ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2590 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by NottsClaret » Mon May 23, 2022 5:43 pm

Even this season, if you reckon 'players had stopped playing for him and it had all gone a bit stale'.. he still had us exactly where our wage bill and expenditure suggests we should be. It's just that he'd set the bar ludicrously high.
This user liked this post: dandeclaret

ClaretTony
Posts: 67429
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32242 times
Has Liked: 5255 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by ClaretTony » Mon May 23, 2022 6:00 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon May 23, 2022 5:27 pm
One day you'll realise it was his fault. The players stopped playing for him, it'd gone stale that's all on Dyche's head.
This isn't a go at his time here he took us places we could only dream of but he stayed a bit too long without changing himself and it cost us this season
Not denying that but I’ve just asked that you remember what I said.

Row Z
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:17 am
Been Liked: 79 times
Has Liked: 17 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Row Z » Mon May 23, 2022 6:03 pm

NottsClaret wrote:
Mon May 23, 2022 5:43 pm
Even this season, if you reckon 'players had stopped playing for him and it had all gone a bit stale'.. he still had us exactly where our wage bill and expenditure suggests we should be. It's just that he'd set the bar ludicrously high.
The suggestion is that his stubbornness potentially caught up with him and the players eventually stopped playing for him. Previous seasons followed a similar pattern but he did in the end find the changes which got the results, I.e. Heaton a few years back and ward coming in during our championship season. This year either through lack of options or not finding that formula, it has cost him.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10843
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5521 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by TheFamilyCat » Mon May 23, 2022 6:48 pm

Row Z wrote:
Mon May 23, 2022 6:03 pm
The suggestion is that his stubbornness potentially caught up with him and the players eventually stopped playing for him. Previous seasons followed a similar pattern but he did in the end find the changes which got the results, I.e. Heaton a few years back and ward coming in during our championship season. This year either through lack of options or not finding that formula, it has cost him.
Arguably he did find the formula v Brighton and Spurs but then went and lost it again. Why he changed that winning team (or more specifically the midfield pairing) will always be baffling.

Row Z
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:17 am
Been Liked: 79 times
Has Liked: 17 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Row Z » Mon May 23, 2022 6:51 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Mon May 23, 2022 6:48 pm
Arguably he did find the formula v Brighton and Spurs but then went and lost it again. Why he changed that winning team (or more specifically the midfield pairing) will always be baffling.
Agreed. We always knew he had a stubborn mentality for certain players returning to the side and retaining their places despite being out of form, but yes why he didn’t stick with it, and more specifically with Cork is anyones guess.

clive40golf
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:51 am
Been Liked: 153 times
Has Liked: 180 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by clive40golf » Mon May 23, 2022 7:28 pm

We seem to go over everything again and again! SD tried to compete with a limited (in skill and numbers) squad. He was never backed properly by the previous or the present board. As a squad aged and got less competitive 3-4 seasons ago, that’s when he should have been backed. AP promised players, a plan & the recourse for SD to compete. He didn’t. To blame SD for any of this mess we’re in now is a complete non footballing/ naive way to look at things.
We’re now in a state, thanks to Pace and his board where Stoke city/Bolton/Portsmouth/Coventry spring to mind. It might be different how we get there, but the outcome will be roughly the same.
I’ve been a Burnley fan for over 50yrs and apart from the itv debacle, this is the most worrying time in those 50yrs.
I definitely don’t want to go back to Div 1 or 2. I want my team back in the premiership, but I fear under the present regime that will never happen again. We’ll be stripped bare and have crowds of 4500.
Not Exciting Times

Wokingclaret
Posts: 2068
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 292 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Wokingclaret » Mon May 23, 2022 8:01 pm

Yes, our best manager in my life time.......

But he'd lost it, burnt out if you like.
Part of the problem and one of the reasons we have gone down. He had become more stubborn in selection and also the players we needed in the transfer window. There had to be a midfielder or right winger out there that was better than we had that wouldn't have cost the earth.

However, I would have given him the chance to get us back up if he wanted to.

