massive news for fulham as al fayed wipes the debt clean. fulham debt fee. the man is a legend. i love this man
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/29/fulham-debt-free-al-fayed?CMP=twt_gu (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/29/fulham-debt-free-al-fayed?CMP=twt_gu)//
What a surprise for everyone who doubted his continued commitment to our (his) club.
This must put us in an excellent financial position going forward.
On the clubs website too
http://www.fulhamfc.com/news/2013/january/29/financial-results (http://www.fulhamfc.com/news/2013/january/29/financial-results)
Wow.
And there were people questioning him only this weekend just past.
Great News! Onwards and upwards!
COYW!
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
:005: Now i want him to incur some more debt and buy some players in the next few days.
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
Basically it means that he has given up wanting repayment of the loans in return for further equity in the club. Which as we know, he already owns.
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
who knows bugger all?
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
In short, as far as the FFC accounts show, the club does not owe Mo any money. So, the club accounts have gone from pretty poor to pretty damn good. What benefits this gives is yet to be seen
Quote from: SaltfordWhite on January 29, 2013, 03:07:34 PM
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
Basically it means that he has given up wanting repayment of the loans in return for further equity in the club. Which as we know, he already owns.
Wow, what an absolute legend! Those debts were £100m+ weren't they? Get that man a statue next to Haynes!
Quote from: TommyBarrs on January 29, 2013, 03:07:47 PM
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
who knows bugger all?
Me.
After reading some of the patently ridiculous comments about getting rid of Al Fayed and Alistair Mac yesterday, I do hope that this article has been rolled up into a pipe and smoked by those commentators.
Fantastic news for the future of the club! Now, let's start winning games again shall we?
By the way this does not mean we are debt free. It just means debts have been converted into shares. Shares are still effectively debt. Instead of paying interest on debt, fulham will be paying dividends on shares.
This really is one in the eye for all those who wanted rid of MAF. The man is a true legend. As the loan has been converted to equity this means we no longer have to pay it back at 10 mil per year.
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 29, 2013, 03:10:01 PM
After reading some of the patently ridiculous comments about getting rid of Al Fayed and Alistair Mac yesterday, I do hope that this article has been rolled up into a pipe and smoked by those commentators.
Fantastic news for the future of the club! Now, let's start winning games again shall we?
Ive been jumping on the Jol out fence but I have never questioned the likes of Al fayed and I agree with you 100%. In my eyes they are not the problem!
Quote from: Slaphead in Qatar on January 29, 2013, 03:10:34 PM
By the way this does not mean we are debt free. It just means debts have been converted into shares. Shares are still effectively debt. Instead of paying interest on debt, fulham will be paying dividends on shares.
The dividends will be small change compared with loan interest.
The value of shares can either go up or down.
This is a much tidier set up than the loan situation.
May mean more money available for transfers. Not necessarily now though, what with there being little time left.
Quote from: grandad on January 29, 2013, 03:14:10 PM
The value of shares can either go up or down.
Is that not only true for public companies?
The fiqures being reported are for the the financial year and that ended on 30 June 2012.
So they do not account for anything that happened after that date - I will leave you to work out what that means.
If he has cleared our debts - incurring some loses to himself - would he really want to to pump more money into the club for signings? It would be incredibly generous to announce this and to spend more on players in the same month.
Like most, I love Mo for what he has done.
Not that I think there is anything untoward but I would ask the question.
Why do this? & Why do this now?
There must be a reason.
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:09:52 PM
Quote from: SaltfordWhite on January 29, 2013, 03:07:34 PM
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
Basically it means that he has given up wanting repayment of the loans in return for further equity in the club. Which as we know, he already owns.
Wow, what an absolute legend! Those debts were £100m+ weren't they? Get that man a statue next to Haynes!
Quote from: TommyBarrs on January 29, 2013, 03:07:47 PM
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
who knows bugger all?
Me.
£212 million according to the article in the guardian.
Quote from: SaltfordWhite on January 29, 2013, 03:07:34 PM
Quote from: SKSW6 on January 29, 2013, 03:05:04 PM
For someone who knows bugger all about finance, what exactly does this mean? Is it basically just business speak for essentially writing off all of the debts?
