha AAP3. The salarial mass cannot be the sole reason for this unprecendented exodus of senior players.

the part that I revealed to you which came from a person who was actually Riberao Preto with the FFF was that Morgan would in no way be a Saint's player at the end of the transfer window and that his exit was already planned because there was no way that he could possibly be persuaded to stay. Oddly enough it was in a thread about Morgan Schneiderlin transfer rumours. As I got a lot of bolloaks about it I presumed it wasn't worth going any further down the avenue because it made no difference to anyone. Guan was telling you all all was rosy rosy so what could I add to that. If you remember on that day I contested his authority to say what he was saying in the way he was saying it. Once again I got hassle, no problem i can take it but sometimes I don't quite see the point in inviting any more. If you were to look back over the entire forum since 19 th January last I think that you would find somewhere that the only person to even reflect on the imbalance between the clubs book value (ie sale value) and it's liabilities would be, well yours truly. I reflect on a lot of things, it's what I do, I sometimes put them out there for discussion but when they bring only scorn and abuse then I back off as a rule.

Absolutely 52 million sounds about right, it was 41.7 million in the last accounts I believe, a couple of players have had improved contracts since then but we've lost some top heavy stuff (like Cortese for instance) and we haven't suddenly doubled everyones money.MP was lowly paid by all accounts, probably had a decent bonus clause though.Still against our income of what 100 million + a year no-one could really say that salarial mass was out of hand I'd have thought. Isn't that what GM is trying to say?

How long have the club got to pay for it though, surely it's not a cash on the nail job.

good enough for me, I like facts, positive or negative they're always what you need. Problem is on this forum positive non facts tend to be considered superior to negative facts.

So in fact the cost of Staplewood is a problem,is that right ? And to think I've been lambasted constantly for querying it's cost/utility ratio.