Michael Jackson did great but the Villa home game blew the game plan out of the window and we went too cautious after that game.

RumRogers
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:08 pm
Been Liked: 24 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by RumRogers » Tue May 24, 2022 11:11 am

Rovers fan in peace.

Firstly, commiserations on your relegation (genuinely). Whilst we're bitter rivals, and we'll always want to get one over each other, it's sad to see a fellow northern club from the local area out of the top flight, only to be replaced by the likes of Bournemouth or even Fulham. Perhaps that's a petty northern sentiment, but all the same, I think football has changed face somewhat, and it was some (small) consolation for me to see your lot bloody a few noses up there. I wish it was us doing that, mind.

Secondly, and in contrast to the above, I'm excited that we'll be having our local derby once more. Of course, we're still the underdogs, and I'm fully expecting a double-defeat in the coming season, but I suppose it hurts a bit less when you know what's coming. It'll add some excitement and anticipation to the season, which is what football should be all about.

With that out of the way, it's difficult to ignore what is going on at Burnley with the ownership. I'm not an expert by any means, and I only read what is publicly available, just like the rest of you. However, I think there can be no smoke without fire.

When I watched Pace's first interview, I was a little bit sceptical. I'm not really into the ever-growing culture of perpetual positivity in the workplace, but Pace's demeanour just smacked of this to me, and has done in subsequent interviews. Call me a cynic, but it just raises a suspicion (perhaps unfounded) that it's an act to cover up the reality of a situation. After all, I've had bosses that give pep talks, even asking me to jump on the office trampoline, only to bin off 50 people the next day. Of course, that might just be my experience, but Pace and all his talk about "community" and connecting with the town and so on just feel like a ruse to me. I know some of you seem to like him and what he has to say, but my "corporate bullsh*t" radar pings with him.

Regarding the debt to MSD, as I understand it, it's basically a loan to a third party, and it appears as though MSD has perhaps got the parachute payment as a part-guarantee upon relegation (£42m would fall under the phrase "significant proportion" of £65m). While that makes sense from MSD's point of view, it would appear to be a hindrance if you're looking for a quick return to the Premier League in the same way that your fellow relegated clubs are. What could save the day for you is that you've got some playing assets that could effectively bring in the money to balance things back out (Pope and McNeil spring to mind). But then other relegated clubs get their parachute payment PLUS player sales, so I suppose it is still a hindrance compared to other relegated clubs.
I still think, in spite of the focus on this debt, you'll be in a much stronger position than most other Championship clubs, and you'll still be able to mount a decent promotion challenge (perhaps play-offs would be realistic).

I suppose you'll get the measure of things in summer. The managerial appointment will be interesting, assuming you're looking at candidates more along the lines of Carvalhal or Farke, as opposed to Kompany. I think either would be good appointments, and perhaps about as good as can be hoped (I'd be delighted if Rovers appointed either of those, but I'm fully expecting a Simon Grayson or similar!). Stuart Pearce is a name that's popped up on both here and a Rovers forum, but I sincerely doubt he'd be appointed as a manager at either club. He's being touted as a potential Director of Football for us. Not sure how I feel about that! With our owners, it's impossible to tell if they're awake or not, and how far up their inbox we are, but I suppose we'll see.

Feel free to tell me where to go, but otherwise, stay safe, and see you next season.
These 6 users liked this post: ClaretAL NewClaret dsr Sleeping Cat ClaretTony Quicknick

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KRBFC » Tue May 24, 2022 11:24 am

The problem with players outgoing is we still owe Lyon and Stoke significant amounts for Collins and Cornet. Sure we don't need to pay those clubs in full immediately but it's just more debt owed and the longer we leave it, the harder it becomes to pay as our income significantly drops yearly.

It's also an incredible risk for any relegated club not to immediately get the books in order. At least we should be able to pay MSD off with what's available, even if it hampers the strength of the squad hugely and means we'll likely at best be 5th-10th next season.

Most fans are forgetting we still owe Garlick close to £60mish, due in instalments they recently couldn't pay so had to renegotiate deadlines. Chester said it's weeks away, where is that money coming from?

