BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
conyoviejo
Posts: 4545
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
Been Liked: 1848 times
Has Liked: 1152 times
Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by conyoviejo » Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:23 pm

Latest rumour of a signing .

https://youtu.be/StAvRDRzB8Q

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:43 pm

I wrote a massive reply to CP’s post earlier, that then disappeared when I tried to post. Probably for the best :lol:

The gist of it was that, whilst I appreciate the sensible and reasoned debate, and recognise the need to look at this from a different perspective, I respectfully disagree.

What our Board have done very well is make hay while the sun shone. They developed a cash pile whilst investing in some infrastructure (Barnfield = good, I’m not so mad keen on the quadrants). They’ve also reduced our future liabilities on player sales. We’re in good shape financially. Sean Dyche has said so. Credit to the Chairman and the Board for that.

You do have to ask why though? Is limited outstanding debt on players a good thing, or a sign we’ve turned the investment taps off? Ditto the cash pile? You could argue that has not motivated by a desire to do right by the club and ensure it’s sustainability, more to prep the club for takeover so they can all sell up and profit.

Will we really be thanking and lauding their prudence in a few seasons if they sell out, leave us short and we’re back in the Championship next year with an inexperienced leadership structure trying to grapple with the loss of key players/manager?

Yes, Covid has hit our numbers, the cash has probably eroded. Yes, there will be some short-term decline in revenue from all sources. But the long term structural direction for the PL (best managers, players, most entertaining and unpredictable league in the world) is very strong. Revenues could increase from a whole variety of opportunities post-covid.

It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling.

Final point is that I’m prepared to give the Chairman and Board the benefit of the doubt. My key targets for this summer are all in the Championship and still available, so let’s see what happens, but in my mind it will be gross mismanagement if they don’t find a way to strengthen this year, Covid or not.

randomclaret2
Posts: 4170
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 1810 times
Has Liked: 2718 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by randomclaret2 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:47 pm

It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling."
Spot on

Paul Waine
Posts: 6713
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1564 times
Has Liked: 1931 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Paul Waine » Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:54 pm

NewClaret: "It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling."

You don't mention who should provide this debt. Do you want the directors to lend the club money? banks? other financial institutions (hedge funds, perhaps)? What terms should apply?

UTC

randomclaret2
Posts: 4170
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 1810 times
Has Liked: 2718 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by randomclaret2 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:59 pm

If we go down this time, it will be an awful.lot harder to come back up.
This user liked this post: huw.Y.WattfromWare

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:14 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:43 pm
I wrote a massive reply to CP’s post earlier, that then disappeared when I tried to post. Probably for the best :lol:

The gist of it was that, whilst I appreciate the sensible and reasoned debate, and recognise the need to look at this from a different perspective, I respectfully disagree.

What our Board have done very well is make hay while the sun shone. They developed a cash pile whilst investing in some infrastructure (Barnfield = good, I’m not so mad keen on the quadrants). They’ve also reduced our future liabilities on player sales. We’re in good shape financially. Sean Dyche has said so. Credit to the Chairman and the Board for that.

You do have to ask why though? Is limited outstanding debt on players a good thing, or a sign we’ve turned the investment taps off? Ditto the cash pile? You could argue that has not motivated by a desire to do right by the club and ensure it’s sustainability, more to prep the club for takeover so they can all sell up and profit.

Will we really be thanking and lauding their prudence in a few seasons if they sell out, leave us short and we’re back in the Championship next year with an inexperienced leadership structure trying to grapple with the loss of key players/manager?

Yes, Covid has hit our numbers, the cash has probably eroded. Yes, there will be some short-term decline in revenue from all sources. But the long term structural direction for the PL (best managers, players, most entertaining and unpredictable league in the world) is very strong. Revenues could increase from a whole variety of opportunities post-covid.

It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling.

Final point is that I’m prepared to give the Chairman and Board the benefit of the doubt. My key targets for this summer are all in the Championship and still available, so let’s see what happens, but in my mind it will be gross mismanagement if they don’t find a way to strengthen this year, Covid or not.
We “were’ in a reasonably strong financial position pre Covid....but our last reported accounts for June 2019 illustrated that we were already approaching break even point with the increase in our wage bill and reducing amounts coming in from player sales. This is all before the impact of Covid.

You can see from the figures estimated for the reduction in tv and gate receipt etc revenue that is very likely to have used up our cash balances. I’m guessing our wage bill for the July 2020 accounts to be £90m plus (partly because of the 13 month period). Everything is pointing to us posting losses for 2020. We’ve reduced our wage bill - probably to nearer £80m and it’s a fair guess this has been done to reflect the forecast reduction in revenue in 20/21.

It’s not looking good - but could have been a hell of a lot worse but for our previous prudence and success in making good profit on player sales.

Our board don’t want to or can’t put anymore money into the club or subsidise losses (one and the same thing). Leaves us with very few options other than find new investment or get into debt - and as already posted who would be prepared to lend the club money in such an uncertain environment when nobody has a real clue what future tv deals are going to look like.

Of course relegation is not a great option either but I don’t see any obvious or easy solutions. I don’t understand why fans would think that our board would not take the easy option if it existed....which it clearly doesn’t !!!
This user liked this post: Taffy on the wing

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 8:59 pm

Image
Paul Waine wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:54 pm
NewClaret: "It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling."

You don't mention who should provide this debt. Do you want the directors to lend the club money? banks? other financial institutions (hedge funds, perhaps)? What terms should apply?

UTC
Well, of course ideally we wouldn’t need to raise debt. And to an extent I’d imagine that the way deals are structured this year should mean there’s a way to spread the cost such that that’s not necessary.

But, if it were, options would be:

1. Govt Covid Fund. I understand Spurs raised that for £175m of govt secured low cost debt. Why not us? It may be closed now, in which case we should’ve been faster to assess and utilise - especially if our financial modelling showed we would not be able to buy players this summer without. Look at Spurs; taking on massive chunks of cheap govt-backed debt, then investing it in the team this summer. Why not us?

2. Banks. To accumulate £40m of cash in the bank with no debt means we must be cash generative. Accepting others think that this would be unnatractive to banks, I see no reason whatsoever why a prudent, cash generative, debt free PL team would not be offered a decent working capital facility by a bank.