Basically it means that he has given up wanting repayment of the loans in return for further equity in the club. Which as we know, he already owns.
Whilst it clearly leaves Fulham in a muich better financial position not having the debt to Mo looming over us, but could Al Fayed use the additional equity in the club as a way of making that chunk of ownership more appealing to a potential new Chairman?? Why has he written the debt off now? I don't pretend to remotely understand the financial/ownership side of football, so happy to be educated if my suggestion/question is a silly one.
I've been saying for quite a while that the only way that loans and short-term contracts of aging players makes sense is if MAF is planning to sell the club. So, here we are:
1. Debts converted into shares
2. Planning permission granted for Riverside extension
3. Little, if any, expenditure commitments over time for long-term contracts
This looks even more like a man making Fulham as financially attractive as possible prior to selling.
Oh, by the way,
QuoteThis really is one in the eye for all those who wanted rid of MAF.
who exactly are these people? This faction must have surfaced the same week that West Ham signed Felleini, and that's why I never heard of it until this thread.
Quote from: BedsFFC on January 29, 2013, 03:18:50 PM
Like most, I love Mo for what he has done.
Not that I think there is anything untoward but I would ask the question.
Why do this? & Why do this now?
There must be a reason.
I wonder if this is timed with some FFP deadline.
Quote from: JustOverTheRiver on January 29, 2013, 03:18:36 PM
If he has cleared our debts - incurring some loses to himself - would he really want to to pump more money into the club for signings? It would be incredibly generous to announce this and to spend more on players in the same month.
No. But more of the profit may be available for them.
It seems that no matter what Mo does some will find wrong in it. For me I love the man and all he has done for FFC.
Quote from: HatterDon on January 29, 2013, 03:21:06 PM
I've been saying for quite a while that the only way that loans and short-term contracts of aging players makes sense is if MAF is planning to sell the club. So, here we are:
1. Debts converted into shares
2. Planning permission granted for Riverside extension
3. Little, if any, expenditure commitments over time for long-term contracts
This looks even more like a man making Fulham as financially attractive as possible prior to selling.
HD, you have written about this previously - I have to say that the scales seem to have tipped in favour of the position you've taken! 092.gif
one of the reason i think Mo has wiped the debt clean is because the new rules come in next season. like i said i think this could be 1 of the reasons why this has happened now but im not so sure.
No idea what club's valued at but even if these 212 equal 50% of the shares I really don't mind the owner taking a 50% share of the profits after tax.
He's long been saying he wants to make the club self-sufficient. Well we have operating profits 3rd year in a row don't we? I can imagine this season we'll end up on the green side of the balance with the sales and mostly cheap/free/loan signings.
Just the new seats if filled will add about 3mil/year and I have no idea how many millions will come with the new TV rights money. People were saying investments for the stand are going to come from the sales of our players this year. What if they actually are made with loans and are to be repayed over the years with the money made from the new seats?
aNd of course there are always those who want see the dark side into things. Up to you guys :D
Also it seems the conversion of the debt was done in June before the financial year ended? At least the news article on fulhamfc.com says the year ended debt free.
So do we have a news that's actually 8 month old news?
ok. so everyone who yesterday was saying the club, the chairman, the board don't care are now falling over themselves to love al fayed? what can we learn from this?
Quote from: HatterDon on January 29, 2013, 03:21:06 PM
I've been saying for quite a while that the only way that loans and short-term contracts of aging players makes sense is if MAF is planning to sell the club. So, here we are:
1. Debts converted into shares
2. Planning permission granted for Riverside extension
3. Little, if any, expenditure commitments over time for long-term contracts
This looks even more like a man making Fulham as financially attractive as possible prior to selling.
But who the heck is going to want to come in and buy the club, and then have to build a £30m+ stand? No one. They'll wait for MAF to do it before acquiring the club.
If the stand was already completed, then yes, it would align. But this is a major issue in any perceived transaction.
