Borrowing - mortgaged on club assets

Not sure what assets we have, unless this is funds to purchase the stadium.

 

What assets though , I would have thought banks wouldn’t give them loans on half owned ground shares but could be wrong .

 

Yeah, we don’t own any major physical assets yet. Oakwell is still split between BMBC and Cryne family personally I believe.

The charge could be just to cover an increased overdraft for working capital - that is quite normal in business and understandable with the increase spending and turnover this season.

Conversely, it could be a charge to cover said purchase of ground in full.

 

I can only think it would be to purchase the other half.

 

Why do we need to borrow cash for? I thought we were self sufficient? I thought we made millions from player sales?

 

It’s to buy players, they loan the money to buy a striker. Sell that striker in 3 years time, repaying the loan and pocketing the profits. That’s why we’re so desperate to develop and sell all these players

 

So were like a vehicle for extremely rich people to make even more money. Great

 

Like I say, could be extended overdraft facilities. Quite normal in everyday business - there’s always a gap between money out and money in.

 

Sorry - just humour me - which company is Barnsley Football Club 2002 - is it the football club vehicle or the one that owns the Oakwell stadium asset?

 

Given that our owners are about the sixth richest football club owners in the country, and that they have vowed to run the club on self-sufficient basis, and have already achieved a promotion on that basis, I think the finances of our club are no longer of any great concern to me.

 

I think I've got two charges on my business, because I had to borrow quite a lot of money to fund expansion and that was the deal. Surely almost all borrowing is "mortgaged" on something - banks don't generally hand out hundreds of thousands of pounds in unsecured loans.

 

If anyone thinks they're in it for the love of Barnsley fc and the community. Welcome to the real world. Whilst I support the strategy of being self sufficient. I do not think the board are in it to lose money. It's also the reason I believe their hopes/intentions are to reach the premier one day then reap some of the rewards.

 

For those who do retain an interest in where the money goes the club has entered in to a loan facility with Barclays. The security is a floating charge (debenture) against the assets, land, plant, machinery and all receivables and goodwill (basically everything of financial value). Given that Barnsley 2002 does not hold any land then the charge is against the assets of the business.

Given that this has been put in place in early July would suggest that this has been done to meet cashflow requirements as a result of transfer activity.

What the filling does not tell us is the size of the facility in place. No doubt the next set of accounts will reveal this.

 

Its to fund the 8m Kone deal

 

Whilst I agree up to a point fans should always be interested / concerned over the finances of the club they support ask BWFC fans

 

Can you give any credible sources to the wealth of our owners? I'd be interested to read them. I can't find anything about them at all other than newspaper stories that claim they're rich, without any evidence to back up that claim. The companies in which they are purportedly involved simply have shell websites with no addresses or details. Chien Lee has a Wikipedia page but it contains a caveat that the author could have been paid to write it.
Got any links?

 

surely every mortgage you get for a property is using that property as collateral, ie cant pay we'll take it away

 

I'd have thought the only assets the club actually "own", would be the football league share(and no value can be put on it, so they wouldn't be able to borrow against it), the clubs actual I.P.(which can't be worth a lot, not for securing against a loan anyway) and the players contracts(and any bank that would take them in security against a loan deserves to go titts up).

Only other thing I could think of, is the loan is secured against future TV money/sponsorship, similar to how the Glazier's purchased Man Utd...

 

I guess this is why you see some clubs haggle over how a transfer is going to be paid . Some clubs want money up front , probably because they can't extend credit lines at the bank so need cash flow ( this tends to lower the value of the transfer ) . Others are happy with instalments over 4 years or so probably because they have credit lines available which in turn tends to increase the value of the transfer ( clubs are happy to pay a little interest as the cash demanded is over a longer period ) .