3. Bonds. Potential issuance of bonds on the bond markets. Not ideal, but better than...

4. Other capital raising - hedge funds, PE houses, etc. Debt with the ability to transfer to equity if not repaid, thus decent terms.

There’s no shortage of options. Other clubs spent £1.25bn - equivalent to £62m each while we spent -£1m. I can’t believe that the £1.25bn has all been spent from wealthy owners picking up the tabs - it will be from their clubs credit facilities and on a tab (future payments). What I’m saying is we should have access to a suitable debt facility that we draw on when needed (like now).
Last edited by NewClaret on Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

randomclaret2
Posts: 4170
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 1810 times
Has Liked: 2718 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by randomclaret2 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:01 pm

"Our board don’t want to or can’t put anymore money into the club or subsidise losses"
This is a genuine question...how much have each of our directors put into the club ?

warksclaret
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 449 times
Has Liked: 37 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by warksclaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:04 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:43 pm
I wrote a massive reply to CP’s post earlier, that then disappeared when I tried to post. Probably for the best :lol:

The gist of it was that, whilst I appreciate the sensible and reasoned debate, and recognise the need to look at this from a different perspective, I respectfully disagree.

What our Board have done very well is make hay while the sun shone. They developed a cash pile whilst investing in some infrastructure (Barnfield = good, I’m not so mad keen on the quadrants). They’ve also reduced our future liabilities on player sales. We’re in good shape financially. Sean Dyche has said so. Credit to the Chairman and the Board for that.

You do have to ask why though? Is limited outstanding debt on players a good thing, or a sign we’ve turned the investment taps off? Ditto the cash pile? You could argue that has not motivated by a desire to do right by the club and ensure it’s sustainability, more to prep the club for takeover so they can all sell up and profit.

Will we really be thanking and lauding their prudence in a few seasons if they sell out, leave us short and we’re back in the Championship next year with an inexperienced leadership structure trying to grapple with the loss of key players/manager?

Yes, Covid has hit our numbers, the cash has probably eroded. Yes, there will be some short-term decline in revenue from all sources. But the long term structural direction for the PL (best managers, players, most entertaining and unpredictable league in the world) is very strong. Revenues could increase from a whole variety of opportunities post-covid.

It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling.

Final point is that I’m prepared to give the Chairman and Board the benefit of the doubt. My key targets for this summer are all in the Championship and still available, so let’s see what happens, but in my mind it will be gross mismanagement if they don’t find a way to strengthen this year, Covid or not.
I am with you NC. The Championship has provided our best buys-Heaton, Wood,Tarks,Arfield,Barton,Gray,Westwood,Barnes,Rodriguez,Brownhill. I am certain there is a great ,up and coming CH in the Division. Is Webster of Brighton not one of them. The thought of Kevin Long starting v Spurs and Chelsea is frightening. Bear in mind Ben will need several 90 minutes of friendlies before he can play. Sadly I feel you are being optimistic. If the Board did not shop in this area pre to the window closure, I cant see it happening in the next 9 days They are lucky in that we have an international break taking the focus off the PL. When the break is over the last window will almost have closed. I hope I am wrong.
This user liked this post: NewClaret

Wokingclaret
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 155 times
Has Liked: 394 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Wokingclaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:25 pm

randomclaret2 wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:01 pm
"Our board don’t want to or can’t put anymore money into the club or subsidise losses"
This is a genuine question...how much have each of our directors put into the club ?
Nothing well without it being guaranteed

Give their time

Bought shares, some from other people.

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:31 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:25 pm
Nothing well without it being guaranteed

Give their time

Bought shares, some from other people.
How’s it “guaranteed” ?

Wokingclaret
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 155 times
Has Liked: 394 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Wokingclaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:33 pm

Loans, with a set return
Or shares

superdimitri
Posts: 1892
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
Been Liked: 355 times
Has Liked: 268 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by superdimitri » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:40 pm

wilks_bfc wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:26 pm
Didn't realise Mario Götze had been released by Dortmund
That would be a signing and a half
Mandzukic is more a Dyche kind of player. 34 but still a better signing that Peter Crouch ;)

If we gonna lump it up in games, may as well make sure we have as many target men as we can, possibly also exploring playing target men on the wing too.

Paul Waine
Posts: 6713
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1564 times
Has Liked: 1931 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Paul Waine » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:41 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 8:59 pm
Well, of course ideally we wouldn’t need to raise debt. And to an extent I’d imagine that the way deals are structured this year should mean there’s a way to spread the cost such that that’s not necessary.

But, if it were, options would be:

1. Govt Covid Fund. I understand Spurs rapped that for £175m of govt secured low cost debt. Why not us? It may be closed now, in which case we should’ve been faster to assess and utilise - especially if our financial modelling showed we would not be able to buy players this summer without. Look at Spurs; taking on massive chunks of cheap govt-backed debt, then investing it in the team this summer. Why not us?

2. Banks. To accumulate £40m of cash in the bank with no debt means we must be cash generative. Accepting others think that this would be unnatractive to banks, I see no reason whatsoever why a prudent, cash generative, debt free PL team would not be offered a decent working capital facility by a bank.

3. Bonds. Potential issuance of bonds on the bond markets. Not ideal, but better than.

4. Other capital raising - hedge funds, PE houses, etc. Debt with the ability to transfer to equity if not repaid, thus decent terms.

There’s no shortage of options. Other clubs spent £1.25bn - equivalent to £62m each while we spent -£1m. I can’t believe that the £1.25bn has all been spent from wealthy owners picking up the tabs - it will be from their clubs credit facilities and on a tab (future payments). What I’m saying is we should have access to a suitable debt facility that we drawn on when needed (like now).
I fear you are making the mistake of looking at last year's accounts rather than thinking about the club's current financial prospects. The £41m cash balance was there on 30-June-2019 - a lot of things have gone on since then.

I don't understand how Spurs have accessed the Gov't Covid Funds. I imagine it's got something to do with their brand new, multi-event stadium. I'm sure there's some security for the borrowings there. What would you think we could raise if it was possible to borrow money against the security of Turf Moor?