JohnMcGreal
Posts: 2207
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 1344 times
Has Liked: 438 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by JohnMcGreal » Tue May 24, 2022 11:33 am

KRBFC wrote:
Tue May 24, 2022 11:24 am
The problem with players outgoing is we still owe Lyon and Stoke significant amounts for Collins and Cornet. Sure we don't need to pay those clubs in full immediately but it's just more debt owed and the longer we leave it, the harder it becomes to pay as our income significantly drops yearly.
Presumably the same principle applies to any players we sell over the summer. It seems quite common for transfer fees to be paid in installments over a few years, so it wouldn't be surprising if we're taking out more loans from the likes of Macquarie Bank in order to get an advance on the sale money, at a price, obviously.

jrgbfc
Posts: 8422
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2098 times
Has Liked: 336 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by jrgbfc » Tue May 24, 2022 3:15 pm

RumRogers wrote:
Tue May 24, 2022 11:11 am
Rovers fan in peace.

Firstly, commiserations on your relegation (genuinely). Whilst we're bitter rivals, and we'll always want to get one over each other, it's sad to see a fellow northern club from the local area out of the top flight, only to be replaced by the likes of Bournemouth or even Fulham. Perhaps that's a petty northern sentiment, but all the same, I think football has changed face somewhat, and it was some (small) consolation for me to see your lot bloody a few noses up there. I wish it was us doing that, mind.

Secondly, and in contrast to the above, I'm excited that we'll be having our local derby once more. Of course, we're still the underdogs, and I'm fully expecting a double-defeat in the coming season, but I suppose it hurts a bit less when you know what's coming. It'll add some excitement and anticipation to the season, which is what football should be all about.

With that out of the way, it's difficult to ignore what is going on at Burnley with the ownership. I'm not an expert by any means, and I only read what is publicly available, just like the rest of you. However, I think there can be no smoke without fire.

When I watched Pace's first interview, I was a little bit sceptical. I'm not really into the ever-growing culture of perpetual positivity in the workplace, but Pace's demeanour just smacked of this to me, and has done in subsequent interviews. Call me a cynic, but it just raises a suspicion (perhaps unfounded) that it's an act to cover up the reality of a situation. After all, I've had bosses that give pep talks, even asking me to jump on the office trampoline, only to bin off 50 people the next day. Of course, that might just be my experience, but Pace and all his talk about "community" and connecting with the town and so on just feel like a ruse to me. I know some of you seem to like him and what he has to say, but my "corporate bullsh*t" radar pings with him.

Regarding the debt to MSD, as I understand it, it's basically a loan to a third party, and it appears as though MSD has perhaps got the parachute payment as a part-guarantee upon relegation (£42m would fall under the phrase "significant proportion" of £65m). While that makes sense from MSD's point of view, it would appear to be a hindrance if you're looking for a quick return to the Premier League in the same way that your fellow relegated clubs are. What could save the day for you is that you've got some playing assets that could effectively bring in the money to balance things back out (Pope and McNeil spring to mind). But then other relegated clubs get their parachute payment PLUS player sales, so I suppose it is still a hindrance compared to other relegated clubs.
I still think, in spite of the focus on this debt, you'll be in a much stronger position than most other Championship clubs, and you'll still be able to mount a decent promotion challenge (perhaps play-offs would be realistic).

I suppose you'll get the measure of things in summer. The managerial appointment will be interesting, assuming you're looking at candidates more along the lines of Carvalhal or Farke, as opposed to Kompany. I think either would be good appointments, and perhaps about as good as can be hoped (I'd be delighted if Rovers appointed either of those, but I'm fully expecting a Simon Grayson or similar!). Stuart Pearce is a name that's popped up on both here and a Rovers forum, but I sincerely doubt he'd be appointed as a manager at either club. He's being touted as a potential Director of Football for us. Not sure how I feel about that! With our owners, it's impossible to tell if they're awake or not, and how far up their inbox we are, but I suppose we'll see.

