Farhad Moshiri

[Zezti]

£30m PROFIT?????
FRAUD.
NSNO - NET SPEND NISI OPTIMUM

 

[ham2]

Who’s going to be the first to vault @davek then?

Please dont

 

[Neiler]

Still, to a degree and to look past the headlines, its a massive increase in turnover due to 1 overriding aspect :

Broadcasting 82m 2016
Broadcasting 132m 2017

I’m trying to work out where the 150 million in extra revenue is going, debt was 40 mill odd, net spend was 30 odd million plus, doing up Goodison maybe 10 mill, sacking managers 10 mill, stadium stuff maybe the remainder?

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

I’m trying to work out where the 150 million in extra revenue is going, debt was 40 mill odd, net spend was 30 odd million plus, doing up Goodison maybe 10 mill, sacking managers 10 mill, stadium stuff maybe the remainder?

The balance sheet is showing a positive position of £91m

 

[Goat]

I’m trying to work out where the 150 million in extra revenue is going, debt was 40 mill odd, net spend was 30 odd million plus, doing up Goodison maybe 10 mill, sacking managers 10 mill, stadium stuff maybe the remainder?

Well, the bulk of the money goes here, last seasons figures of course :

Wages / Turnover Ratio 69%

But ive no idea, I can do the real basics, but the way accounts are structured, none of it makes any sense to me.

 

[Neiler]

Well, the bulk of the money goes here, last seasons figures of course :

Wages / Turnover Ratio 69%

But ive no idea, I can do the real basics, but the way accounts are structured, none of it makes any sense to me.

I think in the context of the accounts the wages to turnover ratio is actually down to in the 50s%, could be wrong (again) on that. I imagine it prob went up in the summer though with our summer signings that said we shed a bit of fat as well and prob raised additional sponsorship.

The 150 mill loan should be outside the turnover and normal operational costs, shouldn’t it.

He’s some man if he’s converting it to equity if that what is being reported.

 

[Goat]

I think in the context of the accounts the wages to turnover ratio is actually down to in the 50s%, could be wrong (again) on that. I imagine it prob went up in the summer though with our summer signings that said we shed a bit of fat as well and prob raised additional sponsorship.

The 150 mill loan should be outside the turnover and normal operational costs, shouldn’t it.

He’s some man if he’s converting it to equity if that what is being reported.

Almost certain our wage bill increased, for sure, again havent seen any figures for wages to turnover ratio, suppose the real meat will come with the full accounts.

But the headlines are certainly impressive.

 

[Neiler]

Almost certain our wage bill increased, for sure, again havent seen any figures for wages to turnover ratio, suppose the real meat will come with the full accounts.

But the headlines are certainly impressive.

The 150 to equity if true, really does ease many of the questions I had around him. God we were some basket case to require that just to hit the reset button and progress.

To be fair to the man if the business is posting a 30 million profit in his first year and he bought a minority share hold and option on a further shareholding on a buisness priced with 45 million debt, the value of his shareholding has jumped 80 million or there about in year one, imagine what the stadium will do for it, he is one clever amigo!

 

[Blake]

Almost certain our wage bill increased, for sure, again havent seen any figures for wages to turnover ratio, suppose the real meat will come with the full accounts.

But the headlines are certainly impressive.

From the OS:

This significant investment in the first-team squad led to staff costs rising by 25% to £104.7m. However, the Club also saw wages as a percentage of turnover (including outsourced catering and retail revenues) reduced to 59%, down from 65%.

 

[banno]

Great figures

I am almost certain someone will pop up on here and dissect the figures and insist we have really no profit at all and poo hoo all the figures.........that's what some people like to do because positivity hurts them so much. Lets wait and see who is first.

 

[Frang]

it is still debt.. we now owe Moshiri another £150m..

yes, he can get it back in shares in the club, or following a fall out we would no doubt have to pay it back to him.

either way, he has put the club in a better position. its all worth his while tho, as it will make sure he gets top top dollar when he sells us to the venkys..

@davek thoughts

 

[Woolly Blue]

it is still debt.. we now owe Moshiri another £150m..

yes, he can get it back in shares in the club, or following a fall out we would no doubt have to pay it back to him.

either way, he has put the club in a better position. its all worth his while tho, as it will make sure he gets top top dollar when he sells us to the venkys..

@davek thoughts

Re. the debt, there are basically four options going forward :-

1. He remains a shareholder and lets the debt run on
2. He converts the debt to equity and becomes the majority shareholder
3. The club's put up for sale at a price which reflects the enterprise value, so includes the debt
4. He asks the club for his money back and the club have to take out a loan to pay it back.

4 is very,very unlikely, but would likely massively bugger us up
3 is unlikely in the short term, but might happen in the medium to long term ( five to ten years say )
1&2 are by far the most likely scenarios

The people who thought, and may still think, that a wealthy accountant was going to run us into the ground financially, are looking a tad silly now, and the vaults may well have their say on this matter.

 

[nsno-chris]

All hail the Mosh

Bisches

 

[Frang]

Re. the debt, there are basically four options going forward :-

1. He remains a shareholder and lets the debt run on
2. He converts the debt to equity and becomes the majority shareholder
3. The club's put up for sale at a price which reflects the enterprise value, so includes the debt
4. He asks the club for his money back and the club have to take out a loan to pay it back.

4 is very,very unlikely, but would likely massively bugger us up
3 is unlikely in the short term, but might happen in the medium to long term ( five to ten years say )
1&2 are by far the most likely scenarios

The people who thought, and may still think, that a wealthy accountant was going to run us into the ground financially, are looking a tad silly now, and the vaults may well have their say on this matter.

it all depends on his end game really. aslong as we are in a better position when he choses to sell , then happy days

 

[Bullet]

Go on then , make one !

Make one what? You do realise that the P&L accounts published don't incorporate last summer don't you? I said, "We took out a £60m facility last summer... It's very likely we don't have the full £60m facility remaining." There's no evidence available yet.