Banks - assuming we were generating cash in 2018/19, I don't expect we were in 2019/20 - and looking forward we will be even less so. You could describe Burnley as prudent if we don't spend money on bringing one or two new first teamers into the club - but spending money like that doesn't suggest the club is being prudence. Banks would not rely on last year's accounts (2018/19) or 2019/20 that we haven't seen, yet. They will want to know what things look like in 2020/21 and beyond. The important question is "how will any borrowings be repaid."

Bond market - it's a total non-starter for all but the largest football clubs. What credit rating do you think Burnley would get?

I think the ALK Capital/SPAC deal fits into the space of hedge funds/PE - though it would be equity from day 1. Maybe a new investor, with some diversified risks could also add some debt, but I don't see this being off the back of Burnley's balance sheet.

Chelsea, City and Leeds appear to be the biggest spenders - subject to final figures from the late night rush. Burnley's net £1m spend is above the net negatives of West Ham, Palace and Brighton.

"Spreading the cost" as you describe it, btw, means going into debt. If we agree to buy a player for £10 million, pay £4m on signing, then we also have debt of £6m. This will be shown as creditors in the accounts - money owed to other football clubs. If there are also add-ons, subject to performance/other events, the add-ons will be shown as contingent commitments - effectively, additional debt that is due if and when these performance events have occurred.

Burnleyareback2
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:07 pm
Been Liked: 477 times
Has Liked: 972 times
Location: Mostly Europe

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnleyareback2 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:58 pm

randomclaret2 wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:01 pm
"Our board don’t want to or can’t put anymore money into the club or subsidise losses"
This is a genuine question...how much have each of our directors put into the club ?
Bought the shares to join the board.

What do you think they should put in?

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:20 pm

Wokingclaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:33 pm
Loans, with a set return
Or shares
Are you making this stuff up ?
Or do you just not understand it ?

IanMcL
Posts: 19103
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:27 pm
Been Liked: 3851 times
Has Liked: 4471 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by IanMcL » Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:35 pm

These 2 users liked this post: NewClaret JarrowClaret

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:47 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:41 pm
I fear you are making the mistake of looking at last year's accounts rather than thinking about the club's current financial prospects. The £41m cash balance was there on 30-June-2019 - a lot of things have gone on since then.

I don't understand how Spurs have accessed the Gov't Covid Funds. I imagine it's got something to do with their brand new, multi-event stadium. I'm sure there's some security for the borrowings there. What would you think we could raise if it was possible to borrow money against the security of Turf Moor?

Banks - assuming we were generating cash in 2018/19, I don't expect we were in 2019/20 - and looking forward we will be even less so. You could describe Burnley as prudent if we don't spend money on bringing one or two new first teamers into the club - but spending money like that doesn't suggest the club is being prudence. Banks would not rely on last year's accounts (2018/19) or 2019/20 that we haven't seen, yet. They will want to know what things look like in 2020/21 and beyond. The important question is "how will any borrowings be repaid."

Bond market - it's a total non-starter for all but the largest football clubs. What credit rating do you think Burnley would get?

I think the ALK Capital/SPAC deal fits into the space of hedge funds/PE - though it would be equity from day 1. Maybe a new investor, with some diversified risks could also add some debt, but I don't see this being off the back of Burnley's balance sheet.

Chelsea, City and Leeds appear to be the biggest spenders - subject to final figures from the late night rush. Burnley's net £1m spend is above the net negatives of West Ham, Palace and Brighton.

"Spreading the cost" as you describe it, btw, means going into debt. If we agree to buy a player for £10 million, pay £4m on signing, then we also have debt of £6m. This will be shown as creditors in the accounts - money owed to other football clubs. If there are also add-ons, subject to performance/other events, the add-ons will be shown as contingent commitments - effectively, additional debt that is due if and when these performance events have occurred.
Spurs: https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... rus-impact

Not secured on stadium from what I can tell. Funding not supposed to be spent on signings, allegedly, but how they could have signed players this summer without this funding is beyond me??? Spurs accessed this funding with remarkable speed and what I’m saying is that, if it were available to football clubs (as it obviously was), we should perhaps have considered that... if it were necessary. Since we didn’t, I can only assume it wasn’t. Interest rate: 0.5%!

Banks: I do understand that banks consider current/future trading performance. They will also consider past performance (especially at this time whilst uncertainty reigns) and I don’t believe they would deny us to a sensible level of debt (say £20m, 1/6th or so of historic turnover - like having a £120k a year job & wanting to borrow £20k as your only debt). In fact, I’d be amazed if we didn’t have such a working capital facility already. On the old accounts, there’s potentially 9 months of positive cash flow to add to the £41m, so the starting point may have been even better.

Bonds: perhaps in the UK. US bond markets are far more accessible and our banks are international. Again, don’t believe it is implausible for BFC to raise relatively small sums via bonds in the global bond markets. Worth noting that Spurs recently raised £500-odd million on these markets to restructure their stadium debt. I’m not talking such huge sums.

I was talking about a loan from a hedge fund/PE house, but yes, perhaps they are planning an equity issue with ALK. I’d support that - if they get it done before the window closes!!!

Understand your point re: how a player acquisition is treated in the accounts, but does holding some creditors on the balance sheet matter a jot to a football club? All that matters is:

- financially, maintain free cash flow and liquidity in the short term. In the longer term the balance sheet and P&L can be repaired.
- strategically, staying in the prem because if we don’t we lose A LOT more than the £20 odd million it would cost resolve the problem areas of the squad.

My view is we should be able to do both (manage cash flow and buy players), especially from such a good starting point. But, for anyone who disagrees, why would Sean keep saying what a strong financial position we are in otherwise? Is he lying?

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:54 pm

IanMcL wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:35 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLlSlK7NnYM

Oh dear!
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Surely stuff like this is unhelpful to any negotiations? They’ll be trying to spank us now. If there are any negotiations of course.

jojomk1
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:20 am
Been Liked: 330 times
Has Liked: 197 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by jojomk1 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:09 am


lakedistrictclaret
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:30 am
Been Liked: 187 times
Has Liked: 53 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by lakedistrictclaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:26 am

There is an article by Tony Cascarino in today's "Times " discussing the winners and losers in the transfer window.

Unsurprisingly, we're one of the three losers, along with Wolves and Brighton. He's scratching his head looking at our transfer policy.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1967
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 366 times
Has Liked: 1589 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:29 am

Are we really being compared to Spurs??