Feel free to tell me where to go, but otherwise, stay safe, and see you next season.
If you lot keep hold of Bradley Dack and Bereton(and they stay fit) I don't see any reason why you won't challenge again. What about Gareth Ainsworth? Blackburn lad isn't he?

RumRogers
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon May 23, 2022 4:08 pm
Been Liked: 24 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by RumRogers » Tue May 24, 2022 3:30 pm

jrgbfc wrote:
Tue May 24, 2022 3:15 pm
If you lot keep hold of Bradley Dack and Bereton(and they stay fit) I don't see any reason why you won't challenge again.
Don't think Dack will go. He had several cameo appearances since returning from his second ACL repair, but looks like he's lost a yard or two to me. He needs a pre-season under his belt, but it's anyone's guess as to how good he'll return next season.

Brereton will likely be off. He's had a contract offer on the table since beginning of the year, but not signed. Rovers have taken the one year option, but it'll be a similar scenario to Armstrong when he was sold to Southampton. The only question is if Venkys will allocate any of those funds to the new management.
jrgbfc wrote:
Tue May 24, 2022 3:15 pm
What about Gareth Ainsworth? Blackburn lad isn't he?
Ainsworth was a youth player at Rovers back in 1992 or so (before Walker era, academy, and so on). He's not my first choice, but I think he'd be a shrewd appointment. Operating on a shoestring at Wycombe and has them punching above their weight. His personal style is also a bit of a talking point 8-) I'd be happy enough with him.

Sorry, going off topic. Back to ALK. ;)

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:48 pm

Looks like the outstanding money from the Pope transfer (paid in 4 instalments with 3) has also been assigned to Macquarie bank in the same way as the Wood transfer accelerating £7m (less fees I would assume) in receipts.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:51 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:48 pm
Looks like the outstanding money from the Pope transfer (paid in 4 instalments with 3) has also been assigned to Macquarie bank in the same way as the Wood transfer accelerating £7m (less fees I would assume) in receipts.
It has been discussed on the MMT

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 22, 2022 5:44 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:51 pm
It has been discussed on the MMT
Ah yes, I tend to skip that most of the time as there is too much on it!

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jul 22, 2022 5:49 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 5:44 pm
Ah yes, I tend to skip that most of the time as there is too much on it!
though I have suggested the topic is better suited to this thread

ArthurShelby
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:17 pm
Been Liked: 82 times
Has Liked: 30 times

Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by ArthurShelby » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:15 pm

No he isn’t coming back on loan but they are reporting we have took out a 10 million pound loan to cover the transfer fee we are set to receive in instalments from Newcastle.

Also said ALK have spent all our parachute payments on repaying an old loan they borrowed after the Chris Wood sale.

Doesn’t look good if we desperately need 10 million now ?!

Winstonswhite
Posts: 2530
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 605 times
Has Liked: 309 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by Winstonswhite » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:17 pm

Why are Newcastle paying in instalments is the question I’d be asking?!

Venkys4eva
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:24 am
Been Liked: 139 times
Has Liked: 183 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by Venkys4eva » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm

Utter drivel

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by RVclaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm

They wouldn’t have a clue how our parachute payments have or haven’t been spent unless they have specific access to our day to day finances, which I assume they don’t. Parachutes will be needed for the wage bill over the course of the season.

The Pope thing is debt factoring, quite a normal practice in business and now in football - Palace did it a few years back for the 50m sale of Wan Bissaka for example.
Last edited by RVclaret on Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10088
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4161 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm

Well if talksport said so it must be true.

Which expert came out with this Jim White ? This the same station that claimed Brownhill could join West Ham on a free as he is out of contract

MancunianClaret
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2022 2:46 pm
Been Liked: 175 times
Has Liked: 322 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by MancunianClaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm

How does anyone at TalkShite know how we've spent parachute payments?

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by RVclaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:21 pm

www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/viewt ... 8#p1865608

And the Pope debt factoring has already been discussed here

ArthurShelby
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:17 pm
Been Liked: 82 times
Has Liked: 30 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by ArthurShelby » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:21 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:17 pm
Why are Newcastle paying in instalments is the question I’d be asking?!
Paying it over 3 years.

