NUFC Accounts 12/13

[trooper 940]

But he owns the club, the owner borrowed from the lender & the lender just happens to be the owner.

[Happy Face 29]

If we ever turn enough profit to pay tax we need something to offset against to avoid giving money away.

 

I think

[The Fish 10674]

But he owns the club, the owner borrowed from the lender & the lender just happens to be the owner.

 

He loaned money to NUFC, NUFC owe Mike Ashley money. Ashley isn't NUFC.

[trooper 940]

But he owns NUFC ?

[Gemmill 44184]

When NUFC lose, does Mike Ashley not bleed?

[gpirlo68 0]

When NUFC lose, does Mike Ashley not bleed?

That's pretty deep

[ewerk 30175]

If that was true then the fat cunt would've died of blood loss years ago.

[The Fish 10674]

But he owns NUFC ?

I don't think I'm explaining it well. Ewerk, Happy Face, Matt, anyone who isn't a fumbling idiot might be able to do a better job explaining

[Howay 12496]

If that was true then the fat cunt would've died of blood loss years ago.

Does he bleed more if we get battered? If so the Pardew years would have been horrific.

 

 

But he owns NUFC ?

 

From what I remember it's his holding company St James' Holdings owns NUFC, they also loaned NUFC the money, so NUFC owes St James' Holdings the money that was used to lower the debt etc. As others have said he's a separate legal entity from NUFC, his holding company loaned the money he had invested in the holding company to NUFC and NUFC agreed to the terms which iirc were interest free. That's briefly how I remembered it anyway it's been a long time since I bothered reading much about Ashley's ownership and the early loan.

[trooper 940]

Does he bleed more if we get battered? If so the Pardew years would have been horrific.

 

 

 

 

 

From what I remember it's his holding company St James' Holdings owns NUFC, they also loaned NUFC the money, so NUFC owes St James' Holdings the money that was used to lower the debt etc. As others have said he's a separate legal entity from NUFC, his holding company loaned the money he had invested in the holding company to NUFC and NUFC agreed to the terms which iirc were interest free. That's briefly how I remembered it anyway it's been a long time since I bothered reading much about Ashley's ownership and the early loan.

Right I get all that so it's another of Ashley's companies that's owes another of Ashley's companies money . But then you say NUFC agreed the terms of the loan so Ashley agreed the terms of his loan from his own company It still boils down to you can't owe yourself money.

[The Fish 10674]

Right I get all that so it's another of Ashley's companies that's owes another of Ashley's companies money . But then you say NUFC agreed the terms of the loan so Ashley agreed the terms of his loan from his own company It still boils down to you can't owe yourself money.

 

It's not himself though. It's a different legal entity.

 

If you owned a cafe and took some money out of the till to pay for dinner at a fancy restaurant, you owe the cafe that money. If you spent your own money on doing up the cafe, the cafe owes you that money. You as the owner and manager may choose not to call in that loan, but it's still owed to you.

 

as I understand money.

 

 

which I don't

 

 

so, y'know, ask someone else

Edited April 8, 2016 by The Fish

[Alex 34741]

You can guarantee the loan arrangement isn't a philanthropic act.

[The Fish 10674]

You can guarantee the loan arrangement isn't a philanthropic act.

Every choice he's made has been "what is the cheapest way to achieve my goals".

[Howay 12496]

Right I get all that so it's another of Ashley's companies that's owes another of Ashley's companies money . But then you say NUFC agreed the terms of the loan so Ashley agreed the terms of his loan from his own company It still boils down to you can't owe yourself money.

You can owe yourself money you'd just have to be a bit mental to do so and you'd not get far in court in fact they'd probably not let you in the door.

 

In the case of Ashley though we're talking about companies owing other legal entities money, the fact he offered the money and accepted it on behalf of both companies is irrelevant. The real reason Ashley did this is he guarantees himself payment (as much as possible), if he had invested the 100m+ himself into the club and failed to sell the club at a higher price which included what we acknowledge as the loan he'd lose out on that money upon the sale (there is ways he could create an obligation mind iirc). In the current instance though if Ashley sold the club for the price he bought it for the club will still owe St James' Holdings the full amount that he loaned NUFC (less any payments NUFC had made to lower the principal), it's an obligation to be paid opposed to an investment by the owner. You're getting caught up in who is the owner of both companies but legally they are separate entities and can owe each other money.