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:14 am

Burnley Ace wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:29 am
Are we really being compared to Spurs??
I’m not comparing us to Spurs. I’m using them
as an example of a club, already heavily indebted, that has raised further debt during covid as I was asked how I would raise funds. The exact avenue we chose is a bit irrelevant though, I just don’t believe there are none open to us - it’s a case of which is best.

I also can’t reconcile why Dyche, who presumably is closer to the club finances than anyone on here, says we’re in great shape yet others suggest we’re so cash strapped we can’t make signings?

The frustrating thing for me is that we’re (in my opinion) a creative midfielder, right winger and attacking right back away from the best BFC team I’ve ever seen and probably ever will. Experienced CH cover would be nice too.

I don’t expect to address all of those positions in one window (although you could argue some should have been addressed last 2-3). Maybe one or two this window, one next, one next summer. It’d be nice to think that the Board had a plan to do so...

Paul Waine
Posts: 6713
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1564 times
Has Liked: 1931 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:34 am

lakedistrictclaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:26 am
There is an article by Tony Cascarino in today's "Times " discussing the winners and losers in the transfer window.

Unsurprisingly, we're one of the three losers, along with Wolves and Brighton. He's scratching his head looking at our transfer policy.
Cascarino in The Times:

Burnley
Sean Dyche will need another miracle this year. Four free transfers and two undisclosed deals tell you all you need to know. I am scratching my head looking at their business. Dale Stephens is a decent player but he couldn’t even get in the Brighton team. In the past, they’ve been savvy in the market by signing the likes of Chris Wood and James Tarkowski. They’re good at what they do. But if ever there was a manager that needed backing it was Dyche this year and it feels for the first time that he’s really got his back against the wall.

randomclaret2
Posts: 4170
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 1810 times
Has Liked: 2718 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by randomclaret2 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:38 am

Four free transfers and two undisclosed deals tell you all you need to know
Who is he referring to ?

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1967
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 366 times
Has Liked: 1589 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:01 am

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:14 am
I’m not comparing us to Spurs. I’m using them
as an example of a club, already heavily indebted, that has raised further debt during covid as I was asked how I would raise funds. The exact avenue we chose is a bit irrelevant though, I just don’t believe there are none open to us - it’s a case of which is best.

I also can’t reconcile why Dyche, who presumably is closer to the club finances than anyone on here, says we’re in great shape yet others suggest we’re so cash strapped we can’t make signings?

The frustrating thing for me is that we’re (in my opinion) a creative midfielder, right winger and attacking right back away from the best BFC team I’ve ever seen and probably ever will. Experienced CH cover would be nice too.

I don’t expect to address all of those positions in one window (although you could argue some should have been addressed last 2-3). Maybe one or two this window, one next, one next summer. It’d be nice to think that the Board had a plan to do so...
That fine but you do accept that their ability to raise finance is completely different to ours? So much so that it is incomparable.

kentonclaret
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 530 times
Has Liked: 88 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by kentonclaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:12 am

Now settled in at their new home it was reported a few days ago that Spurs are losing out on match day income of £800k generated just by Stadium catering.

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:14 am

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:14 am
I’m not comparing us to Spurs. I’m using them
as an example of a club, already heavily indebted, that has raised further debt during covid as I was asked how I would raise funds. The exact avenue we chose is a bit irrelevant though, I just don’t believe there are none open to us - it’s a case of which is best.

I also can’t reconcile why Dyche, who presumably is closer to the club finances than anyone on here, says we’re in great shape yet others suggest we’re so cash strapped we can’t make signings?

The frustrating thing for me is that we’re (in my opinion) a creative midfielder, right winger and attacking right back away from the best BFC team I’ve ever seen and probably ever will. Experienced CH cover would be nice too.

I don’t expect to address all of those positions in one window (although you could argue some should have been addressed last 2-3). Maybe one or two this window, one next, one next summer. It’d be nice to think that the Board had a plan to do so...
Why would you think that someone who has worked in football all his life understands our accounts and financial position better some people on here who have spent their life working in finance ‘ banking etc ?
Plus SD could be talking about our historical position - whereas that is pretty much irrelevant now (other than it’s a good job we did build up some reserves). MG’s only concern is where we are now and what he believes the next few years hold in terms of the ongoing impact of Covid and the next TV deals etc. Overlay into this the complexities of a potential takeover deal and I doubt very much that Dyche is anywhere near the level of detail needed to understand our position.

Our board are not billionaires but many of them have ran very successful multi million pound businesses and have decades of experience. In addition we have accountants and access to whatever other specialist financial expertise we need. Don’t you think between them they have considered the suggestions you have made ?
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:18 am

kentonclaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:12 am
Now settled in at their new home it was reported a few days ago that Spurs are losing out on match day income of £800k generated just by Stadium catering.
Spurs match day income is 29% of their total revenue. That’s the 2nd highest in the league with Arsenal top at 30%.
Not sure exactly how much ours is but at a guess it has to be nearer to 5% of our total revenue ?

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:22 am

Burnley Ace wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:01 am
That fine but you do accept that their ability to raise finance is completely different to ours? So much so that it is incomparable.
Of course. They have £1bn debt or something ridiculous. A lot anyway. I’m not talking about raising anywhere near that - a very small figure relative to revenue, which should be entirely possible - to support squad strengthening and improve our chances of staying in the league.

huw.Y.WattfromWare
Posts: 1616
Joined: Fri May 08, 2020 7:04 pm
Been Liked: 411 times
Has Liked: 382 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by huw.Y.WattfromWare » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:30 am

TVC15 wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:18 am
Spurs match day income is 29% of their total revenue. That’s the 2nd highest in the league with Arsenal top at 30%.
Not sure exactly how much ours is but at a guess it has to be nearer to 5% of our total revenue ?
How much is a twix at the Emirates?

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1967
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 366 times
Has Liked: 1589 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:34 am

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:22 am
Of course. They have £1bn debt or something ridiculous. A lot anyway. I’m not talking about raising anywhere near that - a very small figure relative to revenue, which should be entirely possible - to support squad strengthening and improve our chances of staying in the league.
A lot of posters have pointed out why it’s not possible. What are you proposing to secure these debts against?