I dont think it can be overstated how fantastic this news is. I mentioned on here a couple weeks ago that I thought he would clear the debt, and he has.
I believe this is what RA did with Chelsea. I dont think this is a signal to sell though, quite the opposite. He's effectively given us £200m
Quote from: timmyg on January 29, 2013, 03:38:06 PM
Quote from: HatterDon on January 29, 2013, 03:21:06 PM
I've been saying for quite a while that the only way that loans and short-term contracts of aging players makes sense is if MAF is planning to sell the club. So, here we are:
1. Debts converted into shares
2. Planning permission granted for Riverside extension
3. Little, if any, expenditure commitments over time for long-term contracts
This looks even more like a man making Fulham as financially attractive as possible prior to selling.
But who the heck is going to want to come in and buy the club, and then have to build a £30m+ stand? No one. They'll wait for MAF to do it before acquiring the club.
There is not one piece of evidence to say that it is for sale and wiping out the debt leave assets that can be used to raise a loan for future capital expenditure - the new "MF Stand" for instance.
Given that the financial year ended on 30 June 2012 - anything that has happened since then, player sales for instance, is not included. So unless MAF has paid himself a dividend - we do have a pot to p** in.
If the stand was already completed, then yes, it would align. But this is a major issue in any perceived transaction.
Never doubt that great man!
My understanding of it.
Basically it has been written off- presuming he is the only person who owns the club (which he is). i.e if the club was worth £100m equity + £50m debt (All to MAF) then the club is now worth £150m equity, all owned by MAF. If there were other debtors then they will now have some equity in the club- some shares. Thats basically it.
Its good news for now and the future.
Are you reading this Bradstow?
timmyg - would the £30mil not be money already in the club's budget committed for the work to be completed. If so, surely this would mean that the new stand will have no financial impact on a new Chairman.
lets hope Jol and the squad can muster a decent response to MAF's commitment
if debt free, ensuring we get our share of the 13/14 Prem tv money is even more vital
Quote from: timmyg on January 29, 2013, 03:38:06 PM
Quote from: HatterDon on January 29, 2013, 03:21:06 PM
I've been saying for quite a while that the only way that loans and short-term contracts of aging players makes sense is if MAF is planning to sell the club. So, here we are:
1. Debts converted into shares
2. Planning permission granted for Riverside extension
3. Little, if any, expenditure commitments over time for long-term contracts
This looks even more like a man making Fulham as financially attractive as possible prior to selling.
But who the heck is going to want to come in and buy the club, and then have to build a £30m+ stand? No one. They'll wait for MAF to do it before acquiring the club.
If the stand was already completed, then yes, it would align. But this is a major issue in any perceived transaction.
timmy, having a permit doesn't mean that you have to build. The stand expansion is available as a way to increase income should the new owner want it. It resolves the problem of no potential increase in attendance that we're having right now.
What a potential buyer wants is a ledger that shows projected income and projected expenditure, and for that ledger to show that the club is stable and there is room for growth. This is what we have. This is what MAF has constructed.
Just out of interest, why does it matter if he does plan to sell?
Not that I think for a moment he will, but if he thinks the time has come, then what is the problem with it?
Quote from: SaltfordWhite on January 29, 2013, 04:00:37 PM
Just out of interest, why does it matter if he does plan to sell?
Not that I think for a moment he will, but if he thinks the time has come, then what is the problem with it?
Was going to ask the same question. Think its fair say that if he did decide to sell he has left us in a position no FFC could have ever imagined we would be in 15 years ago.
Brilliant news! It's great to see Al Fayed reaffirming his commitment to the club. Things are certainly looking rosy off the field, with the stadium redevelopment, some talented kids coming through the academy, and now this.
I still have serious doubts about Jol, and investment is needed in the playing squad, but if we can overcome this then there are some exciting times ahead! A positive performance/result tomorrow would be a good place to start!
if he wants to sell, no one with a interest with football would buy, to expensive with no real profit, only a property investor would buy, but that would not be easy at all
Quote from: SaltfordWhite on January 29, 2013, 04:00:37 PM
Just out of interest, why does it matter if he does plan to sell?
