Everton (and 13 other PL clubs) have credit rating suspended

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce Wayne

Bruce Wayne

Player Valuation: £100m
Forum Supporter
Chelsea and Liverpool among clubs on credit agency blacklist | Football - Times Online

Seventy per cent of Barclays Premier League clubs have had their credit ratings “suspended”, an investigation by The Times can reveal.
Reports seen by this newspaper and generated by Riskdisk, a credit checking agency, reveal that 14 of the top-flight sides have been blacklisted, essentially meaning that companies trading with them are advised to withdraw credit terms.
The data — calculated using a range of financial metrics including payment history, court records and information contained on company balance sheets — does not take into account whether a club have a wealthy benefactor or are owned by a cash-rich holding company so the line-up contains some surprising entries.
The clubs with a “suspended” rating are Aston Villa, Birmingham City, Bolton Wanderers, Burnley, Chelsea, Everton, Fulham, Hull City, Liverpool, Manchester City, Portsmouth, Stoke City, Wigan Athletic and Wolverhampton Wanderers.
 

I read that, well we know there is a lot of debt in football. You did not mention Spurs who are not included because of the value of intangible assets. The players apparently are over valued!!
 
Can someone who knows more about this than I do explain if this is an extremely bad thing, or just an inconvenience? Does this mean we suddenly have to pay off a large amount of our debt? Is this something the various clubs have known about for some time, or is this the first wind of it?
 
Really no great shakes, this agency is just warning about doing trade with the clubs and making sure it is payment up front rather than on credit terms like paying in 2 months time.
 
Ah I see, so it's just a warning then. I was briefly worried that this was something which would lead to PL creditors calling in the debts!
 

Bruce Wayne said:
Chelsea and Liverpool among clubs on credit agency blacklist | Football - Times Online

Seventy per cent of Barclays Premier League clubs have had their credit ratings “suspended”, an investigation by The Times can reveal.
Reports seen by this newspaper and generated by Riskdisk, a credit checking agency, reveal that 14 of the top-flight sides have been blacklisted, essentially meaning that companies trading with them are advised to withdraw credit terms.
The data — calculated using a range of financial metrics including payment history, court records and information contained on company balance sheets — does not take into account whether a club have a wealthy benefactor or are owned by a cash-rich holding company so the line-up contains some surprising entries.
The clubs with a “suspended” rating are Aston Villa, Birmingham City, Bolton Wanderers, Burnley, Chelsea, Everton, Fulham, Hull City, Liverpool, Manchester City, Portsmouth, Stoke City, Wigan Athletic and Wolverhampton Wanderers.
Click to expand...

There was a post on moanyweb about this.

Basically the credit reference agencies are not in a position to look at companies or groups as big as these.

Its about the credit reference agency making a name for itself, by getting in the news.
 
This should be fun, from the Times.

English football’s super-rich owners, including Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour, face drastic curbs on their influence under Uefa proposals.

The extent of the crackdown on “financial doping”, championed by Michel Platini, the Uefa president, is laid bare in a 60-page document seen by The Times. In it, Uefa sets out its detailed plans to force clubs towards break-even, allowing them to spend only what they earn.

Owners would be allowed to inject cash to cover losses for a transitional period, but the amounts will be restricted and closely monitored.

Over the initial three-year period of regulation up to and including 2015, owners would be allowed to cover losses totalling "45 million (about £40 million). The “acceptable deviation” from break-even would then fall to £30 million over three years and then less, with the amount to be determined.



In other words, an owner such as Sheikh Mansour would eventually be permitted to put less than ¤10 million a year into Manchester City on average, unless the money is spent on infrastructure or the youth team, which have no limits on investment. That compares with City’s most recent loss of £89.69 million.

While Platini has talked for months about introducing “financial fair play”, the working draft has brought those proposals into sharp focus.

The European Club Association continues to haggle with Uefa for concessions. It is arguing for a five-year accounting period, rather than three, and for owners to be allowed to invest extra funds through equity rather than debt.

Platini is determined to bring in regulations that will mark a watershed in the English game.

While the proposals will be phased in over several years, many clubs will have to make significant changes — drastic in the cases of Chelsea and City — if they are not to fall foul of the new regulations and face a possible ban from European competition.


*Note 89.69mill loss by Man City.
 
It's worth considering also that Man Utd made a pre-tax loss of around £45m last year as well due to their interest payments. Arsenal will be the big winners if such proposals come in.
 

Neiler said:
Neither did they untill they built it!
Click to expand...

Even if we built a stadia like theirs, which we both know is never gonna happen, we wouldnt fill it every week like they do.

You have to be a little realistic, we are nowhere near Arse in terms of revenue, nor do we have billionares on our board, so I doubt any bank would lend us the money as they did the Arse.
 
MikelsGoat said:
Even if we built a stadia like theirs, which we both know is never gonna happen, we wouldnt fill it every week like they do.

You have to be a little realistic, we are nowhere near Arse in terms of revenue, nor do we have billionares on our board, so I doubt any bank would lend us the money as they did the Arse.
Click to expand...

Arsenal werent a bigger club then us when Wenger took over - everything is relative to success - we dont need as big a stadium due to the differences between London and Liverpool, but we should be aiming for 60.000 IMO or at least a stadium that can be expanded to such.

I take your point on affordability though, i wouldnt mind taking on huge debt for something as definite as a stadium though provided there was a decent loan plan like at the Emirites.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top