Dark Cloud
Posts: 3939
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 1100 times
Has Liked: 1386 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Dark Cloud » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:41 am

If we had chosen to run up a very modest (in comparison to others) amount of debt in order to bring in 2 or three significant signings, we would have greatly improved our chances of staying in the PL and therefore quickly recouping that money. At the same time we know that if that modest gamble had failed and we were relegated, we have a whole load of extremely saleable assets (Tarks, Pope, Taylor, Wood, McNeil to name just some) who clubs would be queuing up to buy, so we'd never be in real FINANCIAL trouble. I highlight financial because of course on the field itself we'd be struggling to bounce back after losing our better players, granted, but that's something we'd have had to accept in the gamble and I personally think we could have done this. I acknowledge that with billionaire backers (unlike us) many of the PL clubs who are shelling out £gazillions during this window are taking less of a gamble than it first appears because they have a sugar daddy ready and willing to pick up any tab at the end of the day, but I still genuinely hope that somebody like Villa or Leeds who have gone spend crazy do live to regret it because with all the uncertainty over future finances due to Covid some of the spending around the PL this window seems reckless beyond belief.
This user liked this post: summitclaret

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:56 am

Burnley Ace wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:34 am
A lot of posters have pointed out why it’s not possible. What are you proposing to secure these debts against?
Why does debt need to be secured?? Millions of companies across the world hold unsecured debts. Why should we be any different?

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:07 am

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:56 am
Why does debt need to be secured?? Millions of companies across the world hold unsecured debts. Why should we be any different?
Is that a serious question ?
Unless your debt is to your sugar daddy owners can you tell me of one loan or overdraft facility to a football club that is unsecured.
As for these millions of companies around the world holding unsecured debts after working 30 years in corporate banking in the UK I’m assuming you are talking about other countries because that 100% is not the case with limited companies and PLCs in this country.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1967
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 366 times
Has Liked: 1589 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:03 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:56 am
Why does debt need to be secured?? Millions of companies across the world hold unsecured debts. Why should we be any different?
Ok, so you are expecting a bank to lend us say £30m without wanting any security on the loan? Do you know how a mortgage works?

Chester Perry
Posts: 11822
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1624 times
Has Liked: 437 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:04 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:41 pm

I don't understand how Spurs have accessed the Gov't Covid Funds. I imagine it's got something to do with their brand new, multi-event stadium. I'm sure there's some security for the borrowings there. What would you think we could raise if it was possible to borrow money against the security of Turf Moor?
Hi Paul it has everything to do with the new Stadium - The loan is granted to those ostensibly profitable businesses that can demonstrate sizeable cash generation losses that would lead to significant job losses, businesses can borrow a large percentage of that but no all of it, there is also a minimum amount you can borrow which I think is £50m. It is designed to support a large number of jobs - multiple hundreds not tens. Another critical factor is that the bond (which is what it really is) is due to be repaid in full next July

Spurs demonstrated to the BoE that they were likely to lose £200m in cash flow over the period of the credit. This was almost entirely due to operations at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium which is already notorious for reportedly generating £800k in catering sales on each match day - by way of comparison Burnley do not generate so much income over 4 matchdays and that includes tickets (and season ticket share).

Of course the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium is designed to have many other events across the year along with a broad range of other activities from conferencing and retail - which along with many of it's restaurants and bars along with Stadium tours meant that it was generating significant monies daily not once a fortnight for 9 months of the year.

Turf Moor generates no more the £9m (on the generous side of estimation) from matchday, retail and non matchday events and catering each year (advertising boards and stand sponsorship would push it up to around £12m I would suggest).

Given those numbers we do not qualify for a BoE loan, and given our culturally cautious approach we would not borrow sizeable sums when we are unsure of what our revenues are going to look like in 12 months. I suggest that Spurs can do this because it gives them breathing room to find alternative credit if fans are not allowed back, they will find that credit because that stadium is a cash generator and they have a multi-billionaire owner as a last resort guarantor. It is not beyond the realms of imagination that the BoE will supply similar bonds next year either.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:19 pm

Burnley Ace wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:03 pm
Ok, so you are expecting a bank to lend us say £30m without wanting any security on the loan? Do you know how a mortgage works?
That’s like me asking you if you know how a loan or credit card works??

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:32 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:19 pm
That’s like me asking you if you know how a loan or credit card works??
Are you suggesting we buy players on the clubs Tesco Credit Card ?
In all seriousness it’s not really very clear what you are talking about.
You seem to be saying that for a multi million pound loan or credit facility the club would not be asked to provide security.
That is just simply not true.
In fact not only is if not true the security we would be requested to provide would in no way on its own guarantee we could obtain the facilities being requested. In this environment of uncertainty as to future revenue streams the ability to repay any loan is more important. The PRA (sector regulator) highlighted the amount of irresponsible lending to football clubs more than 10 years ago and many of the main lenders to the sector subsequently pulled out. That was in a world without Covid.
Now even if you did find a bank prepared to support you (big IF) there is absolutely no way they would do this without taking a debenture and / or charge over the clubs land / property.

Rileybobs
Posts: 8867
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3654 times
Has Liked: 831 times
Location: Leeds

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Rileybobs » Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:48 pm

What Mike Garlick should have done is to switch BFC’s current account to another bank and set up at least 5 direct debits to go out of the new account. Think of the cash back offers he could have tapped into. That’s our problem, we just don’t think outside the box.
These 2 users liked this post: NewClaret Dark Cloud

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:15 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:32 pm
Are you suggesting we buy players on the clubs Tesco Credit Card ?
In all seriousness it’s not really very clear what you are talking about.
You seem to be saying that for a multi million pound loan or credit facility the club would not be asked to provide security.
That is just simply not true.
In fact not only is if not true the security we would be requested to provide would in no way on its own guarantee we could obtain the facilities being requested. In this environment of uncertainty as to future revenue streams the ability to repay any loan is more important. The PRA (sector regulator) highlighted the amount of irresponsible lending to football clubs more than 10 years ago and many of the main lenders to the sector subsequently pulled out. That was in a world without Covid.
Now even if you did find a bank prepared to support you (big IF) there is absolutely no way they would do this without taking a debenture and / or charge over the clubs land / property.
Of course I’m not, equally the example of mortgage is a similarly irrelevant example :lol: :lol:

What I am saying is that I don’t believe that it is beyond the wit of man for a £130m turnover business to raise a sixth of its income in debt.