We must be skint.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by RVclaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:23 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:17 pm
Why are Newcastle paying in instalments is the question I’d be asking?!
Its always better for the buying club to pay like this. We do it with our new signings. Highly likely this was the very best deal on offer for us to take or leave. As it happens we needed the cash for our rebuilding spree shortly after.

Mattster
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:02 am
Been Liked: 349 times
Has Liked: 117 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by Mattster » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:24 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:18 pm
Well if talksport said so it must be true.

Which expert came out with this Jim White ? This the same station that claimed Brownhill could join West Ham on a free as he is out of contract
Alex Crook, the one who reported Brownhill was available on a free, last week also reported the Michael Jackson / Cornet "You are not alone" joke that did the rounds on Twitter a month ago as genuine transfer news live on TalkSport too.

Winstonswhite
Posts: 2530
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 605 times
Has Liked: 309 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by Winstonswhite » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:26 pm

ArthurShelby wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:21 pm
Paying it over 3 years.

We must be skint.
We are skint- I thought this was established when we were taken over in Jan 2020?! Why keep banging on about it.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7171
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by Tall Paul » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:28 pm

Winstonswhite wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:17 pm
Why are Newcastle paying in instalments is the question I’d be asking?!
Probably because it's standard practice for transfers.

Top Claret
Posts: 5125
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:50 am
Been Liked: 1127 times
Has Liked: 1238 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Top Claret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:29 pm

Went on to mention the leverage takeover and the way the previous owners shafted the club, not in as many words though buy I got the jist

Mattster
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:02 am
Been Liked: 349 times
Has Liked: 117 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Mattster » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:48 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 4:51 pm
It has been discussed on the MMT
Has a further £5m been paid off the MSD Loan on 14th July or am I reading this wrong?

https://tisegroup.com/market/securities/12598

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by aggi » Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:51 pm

ArthurShelby wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:15 pm
No he isn’t coming back on loan but they are reporting we have took out a 10 million pound loan to cover the transfer fee we are set to receive in instalments from Newcastle.

Also said ALK have spent all our parachute payments on repaying an old loan they borrowed after the Chris Wood sale.

Doesn’t look good if we desperately need 10 million now ?!
This doesn't make sense at all. The "loan" on the Chris Wood sale is based on Macquarie giving us money now and it will be paid off with the second instalment of the Wood fee.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Talk Sport - Nick Pope Loan

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:14 pm

ArthurShelby wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:15 pm
No he isn’t coming back on loan but they are reporting we have took out a 10 million pound loan to cover the transfer fee we are set to receive in instalments from Newcastle.

Also said ALK have spent all our parachute payments on repaying an old loan they borrowed after the Chris Wood sale.

Doesn’t look good if we desperately need 10 million now ?!
So we've spent £40 million on repaying a loan we got just a few months ago?

So at no point during writing that did you think it was rubbish?

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:16 pm

Mattster wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:48 pm
Has a further £5m been paid off the MSD Loan on 14th July or am I reading this wrong?

https://tisegroup.com/market/securities/12598
Good spot, Mattster. This does appear to indicate a further £5 million has been repaid of the original £65 million MSD loan. The listing, of course, isn't the loan to BFCHL, but the other side which provides the funding to MSD to provide the loan. Hence, the £45 million that remains listed earns interest of 8%, whereas BFCHL loan incurs interest of (3 month) Libor + 8%.

My assumption is that the new Macquarie loan of £7 million - against instalments due on balance of Nick Pope's fee - have enable £5 million of MSD loan to be repaid.

Based on public domain information - Bournemouth annual report, who have disclosed data on their similar Macquarie transfer instalment loans - Macquarie loans cost around 4% - whereas MSD loan is currently costing BFCHL about 9.5%.

I think we'd all previously been assuming that the only loan reduction required on relegation was £15 million, and there was no option to repay more just a month later. Maybe there's more to this, either £15 million was the first instalment of loan reduction at the end of last season, and £5 million is the second one required, or ALK negotiated the option to make further repayments.