Not that I think for a moment he will, but if he thinks the time has come, then what is the problem with it?
He's pretty stable, unlike a lot of the more recent owners to come in to the PL.
I would be really interested to know if he is looking to sell. Or perhaps take more of a back seat role given his age. Maybe promote his son to chairman.
Given the location and history of the club you would think that we'd be very attractive for someone with far too much money. I'm sure Al Fayed has had offers for the club previously.
The TV revenue for next season is set to treble or something rediculous, so our profit margins should increase regardless.
Quote from: mikeyffc28 on January 29, 2013, 03:53:32 PM
timmyg - would the £30mil not be money already in the club's budget committed for the work to be completed. If so, surely this would mean that the new stand will have no financial impact on a new Chairman.
the money being in the budget doesn't neccessarily mean they are also already in the clubs bank account :D
I think Hatterdon is correct. Changing Debt to Enquity in this way is worrying.
This is great news and I echo what everyone says in that is shows what a man he his. However can suggest the new FairPlay rules may have had so thing to do with turning the loan to equity.
Either way the man has done a Great thing
Fantastic news Al Fayed is a Fulham legend
This is a great gesture by the man, and he deserves all our best wishes for making it.
In respect of whether this is to position us for a sale, or for the new fiscal fairplay rules due to take effect or just a whim, I would note that if what has been stated in this thread is true, and that Jambo's assertions are correct (100 M equity and 50 M debt for example) and the 50M debt has been written off, it should make no difference to any sale at all. As if the sale was last year, the new buyer would have paid 100M for the equity and an additional 50M to settle outstanding debt, but now would just pay for the 150M equity - no actual purchase price difference.
By all accounts from the club, as I believe, then not only has planning permission been granted, but the plans are drawn up and work due to commence in the close season? If so, then there has already been an oop expenditure by the club that is not recoupable upon any sale.
I hope that our benefactor simply has in mind the future of the club, inasmuch that he didn't wish us to become embroiled in any issues with the new fiscal rules, and also, given his age/health, he further didn't wish, should he pass away, that the debt be called in by his estate and Fulham forced into a fire sale and possibly administration.
I prefer to believe that this was a magnanimous gesture by MaF and that he just wants the best for the club, and nothing much more.
Thanks MaF, you are a gent. :scarf:
Here's the blurb from the Guardian:
---
The Fulham chairman, Mohamed Al Fayed, has converted his £212m in loans to the club into equity. Photograph: Sang Tan/AP
Fulham are effectively debt-free after Mohamed Al Fayed converted his £212m in loans to the club into equity. The London club reported an operating profit of £1.2m for the financial year ending 30 June 2012 with that figure inflated by the £3.4m generated by the team's participation in last season's Europa League.
The manager, Martin Jol, still hopes to strengthen his squad this week ahead of Thursday's closure of the transfer window with Fulham currently 14th in the Premier League, six points clear of the relegation zone, as they attempt to emulate last term's ninth-place finish. There is some funding available to add to his options given the summer sales of Moussa Dembélé and Clint Dempsey.
Fulham posted revenue figures of £79.3m, including the influx from the Europa League, for the last financial year and also saw the overall occupancy figure at Craven Cottage rise to 98.4%.
"Fulham continues to make great strides and, following planning permission for the redevelopment of the Riverside Stand, we will continue to prosper and grow," said Fayed, the chairman. "For almost the last 15 years, I have ensured the club moves in the right direction and remains true to our proud history, strong heritage and past traditions."
---
Changing debt to equity is only worrying in a public where it is effectively printing money to pay off your debts. In a single owned private company the equity is the owners so he can draw dividends against it if he choose but is not obliged to and may put it back to pay for players or further expansion. With the debt interest was payable. You must remember that not only has MAFs private debt been converted to shares the rest of the debt has been paid off. So at the end of the financial year we not indebted to anyone.
My assumption is that MAF is planning to retire from his business life and is giving his sons a big start in taking over his businesses.
I can see no problems with these new financial arrangements.
MAF... Best chairman in club footy.