You seem fixated on whether that needs to be secured. Whether it does or not is irrelevant (I happen to think it could be raised without securitisation, partly because Spurs *appear* to have done so via the BoE for a sum 10x larger than the small sum I am proposing despite already carrying £500m debts, and partly due my knowledge of my organisations working capital facility which is unsecured) but acknowledge you may have greater experience in corporate banking than I. And I’m not just talking about banks, as discussed there are alternative ways to raise finances, if needed.

I think what you are saying is that it’s impossible for BFC to raise a sixth of its turnover in debt? I don’t really care how it does it, secured/unsecured, bank, bonds, PE investment, equity issue, whatever. I just do not believe it’s impossible for BFC to raise reasonable funding when it’s starting point is a cash generative business, with no debt, at least historically sat on a cash pile most businesses would give their right arm for.

So are you seriously saying we couldn’t?

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:15 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 1:48 pm
What Mike Garlick should have done is to switch BFC’s current account to another bank and set up at least 5 direct debits to go out of the new account. Think of the cash back offers he could have tapped into. That’s our problem, we just don’t think outside the box.
Exactly :lol: :lol:

TVC15
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3224 times
Has Liked: 584 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by TVC15 » Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:47 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:15 pm
Of course I’m not, equally the example of mortgage is a similarly irrelevant example :lol: :lol:

What I am saying is that I don’t believe that it is beyond the wit of man for a £130m turnover business to raise a sixth of its income in debt.

You seem fixated on whether that needs to be secured. Whether it does or not is irrelevant (I happen to think it could be raised without securitisation, partly because Spurs *appear* to have done so via the BoE for a sum 10x larger than the small sum I am proposing despite already carrying £500m debts, and partly due my knowledge of my organisations working capital facility which is unsecured) but acknowledge you may have greater experience in corporate banking than I. And I’m not just talking about banks, as discussed there are alternative ways to raise finances, if needed.

I think what you are saying is that it’s impossible for BFC to raise a sixth of its turnover in debt? I don’t really care how it does it, secured/unsecured, bank, bonds, PE investment, equity issue, whatever. I just do not believe it’s impossible for BFC to raise reasonable funding when it’s starting point is a cash generative business, with no debt, at least historically sat on a cash pile most businesses would give their right arm for.

So are you seriously saying we couldn’t?
You do know that a ‘mortgage’ is not just a term used to a domestic house loan ? I guess you don’t as you would not be saying what you have !!

I’m not fixated on whether it would secured or not - I’m telling you that it would.
I’m not sure why you keep on referencing Spurs and the B of E loan - that is a government backed scheme and guaranteed. You realise the B of E is the lender of last resort ? Why on earth would they need to take security - they are not a normal bank and are hardly going to go bust.

Oh btw you might want to look up the meaning of securitisation !!

And to answer your last question yes I am saying they would find it very difficult (or nigh on impossible) for the club to raise the levels you are talking about from any financial institution. If you seriously think a historic ‘cash pile’ is something that a lender would take into consideration you really have not got a clue how it works.

Eh oh if you think it’s as easy as you are suggesting that’s fine. Ask yourself why they haven’t gone down this route though and ask yourself why so few football clubs in our league have loans with UK Banks.

Burnley Ace
Posts: 1967
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 366 times
Has Liked: 1589 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Burnley Ace » Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:55 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:15 pm
Of course I’m not, equally the example of mortgage is a similarly irrelevant example :lol: :lol:

What I am saying is that I don’t believe that it is beyond the wit of man for a £130m turnover business to raise a sixth of its income in debt.

You seem fixated on whether that needs to be secured. Whether it does or not is irrelevant (I happen to think it could be raised without securitisation, partly because Spurs *appear* to have done so via the BoE for a sum 10x larger than the small sum I am proposing despite already carrying £500m debts, and partly due my knowledge of my organisations working capital facility which is unsecured) but acknowledge you may have greater experience in corporate banking than I. And I’m not just talking about banks, as discussed there are alternative ways to raise finances, if needed.

I think what you are saying is that it’s impossible for BFC to raise a sixth of its turnover in debt? I don’t really care how it does it, secured/unsecured, bank, bonds, PE investment, equity issue, whatever. I just do not believe it’s impossible for BFC to raise reasonable funding when it’s starting point is a cash generative business, with no debt, at least historically sat on a cash pile most businesses would give their right arm for.

So are you seriously saying we couldn’t?
Yes that is exactly what people are telling you. A mortgage is a loan that is secured on the property, a credit card is unsecured. Why would anyone lend money to Burnley without some security on the loan? Especially ow that expenditure is greater than income.

Turnover is immaterial - if Company A turnover is £130m and profit is £5m and Company B has a turnover of £40m and a £20m profit - which one is the most attractive to lend to?

NewClaret
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 455 times
Has Liked: 426 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by NewClaret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 3:07 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 2:47 pm
You do know that a ‘mortgage’ is not just a term used to a domestic house loan ? I guess you don’t as you would not be saying what you have !!

I’m not fixated on whether it would secured or not - I’m telling you that it would.
I’m not sure why you keep on referencing Spurs and the B of E loan - that is a government backed scheme and guaranteed. You realise the B of E is the lender of last resort ? Why on earth would they need to take security - they are not a normal bank and are hardly going to go bust.

Oh btw you might want to look up the meaning of securitisation !!

And to answer your last question yes I am saying they would find it very difficult (or nigh on impossible) for the club to raise the levels you are talking about from any financial institution. If you seriously think a historic ‘cash pile’ is something that a lender would take into consideration you really have not got a clue how it works.

Eh oh if you think it’s as easy as you are suggesting that’s fine. Ask yourself why they haven’t gone down this route though and ask yourself why so few football clubs in our league have loans with UK Banks.
Okay, well we’ll have to agree to disagree then. I think they could, you think they couldn’t.

In any event, hopefully unnecessary since Sean says our finances are in good shape.

Chester Perry
Posts: 11822
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1624 times
Has Liked: 437 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:01 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 6:43 pm
I wrote a massive reply to CP’s post earlier, that then disappeared when I tried to post. Probably for the best :lol:

The gist of it was that, whilst I appreciate the sensible and reasoned debate, and recognise the need to look at this from a different perspective, I respectfully disagree.