UTC
This user liked this post: Mattster

bobinho
Posts: 9248
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Been Liked: 4070 times
Has Liked: 6538 times
Location: Burnley

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by bobinho » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:17 pm

clive40golf wrote:
Mon May 23, 2022 7:28 pm
We seem to go over everything again and again! SD tried to compete with a limited (in skill and numbers) squad. He was never backed properly by the previous or the present board. As a squad aged and got less competitive 3-4 seasons ago, that’s when he should have been backed. AP promised players, a plan & the recourse for SD to compete. He didn’t. To blame SD for any of this mess we’re in now is a complete non footballing/ naive way to look at things.
We’re now in a state, thanks to Pace and his board where Stoke city/Bolton/Portsmouth/Coventry spring to mind. It might be different how we get there, but the outcome will be roughly the same.
I’ve been a Burnley fan for over 50yrs and apart from the itv debacle, this is the most worrying time in those 50yrs.
I definitely don’t want to go back to Div 1 or 2. I want my team back in the premiership, but I fear under the present regime that will never happen again. We’ll be stripped bare and have crowds of 4500.
Not Exciting Times
Well it started badly, tailed off a little towards the middle, and the less said about the ending the better. Other than that…..utter dog toffee🤔😳🥴

Garlick wanted out with as much money trousered as possible. Hence no support for Dyche. That’s not the fault of Pace.

Dyche repeatedly demonstrated during his time here that he had his favourites in the squad, and he got away with that stubbornness/arrogance for a very long time. And then he didn’t, and it cost us. That’s not the fault of Pace.
The message sent by the performances against Brighton and Spurs Stevie Wonder could’ve seen, and I think maybe SD could too, but his sheer bloody mindedness saw us relegated. That’s not the fault of Pace.

Pace did his best to get players in, but it was far too late for that. He even traveled to Croatia to try to secure the services of a player. There simply wasn’t enough time to reverse the trend, and not enough willingness by SD to acknowledge the “old way” wasn’t enough anymore.

To suggest SD is solely to blame is naive I’ll give you that, but to suggest as you have it’s nothing to do with SD and is the fault of others is equally naive.

Pace this and pace that, and all the while the real culprit is sunning himself somewhere watching and laughing whilst people blame his replacement for our current predicament.

Pace will be judged at some point, no doubt about it, but he should be judged on what happens during his full tenure, not what happened in the few weeks after he took over somebody else’s shitshow.
These 2 users liked this post: MeeActon1 tiger76

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by dsr » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:25 pm

One of the prime ways to judge Pace will be whether he ever repays the £112m+ that he owes the club, on which he is paying zero interest.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by RVclaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:26 pm

Mattster wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:48 pm
Has a further £5m been paid off the MSD Loan on 14th July or am I reading this wrong?

https://tisegroup.com/market/securities/12598
Interesting - so now the balance is 45m. I take it the sales of Collins and Cornet (likely) we will do similar, though with those ones we also need to pay off Stoke / Lyon too. I’m purely speculating here but perhaps the ‘agreement’ that might be in place is that 50% of any transfer money received goes towards the balance.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:12 pm

dsr wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:25 pm
One of the prime ways to judge Pace will be whether he ever repays the £112m+ that he owes the club, on which he is paying zero interest.
ALK have already reduced the MSD £65 million to £45 million (if our reading of TISE listings are correct). On that basis your figure can be reduced to £92 million.

However, reality is, it doesn't matter: ALK bought the club, it's not just ALK who has "borrowed the money" it is also ALK who they've borrowed it from.

The bit they do need to repay is the money they've borrowed from MSD and any other 3rd party loans, if any, that arise further down the line.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:27 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:12 pm
ALK have already reduced the MSD £65 million to £45 million (if our reading of TISE listings are correct). On that basis your figure can be reduced to £92 million.

However, reality is, it doesn't matter: ALK bought the club, it's not just ALK who has "borrowed the money" it is also ALK who they've borrowed it from.