065.gif
:Haynes The Maestro:
:medal:
:scarf:
Quote from: Berserker on January 29, 2013, 04:21:52 PM
I think Hatterdon is correct. Changing Debt to Enquity in this way is worrying.
I don't think it is worrying at all even if Mo is planning on selling. If he does sell he has put himself in position to do it in his own time and to pick a buyer that meets his approval. It would not need to be a panic sell to the first group to stump up some cash.
There are also other possibilities. It would certainly be easier on the club to divide up equity shares of the club for estate planning purposes than to divide up ownership rights to debt. Some of the heirs would likely want to call the debt immediately which could put the club in dire straights. It could be a plan to set the club in good standing for the new financial operating rules. It could be a financial plan that not one of us can fathom at the moment. Whatever the case, Mo is not a dull tack and I am confident this is part of a plan to keep the club in a good financial position regardless of his future plans.
Logicalman
I believe that MAF has acted in the best long term interests of the Club, as he has throughout his ownership.
What would put a real damper on things, given what he has done and the bright financial prospects - more ticket sales and more TV revenue - would be relegation. So within the next few days we will surely see either some strengthening of the squad or a new manager - or possibly both.
But the first priority, which both Jol supporters and critics can surely agree upon, is getting three points tomorrow. That alone won't keep us in the Premiership and thus make continuing sense of all MAF has done, but it would be an important contribution. Fingers crossed!
God this was a bolt out of the blue...all hail Big Mo...
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/04/17/article-1266848-08C65AE8000005DC-766_468x286.jpg)
Quote from: Slaphead in Qatar on January 29, 2013, 03:10:34 PM
By the way this does not mean we are debt free. It just means debts have been converted into shares. Shares are still effectively debt. Instead of paying interest on debt, fulham will be paying dividends on shares.
Wrong.
Debts can attract interest and can be repaid at any time.
Equity is part of the company, attracts no repayment (unless preferential shares, which is unlikely) and dividends can only be paid from distributable funds. So if the company's net worth is only £5 Million (£200M less the -£195M from last year) then no more than 5 million can be paid.
This not only leaves us financially strong (value of the company is not relevant when there is only one owner, as the shares are worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for them, no ore, no less). It also sets us up very nicely for the financial fair play.
There is no down side to this, it's all excellent news for Fulham going forward.
Thank you Al-Fayed!
Give the man a knighthood...
Or a passport?
Brilliant news - I think Mo has acted ahead of the rule changes to put FFC into a great position.
Great news from the man who owns us.
However this has been done on the back of big sales of players and little fees on players coming in. We may be debt free but we are without a team that works very well under this manager.
It actually changes little in our present situation.
Debt free, a new stand but which division will we be in?
Quote from: TheGreatGatsby on January 29, 2013, 04:56:55 PM
Give the man a knighthood...
Give him citizenship first, then he can become the King of Scotland later on!!
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 29, 2013, 03:10:01 PM
After reading some of the patently ridiculous comments about getting rid of Al Fayed and Alistair Mac yesterday, I do hope that this article has been rolled up into a pipe and smoked by those commentators.
Fantastic news for the future of the club! Now, let's start winning games again shall we?
Spot on, 082.gif Guarantee the same people will still moan about the great man telling him to sell the club as they assume, like other foolish fans around the country that there are people with billions just queuing up to endlessly splash their money around on a football club because City's owners have. If they look around at all the other supposed billionaires who have bought clubs have one thing in common - none of spent very much money
Quote from: Lighthouse on January 29, 2013, 05:01:40 PM
Great news from the man who owns us.
However this has been done on the back of big sales of players and little fees on players coming in. We may be debt free but we are without a team that works very well under this manager.
It actually changes little in our present situation.
Debt free, a new stand but which division will we be in?
We also need to note that Fulham have now been in profit for 2 years running and already have Dembele and Dempsey sales (less purchases) to add to this years balance sheet.
The team is not playing well at the moment and one day we (like 14 other teams in the division) may well be relegated. However, if and when that happens, I would much rather be in our position, than the likes of say QPR!
And a lot of these chairmen have bitten off more than they can chew.
