Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:58 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? I have an account but cant find the referenced line - even assuming it is there, I'd imagine its a generalised statement used on all companys pages by grouping together all forms of debt. Saints arent debt free. They are bad debt free. The good debt still accrues interest, but does not put risk to the business. As stated, the debt owed to Mike Coleman can only by claimed through shares - that will still accrue interest (at a very favourable rate if 244k is the total interest on a 11m loan) but doesnt risk the operating finances in place at Saints. That is a favourable position to be in as the club are maximally leveraging cash flows. This is why banks that are failing are being split into bad asset banks and good asset banks (TSB being the result of a recent split iirc)

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? I have an account but cant find the referenced line - even assuming it is there, I'd imagine its a generalised statement used on all companys pages by grouping together all forms of debt. Saints arent debt free. They are bad debt free. The good debt still accrues interest, but does not put risk to the business. As stated, the debt owed to Mike Coleman can only by claimed through shares - that will still accrue interest (at a very favourable rate if 244k is the total interest on a 11m loan) but doesnt risk the operating finances in place at Saints. That is a favourable position to be in as the club are maximally leveraging cash flows. This is why banks that are failing are being split into bad asset banks and good asset banks (TSB being the result of a recent split iirc)

Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 2:57 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

I have an account but cant find the referenced line - even assuming it is there, I'd imagine its a generalised statement used on all companys pages by grouping together all forms of debt.

Saints arent debt free. They are bad debt free. The good debt still accrues interest, but does not put risk to the business. As stated, the debt owed to Mike Coleman can only by claimed through shares - that will still accrue interest (at a very favourable rate if 244k is the total interest on a 11m loan) but doesnt risk the operating finances in place at Saints. That is a favourable position to be in as the club are maximally leveraging cash flows. This is why banks that are failing are being split into bad asset banks and good asset banks (TSB being the result of a recent split iirc)

That is about a loan of 2.2% APR

Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 3:18 pm  

Just realised it's less than 2.2% APR as some of that will be capital repayments as I doubt we are doing and interest only loan.

Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 3:24 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

Just realised it's less than 2.2% APR as some of that will be capital repayments as I doubt we are doing and interest only loan.

I didnt have time to do the maths so thanks for that.

For comparison Warrington have a bank loan for just under 500,000 over 9 years at 3% over base rate (so 3.5% atm)

Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:54 pm  

Actually scrap all that.

It's bunkum, just thought we have no idea of the term of the loan do we!!!!

Re: Club Statement : Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:11 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? Very sadly you do not want genuine answers......... In the real world Eamon (born Iin St Helens and a lifelong supporter) rescued the club with his own money and we had the most successful period in our history. He has since brought in other investors who also have the club's interests at heart. Their investments/loans are now converted in to shares. All this has delivered a new fully funded stadium and a longterm business plan. The stadium is the asset that underpins the plan and allows any loans to be repaid. Now Ian Lenighan's plan successfully perfected at Oxford United. No tangible assets other than players and a field in Orrell. The players are sold if the money is right and nothing seems to go back to the club. A rented ground that is only available when the landlord says so and there are no wedding bookings. If you want an insight into the future read Lenighan's fan mail on the Oxford website. A genuine question - which business plan do you prefer?

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? Very sadly you do not want genuine answers......... In the real world Eamon (born Iin St Helens and a lifelong supporter) rescued the club with his own money and we had the most successful period in our history. He has since brought in other investors who also have the club's interests at heart. Their investments/loans are now converted in to shares. All this has delivered a new fully funded stadium and a longterm business plan. The stadium is the asset that underpins the plan and allows any loans to be repaid. Now Ian Lenighan's plan successfully perfected at Oxford United. No tangible assets other than players and a field in Orrell. The players are sold if the money is right and nothing seems to go back to the club. A rented ground that is only available when the landlord says so and there are no wedding bookings. If you want an insight into the future read Lenighan's fan mail on the Oxford website. A genuine question - which business plan do you prefer?

Re: Club Statement : Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:12 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? I have a full set of accounts for both the club and the parent company. This £244K is interest paid on Mike Coleman's company's £10M+ loan to the club at a ridiculously low rate of 1.5% + LIBOR. As previously stated this is not external or bank debt. The debt is to be repaid by swapping it for share capital so Saints do not have to find any cash.

Rogues Gallery wrote: it was a direct copy of a line from here. http://companycheck.co.uk/company/00331 ... l-accounts You may have to have an account to view it. Genuine question if there was no debt how has the £244K interest payment been generated, or is that funny money? I have a full set of accounts for both the club and the parent company. This £244K is interest paid on Mike Coleman's company's £10M+ loan to the club at a ridiculously low rate of 1.5% + LIBOR. As previously stated this is not external or bank debt. The debt is to be repaid by swapping it for share capital so Saints do not have to find any cash.

Re: Club Statement : Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:46 am  

saint at wire wrote:

£10M+ loan to the club at a ridiculously low rate of 1.5% + LIBOR. As previously stated this is not external or bank debt.

The debt is to be repaid by swapping it for share capital so Saints do not have to find any cash.

£10M+ loan plus interest, would seem to transfer to a lot of shares, as you are well informed how does that compare in percentage shares, did Mc Manus invest more than £10 Million plus then?

Re: Club Statement : Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:17 pm  

jaybs wrote:

£10M+ loan plus interest, would seem to transfer to a lot of shares, as you are well informed how does that compare in percentage shares, did Mc Manus invest more than £10 Million plus then?

The accounts state:

The loan is convertible into ordinary shares of the company at the option of the lender. The conversion price per share is based on 50% of the Net Tangible Asset value per share when a conversion notice is issued, or price per share if there is an acquisition of the company.

This means that if it were to happen now based on the 2013 accounts, M Coleman's Director's loans of £10.56M with Net Assets of £16.85M and 332,502 shares i.e. £50.67 Net Asset Value per share, the Director's loan would convert to an additional 417,036 shares.
The total issued shares would therefore be 332,502 + 417,036 = 749,538. As Mr Coleman's company already own 45,000 shares his shareholding would increase to 462,036 which would equate to 61.2% ownership of the total shares and company.

However, it all depends when the conversion is done to come up with a valuation - the final date for doing this (or in the unlikely event that the company can pay him £10M+ in cash) is October 2018.

It appears that the other Directors including Sir Mac have had their loans to the company paid back to them.

I hope this answers the queries and finally puts to bed the incorrect allegations about the Club owing banks loads of money which is doesn't.

Re: Club Statement : Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:32 pm  

saint at wire wrote:

The accounts state:


This means that if it were to happen now based on the 2013 accounts, M Coleman's Director's loans of £10.56M with Net Assets of £16.85M and 332,502 shares i.e. £50.67 Net Asset Value per share, the Director's loan would convert to an additional 417,036 shares.
The total issued shares would therefore be 332,502 + 417,036 = 749,538. As Mr Coleman's company already own 45,000 shares his shareholding would increase to 462,036 which would equate to 61.2% ownership of the total shares and company.

However, it all depends when the conversion is done to come up with a valuation - the final date for doing this (or in the unlikely event that the company can pay him £10M+ in cash) is October 2018.

It appears that the other Directors including Sir Mac have had their loans to the company paid back to them.

I hope this answers the queries and finally puts to bed the incorrect allegations about the Club owing banks loads of money which is doesn't.

So Coleman takes a controlling stake in the company October 2018, but has put significant investment in the club as opposed paying McManus a fee is the short and long of it?