The bit they do need to repay is the money they've borrowed from MSD and any other 3rd party loans, if any, that arise further down the line.
I can't see where you are getting that from. Unless I've missed something there's nothing to suggest that ALK have reduced the loan rather than BFC Holdings (unless you are suggesting that it is all ALK as they are the parent entity).

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:34 pm

aggi wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:27 pm
I can't see where you are getting that from. I've missed something there's nothing to suggest that ALK have reduced the loan rather than BFC Holdings (unless you are suggesting that it is all ALK as they are the parent entity).
Yes, ALK own the club. It's their club and all the assets and liabilities of the club are also theirs. Of course, if anyone has any doubts they should ask themselves who the club's chairman is and who all the members of the board of directors are.

EDIT: It's all their own money, maybe different pockets, but still all their own money.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:05 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:34 pm
Yes, ALK own the club. It's their club and all the assets and liabilities of the club are also theirs. Of course, if anyone has any doubts they should ask themselves who the club's chairman is and who all the members of the board of directors are.

EDIT: It's all their own money, maybe different pockets, but still all their own money.
Then the £20m reduction that you've suggested (£112m to £92m) makes no sense as you're saying the £112m doesn't exist (I'm assuming DSR has added the £10m in the post balance sheet events to the £102m to get the £112m).

The issue is that it's very clear that £102m has come out of BFC Holdings to fund the purchase (and hence leave the group at some point, it's not all intercompany transactions). You can of course argue that ALK purchased the right to do that when they bought the club but, of course, what benefits ALK doesn't necessarily benefit the club and Pace can be judged on what happens with that money.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:07 pm

Mattster wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 12:48 pm
Has a further £5m been paid off the MSD Loan on 14th July or am I reading this wrong?

https://tisegroup.com/market/securities/12598
Given, how it has been reported that is a complicated and expensive process to pay down an MSD UK Holdings loan out of a borrowers own volition, a report that is backed up by publicly available documentation of general practice by MSD UK Holdings. It would seem appropriate to suggest that this additional sum is actually part of the negotiated reduction in overall balance as outlined in the clubs last accounts.

That would require MSD to accept the staged payment scenario, but given that it required the sales of players to fund, that would make sense, given the provisions of the Charge against the club.

£20m would seem more in line with an appropriate loan value drop (though many of us entertained the possibility for a greater sum - which it may yet be), given that there is notice for a further repayment if we do not achieve promotion in the coming season.

What is still not known is if there has been a penalty payment in addition to these balance reductions - I know I am in a minority for believing they are such payments, but I am just acknowledging the intent described in the MSD UK Holdings business model as outlined in their first accounts dated December 31 2020
This user liked this post: NewClaret

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:10 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:34 pm
Yes, ALK own the club. It's their club and all the assets and liabilities of the club are also theirs. Of course, if anyone has any doubts they should ask themselves who the club's chairman is and who all the members of the board of directors are.

EDIT: It's all their own money, maybe different pockets, but still all their own money.
there are still other shareholders in the club, so technically it is not all their own money though they can act, are acting and have acted like it is.

NewClaret
Posts: 13225
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by NewClaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:23 pm

Agree with CP.

Good that it’s being paid down albeit a shame that is necessary.

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KRBFC » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:42 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:12 pm


The bit they do need to repay is the money they've borrowed from MSD and any other 3rd party loans, if any, that arise further down the line.
By selling our best players? :lol:
Which other club in world football is selling their best players to pay for a new chairman? Why is the club paying for ALK's shares? it's insanity

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by claretandy » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:50 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:07 pm
Given, how it has been reported that is a complicated and expensive process to pay down an MSD UK Holdings loan out of a borrowers own volition, a report that is backed up by publicly available documentation of general practice by MSD UK Holdings. It would seem appropriate to suggest that this additional sum is actually part of the negotiated reduction in overall balance as outlined in the clubs last accounts.

That would require MSD to accept the staged payment scenario, but given that it required the sales of players to fund, that would make sense, given the provisions of the Charge against the club.

£20m would seem more in line with an appropriate loan value drop (though many of us entertained the possibility for a greater sum - which it may yet be), given that there is notice for a further repayment if we do not achieve promotion in the coming season.

