Fulham debt free

[ToodlesMcToot]

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!

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.

[mikeyffc28]

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.

[HatterDon]

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,

This 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.

[ToodlesMcToot]

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.

[God The Mechanic]

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.

[Jem]

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.

[cebu]

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

[TommyBarrs]

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.

[ffcbulgaria]

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

[ffcbulgaria]

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?

[LRCN]

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?

[timmyg]

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.

[Ordar]

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

[Roberty]

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.

[twang]

Never doubt that great man!

[Jambo]

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.

[Peabody]

Are you reading this Bradstow?

[mikeyffc28]

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.

[mangoputney]

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

[HatterDon]

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.