What our Board have done very well is make hay while the sun shone. They developed a cash pile whilst investing in some infrastructure (Barnfield = good, I’m not so mad keen on the quadrants). They’ve also reduced our future liabilities on player sales. We’re in good shape financially. Sean Dyche has said so. Credit to the Chairman and the Board for that.

You do have to ask why though? Is limited outstanding debt on players a good thing, or a sign we’ve turned the investment taps off? Ditto the cash pile? You could argue that has not motivated by a desire to do right by the club and ensure it’s sustainability, more to prep the club for takeover so they can all sell up and profit.

Will we really be thanking and lauding their prudence in a few seasons if they sell out, leave us short and we’re back in the Championship next year with an inexperienced leadership structure trying to grapple with the loss of key players/manager?

Yes, Covid has hit our numbers, the cash has probably eroded. Yes, there will be some short-term decline in revenue from all sources. But the long term structural direction for the PL (best managers, players, most entertaining and unpredictable league in the world) is very strong. Revenues could increase from a whole variety of opportunities post-covid.

It’s therefore imperative we stay in the PL and invest to do so, even if that means taking on some short term debt. If we continue to plan and prepare for doomsday it will eventually be self fulfilling.

Final point is that I’m prepared to give the Chairman and Board the benefit of the doubt. My key targets for this summer are all in the Championship and still available, so let’s see what happens, but in my mind it will be gross mismanagement if they don’t find a way to strengthen this year, Covid or not.
As in all forms of business there is no right or wrong way to approach the club's financial issue, it comes down to what deep down is most important to those who are making the decisions. At times such as these there tends to be two distinct courses of actions for business retract, bunker down and hope to ride out the storm, attack, risk a lot and play to win.

Across my two posts on this thread yesterday I repeatedly talked about the culture at the club and ultimately it is that which determines how they will act in what they feel is right for the club at this time. Understanding that from the outside looking in requires a certain knowledge of club history, recognition of established practices and attitudes and an empathy for them.

My posts were not ones of judgement, just ones of understanding and given that understanding I was comfortable that I believed that the board were doing what they believed to be in the best interests of the club. The posts were not a critique in support of or against previous posts on the thread or even of what the board were doing. It was an effort to explain what I thought were the reasons for what they appear to be doing.

If I was doing a critique of the club from what appears to be your (and a number of others) perspective, then I would talk about seizing the opportunity to grow a position of strength by improving the squad (and who knows maybe weaken rivals at the same time). More importantly I would address the weaknesses in the starting 11 and the squad and try to ensure we keep on the broadcast gravy train, which is good for both the club and the town economically.

Of course I would then have to look at how I could generate such funds to facilitate that, as you have thought you have done in a subsequent post. To do this I would require a knowledge of our financial position, knowledge of the revenue outlook for the club and football in the short medium term, knowledge of what our rivals are doing to facilitate transfer activities, and knowledge of the the available credit mechanisms that are on offer.

To be clear I define knowledge in this instance as understanding (which includes positive and negative consequences of events, actions and environmental risks). I have not seen you (or anyone sharing your perspective) demonstrate this knowledge (tbf you don't claim to have) in any area that I have talked about.

So what is our Knowledge?
If we start with our financial position we could look at the last accounts and jump on our cash holding (a popular pastime on this board), which appears to have grown steadily during our tenure at the top table. £42m looks very healthy but only reflects a point in time, we do not know for instance if that point in time is the day after we have received the final instalment of Premier League central funding for the season and the day before we pay the bonuses (for want of being simplistic). This is a practice football is notorious for - both Real Madrid and Barcelona have a habit of producing accounts that show enormous cash sums but are accrued salaries that are paid out a matter of days later because those clubs pay out a massive proportion of salaries once every 6 months. I am not saying any of this is what our club does I am saying we do not know.

As I say knowledge is important for interpretation of public data. What we can say for certain looking back over the accounts is that the clubs operations are now only generating a small level of positive cash flow and as of lockdown and the behind closed door games we are likely to be generating a negative cash flow. We are able to say this because, our positive cash flow numbers are less than the revenue generated from matchday and catering income in past accounts and we know there is none of the former and very little of the latter happening at the moment.

This cash flow element is important when it comes to obtaining credit, a business that can demonstrate positive cash flow both historically and currently is likely to be able to find credit - the level of that cash flow will help determine how much and on what terms, as that is what the lender will look at to determine how likely it is the payment terms can be met. The lender will also look at the overall business financials (costs, income, existing liabilities and general economic outlook for the sources of income too).

For non big 6 Premier League clubs credit has become very expensive (prohibitively for some) and can only really be sourced from owners via loans or a rights issue, Private Equity in the form of a mortgage over the fixed assets (ground/training ground etc - I have even seen equipment as a part of such security), or of factored future income such as Broadcast (central distribution) or transfer fees.

In all these cases the interest on these forms of credit has at least doubled (and is still climbing) over last year as the economic outlook for the league has continued to darken causing the risk to the lenders (still willing to operate in this market, many have withdrawn, some have folded as a result of failed payments) to sharply rise.

A key factor in the lenders thinking is the revenue outlook for the club - As we know clubs tend to have 3 distinct streams of revenue (matchday, commercial and Broadcast or central payments) and the option of a 4th via player sales (this is more about generating cash within the business rather than enticing a lender).

- Matchday
This is null and void currently and subject to the whim of government (a sensible outlook - particularly for a lender - would be to discount it for the season and treat any return as fortune).

- Commercial income
Any commercial activity that requires footfall (retail and catering) will likely drop substantially, all clubs are working hard to generate extra sponsorship but that can be hard when sponsors are experiencing their own trading challenges. Local sponsors may question the value of advertising around the ground if there is no one there to see it. Major sponsors may question the value they are receiving, particularly if (as in our case) the target market is unable to see the sponsorship because of reduce access caused by constantly revised schedules (often in the early hours of the morning in the far east as opposed to prime time) and the fact games are now broadcast on minor channels in China.

The LoveBet deal has already reduce in value this season and next, which I believe is an effective rebate for the end of last season. On those terms it could fall another £2m or more this season if current practice continues throughout the season. We do not know what next season may look like.