What is still not known is if there has been a penalty payment in addition to these balance reductions - I know I am in a minority for believing they are such payments, but I am just acknowledging the intent described in the MSD UK Holdings business model as outlined in their first accounts dated December 31 2020
It seems to defeat the object if you get penalised for making extra payments.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30275
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 10917 times
Has Liked: 5594 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Vegas Claret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:58 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:42 pm
By selling our best players? :lol:
Which other club in world football is selling their best players to pay for a new chairman? Why is the club paying for ALK's shares? it's insanity
pretty sure we would be doing that anyway, isn't that the model, buy cheap sell for a profit ?

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:03 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:58 pm
pretty sure we would be doing that anyway, isn't that the model, buy cheap sell for a profit ?
Yes that's what most clubs aim to do where possible

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by dsr » Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:04 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:12 pm
ALK have already reduced the MSD £65 million to £45 million (if our reading of TISE listings are correct). On that basis your figure can be reduced to £92 million.

However, reality is, it doesn't matter: ALK bought the club, it's not just ALK who has "borrowed the money" it is also ALK who they've borrowed it from.

The bit they do need to repay is the money they've borrowed from MSD and any other 3rd party loans, if any, that arise further down the line.
You're definitely confusing two loans there, although the reason we had to borrow one was to pay the other.

Loan 1 - ALK (or other Pace company) owe £112m to Burnley FC as per the last set of accounts. It may be more now or it may be less, depending on what they have borrowed or repaid. They aren't paying interest.

Loan 2 - Burnley FC have borrowed £65m off MSD, at double figure rates of interest, so they could lend it to ALK (or other Pace company).

Repayment of one loan does not write down the other.

I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that "it doesn't matter" what the loan is. If ALK go belly up because they have liabilities and no assets, then Burnley FC's £112m goes belly up as well. But the amounts BFC still owe - they don't go belly up. I think what you mean is that it doesn't matter to ALK if they can't pay their loan to BFC because we can't force them to, and it doesn't matter to ALK if Burnley have to sell all their PL players to repay the MSD loan. But it matters to supporters of BFC, even if we don't have a financial interest in whether the club survives.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19169
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:05 pm

claretandy wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 3:50 pm
It seems to defeat the object if you get penalised for making extra payments.
Maybe, but this is what I was referring to in the MSD UK Holdings December 31 2020 accounts

Notes to the Financial Statements,
2 Significant Accounting Policies
(d) Critical Accounting Judgements and Key Sources of Estimation Uncertainty
Critical Judgements in Applying the Company’s Accounting Policies
Business Model

Paragraph 3 “…Whilst there are early repayment penalties, the Directors consider the penalty to be materially equivalent to the lost interest that would have been received, but would highlight that this is an area of judgement.”

and yes this is only a guide to their practises and not our specific loan agreement, but it seems to be a pretty clear statement of intention, to me at least.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by RVclaret » Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:07 pm

dsr wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:04 pm
You're definitely confusing two loans there, although the reason we had to borrow one was to pay the other.

Loan 1 - ALK (or other Pace company) owe £112m to Burnley FC as per the last set of accounts. It may be more now or it may be less, depending on what they have borrowed or repaid. They aren't paying interest.

Loan 2 - Burnley FC have borrowed £65m off MSD, at double figure rates of interest, so they could lend it to ALK (or other Pace company).

Repayment of one loan does not write down the other.

I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that "it doesn't matter" what the loan is. If ALK go belly up because they have liabilities and no assets, then Burnley FC's £112m goes belly up as well. But the amounts BFC still owe - they don't go belly up. I think what you mean is that it doesn't matter to ALK if they can't pay their loan to BFC because we can't force them to, and it doesn't matter to ALK if Burnley have to sell all their PL players to repay the MSD loan. But it matters to supporters of BFC, even if we don't have a financial interest in whether the club survives.
I thought it had been said that the 112m consisted of 65m (MSD) + 37m (deducted from cash balance) + 10m intercompany loan to holding company?

Post Reply