Usmanov

[paulbefc]

I doubt another poster has read a single word of that discussion.

 

[Martin Alvito]

I doubt another poster has read a single word of that discussion.

Plenty of us have read at least excerpts for the popcorn value. It has gotten a little long in the tooth, to be fair.

If catcher has finally gotten him to scurry back under his RAWK with his tail between his legs, worth.

 

[gwladysnight]

Saying that Jeff Bezos is happy to access capital at 8% because Amazon access capital at 8% is the most ill informed post you've ever seen?

That is what you do though isn't it Catcher, try to appear clever and then backtrack. Unfortunately it is very simple to show you are a blagger.

This is what you said.

Ok.

Amazon's WACC rate is over 8%. Thats the rate it borrows money. Jeff Bezos could find it, but he's comfortable with that rate.

Quite clearly you haven't got any idea of what you are talking about.

What kind of financial idiot thinks that the Weighted Average Cost of Capital is the rate that a company borrows money at.

You are making a complete fool of yourself.

 

[chrissyjack]

Are we buying our new stadium off Amazon

 

[gwladysnight]

Are we buying our new stadium off Amazon

Ask Catcher he brought Bezos and Amazon up.

 

[chrissyjack]

Ask Catcher he brought Bezos and Amazon up.

Did your club buy their loft extension off Amazon , then

 

[catcherintherye]

That is what you do though isn't it Catcher, try to appear clever and then backtrack. Unfortunately it is very simple to show you are a blagger.

This is what you said.


Quite clearly you haven't got any idea of what you are talking about.

What kind of financial idiot thinks that the Weighted Average Cost of Capital is the rate that a company borrows money at.

You are making a complete fool of yourself.

I'm sure it makes sense to you mate, as I dont think anyone else understands what you're going on about. People view the rate you can access capital at as closely aligned to the rate you can borrow money at. As I've said, they're not the same but in this context the difference is negligible.

For Everton, borrowing money at 7% doesnt automatically mean Usmanov isnt involved at Everton. Nor does it mean he is. It really is that simple.

As I said, I'm sure it makes sense to you, which is all that matters I suppose, as nobody else has a clue what you're going on about.

 

[catcherintherye]

Are we buying our new stadium off Amazon

I tried to bring them up as an example to show that just because you borrow/access debt at a certain rate, doesnt mean you dont/cant have a multi-millionaire backer or that your business is failing.

Unfortunately Gwladys night doesnt understand this and has then spammed the thread to deflect from this mistake.

I wish I wouldnt have brought it up now. You cant reason with stupid and all that!

 

[Martin Alvito]

I'm sure it makes sense to you mate, as I dont think anyone else understands what you're going on about. People view the rate you can access capital at as closely aligned to the rate you can borrow money at. As I've said, they're not the same but in this context the difference is negligible.

For Everton, borrowing money at 7% doesnt automatically mean Usmanov isnt involved at Everton. Nor does it mean he is. It really is that simple.

As I said, I'm sure it makes sense to you, which is all that matters I suppose, as nobody else has a clue what you're going on about.

He strikes me as the sort that has read a lot of books and thinks he knows what he's on about, but lacks the practical experience to understand how the concepts are applied in real world decision-making.

No luck on the tail between legs, it would seem.

 

[catcherintherye]

He strikes me as the sort that has read a lot of books and thinks he knows what he's on about, but lacks the practical experience to understand how the concepts are applied in real world decision-making.

No luck on the tail between legs, it would seem.

I think if you swap books for google/wikipedia you're probably right.

And yes, I cant really embarrass him anymore than I have. We are stuck with him. We are screwed because Putin has given Moshiri and Usmanov all their money. They were peasants before he intervened apparently. No match for a guy who can master the copy and paste function on his chromebook.

 

[gwladysnight]

I'm sure it makes sense to you mate, as I dont think anyone else understands what you're going on about. People view the rate you can access capital at as closely aligned to the rate you can borrow money at. As I've said, they're not the same but in this context the difference is negligible.

For Everton, borrowing money at 7% doesnt automatically mean Usmanov isnt involved at Everton. Nor does it mean he is. It really is that simple.

As I said, I'm sure it makes sense to you, which is all that matters I suppose, as nobody else has a clue what you're going on about.

I will post the calculation again for you Catcher.

WACC	=	E / (E + D)	*	Cost of Equity	+	D / (E + D)	*	Cost of Debt	*	(1 - Tax Rate)
	=	0.9574	*	8.28%	+	0.0426	*	2.2318%	*	(1 - 14.415%)
	=	8.01%

So the WACC is 8.1% and the actual interest on the money they are borrowing is 2.2318%.

What kind of financial numbskull thinks the difference between 8.1% and 2.2318% is negligible.

The hilarious part is that you claim to know how to work out the WACC. One of the variables you need to know to work out the WACC is the interest rate of the debt. Yet you think they are the same thing.

 

[chrissyjack]

I will post the calculation again for you Catcher.

WACC	=	E / (E + D)	*	Cost of Equity	+	D / (E + D)	*	Cost of Debt	*	(1 - Tax Rate)
	=	0.9574	*	8.28%	+	0.0426	*	2.2318%	*	(1 - 14.415%)
	=	8.01%

So the WACC is 8.1% and the actual interest on the money they are borrowing is 2.2318%.

What kind of financial numbskull thinks the difference between 8.1% and 2.2318% is negligible.

The hilarious part is that you claim to know how to work out the WACC. One of the variables you need to know to work out the WACC is the interest rate of the debt. Yet you think they are the same thing.

So THAT’S Numberwang

Back on topic ...Usmanov IN

 

[catcherintherye]

I will post the calculation again for you Catcher.

WACC	=	E / (E + D)	*	Cost of Equity	+	D / (E + D)	*	Cost of Debt	*	(1 - Tax Rate)
	=	0.9574	*	8.28%	+	0.0426	*	2.2318%	*	(1 - 14.415%)
	=	8.01%

So the WACC is 8.1% and the actual interest on the money they are borrowing is 2.2318%.

What kind of financial numbskull thinks the difference between 8.1% and 2.2318% is negligible.

The hilarious part is that you claim to know how to work out the WACC. One of the variables you need to know to work out the WACC is the interest rate of the debt. Yet you think they are the same thing.

Oh god hes re-posted the spreadsheet.

 

[tommye]

What the hell has happened to this thread?! Came in to see if we're getting pumped with dirty cash and ended up having to take a degree in corporate finance to understand what's being said.

I've not got the foggiest what either of them are waffling about and nor do I care

I just want someone to punch someone ffs.
I've fallen asleep 11 times just catching up on the last 5 pages

 

[roydo]

D / ( E + D) was my personal highlight today.

Triffic read.