- Broadcast/Central Payments.
The Premier League have said that they intended to pay out in full last season and deduct the rebates they have paid overseas broadcasters from payments this season and next - There is also the Sky/BT rebate from last season which the Premier League will pay back by accepting reduced payments from them over this season and next. The latest edition of the Premier League Handbook suggests that Burnley's 2019/20 share to be deducted at around £13.4m - to my eyes this constitutes the share of all the overseas rebate and one third of the Sky/BT rebate.

It is complicated by the fact that we have been paid this money (to help cash flow) but must accrue for the fact it will be deducted over the 2020/21 and 2021/22 seasons payments, as will the remaining SKY/BT payments. It does not account for the £160m missing from the PPTV/Suning payment last season, or the project £175m - £178m loss on projected Chinese TV income this season or whatever shortfall on the £185m Chinese tv deal is made next season.

Of course there are already claims for rebates from overseas broadcasters this season as fans in this country have demanded all games be broadcast and domestic broadcasters have refused to broadcast games free to air in slots it has paid substantial monies for. The domestic broadcasters are now saying that all these free to air games are also diluting the value of the ones they have paid for, which in turn paves the way for domestic rebate claims and lower bids for rights in the next cycle for which tender documents are due before Christmas this year.

We also know that Broadcasters have placed a value on fans at games. Looking forward to the next cycle expert analysts (whose forecasts lenders will pay close attention believe that domestic rights could drop as much as 10% - 15% and in the case of the Far East (where it is recognised everyone substantially over bid for rights in the last cycle) it could be higher.

- Player sales
These are about shedding of those you no longer need or your selling you most attractive assets (who may have outgrown you in a combination of ability and wage demands) that are at peak market value under your operational constraints. For many in the current climate (and keeping half an eye on FFP) it is as much about accounting procedures as it is about generating cash.

There is a long established practice in the European game (particularly Italy and Spain) of trades between 2 clubs of 2 players at questionable fees, but vey little cash. For the books it allows the ability to book a high incoming fee (and profit therein) and spread the cost of the incoming player via amortisation and salary allowing for a substantial book profit in the first year. In practice it just kicks financial problems down the road, so is not something I would recommend (even looking from your perspective.

If you are looking at player sales to provide cash s which then is to be used address wider team/squad weaknesses then you are likely to need to sell a star asset and allow for the cost of a suitable replacement as well as the cost of the other players you are looking to acquire in the sale price

Understanding what our rivals are doing
Almost all are using a combination of credit (from a range of sources including owners) and player sales, the newly/recently promoted teams are also using the gap between cost bases in the Championship and Premier League revenues. Some most notably Brighton and West Ham have so far used the market for revenue purposes, covering shortfall elsewhere. Wolves while being quite active are running a net trading balance of zero having sold to first team mainstays (though I am certain they have run up some sizeable agent fees). I am also struck that Manchester United pulled out of the Sancho transfer because they though it was an insensitive amount given the economic tribulations in their region.

What has our club's approach been?
There has been little direct communication, so we have to read between the lines of the various media reports

- It would appear from all the serious transfer speculation that ALL at the club have acknowledged there are weaknesses in our squad and starting 11 even before injuries.

- it would also appear that the board (the only ones with real knowledge of all the financial realities and projections, together with the issues facing the Premier League and central payments) believe there is very little cash available for transfer fees in the kitty and projected revenue stream.

- The board appeared ready to sell a star asset to address the squad issues and given their reluctance to accrue new debt wanted that sale to include as much cash upfront as possible.

- The board also appeared to know what value that transfer needed to be to acquire the targets and replacement approved by the manager.

- It also appears that the manager had only one target in mind as a direct replacement (and that player subsequently got injured) and/or the manager did not understand that the incomings of the quality he was looking for were entirely subject to the outgoing of a star asset to cover the cost

- given that the sale of a star asset is now extremely unlikely in this window it is unlikely that any incoming player would be at modest let alone substantial cost

I haven't talked about the costs of any pyramid bailout here but now you have some knowledge of the situation what would you do?
These 3 users liked this post: Paul Waine Down_Rover Jimscho

Zlatan
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 2:06 pm
Been Liked: 901 times
Has Liked: 2262 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Zlatan » Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:28 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:01 pm
.
makes me feel grateful for LTL posts...

;)
These 5 users liked this post: Vegas Claret Chester Perry The Enclosure BenWickes Burnley Ace

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 4693
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 1794 times
Has Liked: 2700 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by Colburn_Claret » Wed Oct 07, 2020 5:11 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:22 am
Of course. They have £1bn debt or something ridiculous. A lot anyway. I’m not talking about raising anywhere near that - a very small figure relative to revenue, which should be entirely possible - to support squad strengthening and improve our chances of staying in the league.
Spurs owe £1billion, we owe nothing.

Yet Spurs could click there fingers and borrow another £100 million from the banks tomorrow, we wouldn't find any Bank willing to lend us that even if we wanted too. Sad facts.

BenWickes
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:27 pm
Been Liked: 354 times
Has Liked: 349 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by BenWickes » Wed Oct 07, 2020 5:36 pm

Zlatan wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:28 pm
makes me feel grateful for LTL posts...

;)
:lol: Don't encourage him.

aggi
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1473 times

Re: BFC TRANSFER NEWS SUMMER/AUTUMN 2020 (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Post by aggi » Wed Oct 07, 2020 5:36 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:53 am
...
There is another issue which is going to come to the fore if the current situation prolongs (and no one really knows when it will end) and that is clubs not being able to service their transfer debt - on Monday @SwissRamble did a long and detailed thread on debt - the scale of transfer debt is huge and has grown significantly this window with many small upfront payments and agreements in place for sizeable scheduled payments. It benefits a selling clubs accounts as they book the full transfer price but does little to help immediate cash flow. It will only take one or two significant clubs to fail to make their scheduled payments to create a sizable domino effect which would have a dramatic impact on cash flow across the game.
...
One other point related to this the Football League (and I suspect the PL, although it has yet to be tested) don't care too much if you don't pay/pay only fractions of non-footballing debt but if you don't pay footballing debt in full you don't get to take part in the league.
This user liked this post: Chester Perry

Post Reply