Fabulous news. I hope he doesn't sell though.
Quote from: Slaphead in Qatar on January 29, 2013, 03:10:34 PM
By the way this does not mean we are debt free. It just means debts have been converted into shares. Shares are still effectively debt. Instead of paying interest on debt, fulham will be paying dividends on shares.
Not to jump on your opinion here, but Shares are nothing like debt.
Shares of a company is ownership in the company, if he had sold a bond to pay himself back then the bond would indeed be debt.
He was not being paid interest (interest free), and I cannot remember if there is a dividend made to owners. If there is, it does not mean that there would be "more" paid in dividends. A dividend amount is decided by the board, and then divided in proportion to the number of shares.
Quote from: God The Mechanic on January 29, 2013, 03:16:09 PM
Quote from: grandad on January 29, 2013, 03:14:10 PM
The value of shares can either go up or down.
Is that not only true for public companies?
No, there is a valuation that determines the actual value of a company. Publicly traded companies trade higher than this value, not because they are worth it....but because people feel the company will grow.
Not long ago, everyone was of the opinion that Fulham is a well run club. That does seem to be the case (still). I love the optimism in the statement made but........the product on the pitch isn't very good of late. Almost like Jol is rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.
Of course, a win today and at Norwich will change absolutely everything.
The other point in the Guardian story is they believe Jol has at least £21m to spend so all these rumours of old men and sickos is just a front and we are going to make some last day big name signings.
I have two thoughts on this.
1st - For me it is a good way to make it more appealing to potential buyers, and less than a year ago there were a number of links to potential buyers. Not that it would be a bad thing, but it is a ways off of being stable.
2nd - this to me is more likely. He pays off the debt, and makes this a profitable year. The fair play rules kick in, and we get a tremendous boost in TV revenues. A large portion of this money is placed back into the club this summer, and Fulham rebuild the team with much better quality. There is a reason that the FFC company's year end is in June and not in January. I feel that this could be a big boost in the summer, and the board and Jol could have had this all planned. It may very well be why so little was spent over the past year.
One more thing, Fulham is not technically owned by MAF, but one of his companies. He may have taken shares in his name or in this holding company.
Awesome news! Now we just have to stay in the prem and the future looks bright. Especially with hopes of a summer squad overhault. - A man can dream.
Al Fayed 077.gif
:scarf: 065.gif :clap_hands:
Thank you Mo.
MAF is clearly a Fulham fan, and I love him for it !
Debt, i.e. loans, is/are repayable and have a 'servicing' cost which is interest payable (by Fulham) - albeit the latter has been at 0% by all accounts.
Shares do not have to be repaid by a company. Shareholders risk their own money in buying shares though their liability is limited to what they have (already) paid for those shares, this being the principle of 'limited liability' and hence limited companies. The reward, if a company is successful, can be in handsome dividends and appreciation in the value of shares which, for a public company, can be traded, i.e. sold, at any time.
Quote from: A Humble Man on January 29, 2013, 05:50:42 PM
The other point in the Guardian story is they believe Jol has at least £21m to spend so all these rumours of old men and sickos is just a front and we are going to make some last day big name signings.
Do they have any basis for this? Sounds like just speculation to me.
Quote from: jmh on January 29, 2013, 08:14:23 PM
Quote from: A Humble Man on January 29, 2013, 05:50:42 PM
The other point in the Guardian story is they believe Jol has at least £21m to spend so all these rumours of old men and sickos is just a front and we are going to make some last day big name signings.
Do they have any basis for this? Sounds like just speculation to me.
It's what I believe, sounds like all the funds they've recently acquired are being stockpiled for the Riverside stand. I expect one more loan and maybe Malanda/Okore.
Mo once said ' there will always be a Fayed at Fulham' so why this weird idea that he has done this only to sell? He is a Fulham supporter and hasn't let us down yet!
Also, maybe now the booing can stop and supportive chants begin? This would honour Mo and assist the team. Imagine doing what Mo has done for this club only to be booed and questioned for whatever you do? Please don't say that the booing isn't for him - it makes no difference to him I'm sure, as it is his choice who the manager is and how much he is given to spend - therefore boo the boss/team and you boo the chairman!