 

Btw I'm not 100% sure if all of this is the case as I'm just going off the very little I've read on the topic and speaking in pretty general terms.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Howay

[Alex 34741]

Every choice he's made has been "what is the cheapest way to achieve my goals".

Which, ironically, has cost him dearly.

[Isegrim 9694]

He achieved a lot of own goals tbh

[sammynb 3342]

From what I remember it's his holding company St James' Holdings owns NUFC.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I also seem to remember any and all property, training facilities, etc, were also moved to another, different holding company to St James' Holdings (was it MASH?) - so in effect if the cunt ever sells the club or makes it insolvent, the club has no assets other than staff and potential revenue.

Edited April 8, 2016 by sammynb

[trooper 940]

Cheers for the answers lads

[ewerk 30175]

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I also seem to remember any and all property, training facilities, etc, were also moved to another, different holding company to St James' Holdings (was it MASH?) - so in effect if the cunt ever sells the club or makes it insolvent, the club has no assets other than staff and potential revenue.

 

Nah, it's still all owned by the club.

[Howay 12496]

Cheers for the answers lads

No bother, again I'm not really sure what I said is really the case but it's a general idea of how he could do it.

 

Edit:

I just had a quick google and it seems I'm about right going off this canny article:

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/dec/09/mike-ashley-sports-direct-tycoon-empire-profile

They do a far better job than I did Troop so have a look on there if you're bothered.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Howay

[The Fish 10674]

http://www.themag.co.uk/2016/04/breaking-news-sports-direct-will-now-pay-advertising-newcastle-united/

 

 

 

Some very surprising breaking news on Thursday afternoon, as Sports Direct are now going to be paying for the ‘advertising and promotional services’ at Newcastle United.

 

During Mike Ashley’s reign, it has been a major source of resentment from supporters that year after year the rest of Ashley’s business empire has enjoyed the massive benefits of free worldwide advertising via the football club.

 

A policy that obviously restricts the ability of Newcastle United Football Club to raise extra income to allow it better able to compete in the Premier League.

 

The full Newcastle United 2014/15 accounts were made public today and in the ‘Related Party Transactions’, it revealed that the club ‘are in the process of agreeing an arms length rate for these services’ with Sports Direct International.

 

This revelation would appear to strongly suggest that Mike Ashley will be retaining ownership of Newcastle United, at least into next season.

 

As to the motivation for this move, there are a number of thoughts that may go through the mind.

 

The Championship has strict rules regarding FFP (Financial Fair Play) and so by paying for the advertising, it would allow extra money to be put into Newcastle United to help the club get back into the Premier League without breaking FFP rules (if indeed NUFC are relegated..).

 

Alternatively, maybe Mike Ashley will ‘negotiate’ a deal whereby Sports Direct gets a special ‘90% off’ rate of advertising that ties the club to SD beyond the owner’s future departure.

 

Or maybe Mike Ashley has just realised the error of his ways and wants to run Newcastle United properly now…

 

Extract from the 2014/15 Newcastle United Football Accounts

 

‘During the current and prior year, advertising and promotional services were provided to Sports Direct International being a company associated with the ultimate owner of the company, MJW Ashley.

 

No consideration has been paid by Sports Direct International for these services to date but Sports Direct International and the Company are in the process of agreeing an arms length rate for these services and the Company anticipates receiving payment for these services in the future.

 

During the current and prior year, advertising and promotional services were provided to companies associated with MR MJW Ashley, the ultimate shareholder of the Company’sultimate parent undertaking MASH Holdings Limited. No consideration was paid or payable for these services.’

[Happy Face 29]

[Rayvin 5151]

We can look forward to an extra £5 to £10 income then...

[Happy Face 29]

Under-reported issues raised by the accounts...

 

http://www.themag.co.uk/2016/04/newcastle-united-accounts-questions-contradictions-omissions/

[Gemmill 44184]

The net debt point. It's much more likely that the change in that figure is due to a restatement, possibly due to a change in accounting treatment. This would usually be covered in a note to the financial statements.

 

I have to look at bank financial statements all the time at work, and it's not unusual for last year's figures to change if they change the way they classify a certain balance or restructure something.