Anyway enough.......
Thank you Chairman Mo for everything! :scarf: :wine: 065.gif
Explains alot when it comes to the transfer market then, the club in the black is far far more important! Thank you big mo!
Quote from: Berserker on January 29, 2013, 04:21:52 PM
I think Hatterdon is correct. Changing Debt to Enquity in this way is worrying.
i love al fayed and would entirely support the renaming of a stand or erection of a statue in his honour, but i think some are reading a bit too much into this particular development. it doesn't mean suggest he's selling the club any more than it amounts to some kind of windfall for us. there are a thousand different ways that debt and this equity could have been structured and without knowing the specifics this announcement doesn't mean much. neither do our accounts (think starbucks), or jol's inconsistent assertions about our transfer budget. all i'd say is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one: we've probably applied for permission to develop the riverside because we actually plan to do so; we probably have a fair bit of money to spend on players but don't want our pants pulled down; and today's announcement is probably just an attempt to reduce our and/or the chairman's exposure to tax, or ensure compliance with the financial fair play regs
Wasn't Mo going to sue Premier League over fair play plan ??
Fulham, Citti and Villa were against it and another club .....
He probably found that not enough Premiership Clubs would support his objection, 14 of the 20 needed to,
so this was the way to keep us from falling foul of the ruling.
Which is :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14825620 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14825620)
Uefa plans tough action on financial fair play
By Matt Slater
Sports news reporter in Geneva
Uefa will withhold prize money and issue transfer bans on clubs failing to meet the new financial fair play rules.
The ultimate sanction remains a ban from European competition but Uefa told the European Club Association (ECA) it wanted other penalties at its disposal.
"It's good Uefa are thinking penalties that fit the crime better than the usual sporting sanctions," Inter Milan chief executive Ernesto Paolillo said.
"This will give the push that some clubs need."
"Football clubs understand rules, it's what we're used to, so we wanted to hear more about the penalties," Paolillo added.
"
Always buying, buying, buying isn't rational
"
Karl-Heinz Rummenigge
Bayern Munich chief executive
Alarmed about the amount of debt carried by Europe's leading clubs, and the fact that only 20% of them turn a profit, Uefa president Michel Platini is determined to encourage a more sustainable business model.
The rules, designed to ensure clubs live within their means over a rolling three-year period, do not come into full effect until the 2013-14 season but this campaign is the first that "counts" towards the initial assessment by the governing body's FFP panel.
That panel is headed by the former Prime Minister of Belgium Jean-Luc Dehaene, who spoke exclusively to the BBC last month about his hopes for the new system.
Quote from: Logicalman on January 29, 2013, 04:39:49 PM
This is a great gesture by the man, and he deserves all our best wishes for making it.
In respect of whether this is to position us for a sale, or for the new fiscal fairplay rules due to take effect or just a whim, I would note that if what has been stated in this thread is true, and that Jambo's assertions are correct (100 M equity and 50 M debt for example) and the 50M debt has been written off, it should make no difference to any sale at all. As if the sale was last year, the new buyer would have paid 100M for the equity and an additional 50M to settle outstanding debt, but now would just pay for the 150M equity - no actual purchase price difference.
By all accounts from the club, as I believe, then not only has planning permission been granted, but the plans are drawn up and work due to commence in the close season? If so, then there has already been an oop expenditure by the club that is not recoupable upon any sale.
I hope that our benefactor simply has in mind the future of the club, inasmuch that he didn't wish us to become embroiled in any issues with the new fiscal rules, and also, given his age/health, he further didn't wish, should he pass away, that the debt be called in by his estate and Fulham forced into a fire sale and possibly administration.
I prefer to believe that this was a magnanimous gesture by MaF and that he just wants the best for the club, and nothing much more.
Thanks MaF, you are a gent. :scarf:
+1
i am very pleased, but a part of me is cautious,
I'm with Big Don on this one.
Nogood "ten gallon hats and all, isit" Boyo
