Previous Message
Yes, they could clear the debt with equity but that is not a normal way to operate in most industries. You have a mix of debt and equity funding to optimise gearing, with the bulk of your debt ideally long-term funding infrastructure (eg stadium) with a smaller working capital facility to draw against as needed. The ideal gearing ratios and long to short term debt ratios vary by industry and business specifics.
The balance TFG struck with us post takeover is substantially less debt heavy than you see with finance/VC/PE owners and well within norms for most industries. I think they will want to focus on growing revenues to loosen PSR restrictions. Paying down more debt would not be their preferred solution. Previous Message
Could they clear debt, by trurning into more equity, or just paying off, with no negative PSR impact. If they could by your estimate that gives us another 20-30 mil a year for wages.
If they can and they arent (fair enough thhey have put a lot of cash in already) then in some ways its not really PSR holding us back* ut at all, its the understandably having a limit to hhow muc tey want to shell out?
*obvioulsy PSR would kick back in an issue when that 20 -30 mil was spent up. Although by the looks of it...if you really want to splurge loads more cash there are ways, so long as it isnt debyt on the club? Im putting a tin foil tin hat on here....wasnt that sort of the point? Previous Message
TFG cleared about £550m of non Moshiri debt. They financed it with roughly 40% new equity and 60% new, cheaper syndicated debt with premium lenders. So some of the debt was effectively swapped to better lenders. Previous Message
Moshiri converted his 450 million loan to shares, so who did we owe the 300 million to? That's one piece of the puzzle I never understood or missed. Previous Message
The announcements were a little fuzzy. This is about half of the debt pre takeover as TFG put in new equity and Moshiri turned his loans to equity which TFG obviously bought. The restructured debt is at reduced interest rates with a premium lender. That still means something in the £22-30m range for annual interest depending on precise nominal amount and interest rates. Previous Message
We've definitely still got plenty of debt - but my (very basic!) understanding of the key difference that TFG/Roundhouse have brought is that they have paid off all the high-interest "pay day" loans (that the previous regime had been forced to take on as fewer and fewer reputable institutions were willing to lend to us!) and reconsolidated that into a deal with much more reasonable interest rates, and with a more reputable company - so the debt is still there, however it is now "manageable" debt, whereas before we were paying hand-over-fist and thus haemorrhaging money.
Disclaimer: The above might all be nonsense - I'm a business dunce - but hopefully it's not far off! Previous Message
....but I remember reading fans saying we have no/little debt for the stadium and thinking they must have the wrong end of the stick there. Previous Message
A lot of the build costs were effectively paid by Moshiri so payments are nowhere near what they should be.
How much operating cost does GP require when they will scale it down? They don't need as much policing and stewarding.
And how does construction cost debt count against PSR? Why is that not an infrastructure cost?
I have seen estimates of a 70 million increase in revenue. Even at 50 million I just can't figure out how there's no money. Why did we build BMD if net result is 0? Will it take decades before stadium is actually worth it? Previous Message
We are still very PSR restricted until the end of this financial year on 30 June so we can negotiate but probably not formally complete deals until after that eg Alcaraz.
1 July onwards we will have some headroom from higher projected revenues at BMD (matchday, other use and commercial boost) but we will also have higher operating costs running two stadia. Construction debt interest costs will also become an operating cost counting against PSR the second we start using it. The debt reduction and restructure by TFG helps somewhat but a significant proportion of the revenue boost will be soaked up by these ‘new’ PSR costs.
PSR will clearly remain a constraint on us to some degree in respect of amortisation and wages/squad size unless and until we win things/play in Europe and/or attract significantly more and more lucrative commercial sponsorship.
A massive net transfer splurge is unrealistic in terms of PSR costs (amortisation, wages, deferred interest) as we will need to keep that element of our cost base similar to last year plus any net income boost. We should be less cash constrained so we might be in play for the sort of deals we missed out on in recent years due to needing heavily deferred payment structures. Frees and loans will probably still play an important role bulking the squad out for a year or two yet. Previous Message
New players coming in late. A poor start to the season, a decent stretch along the way to reach safety.
Would be nice to come out roaring and ready.
Responses
on June 16, 2025, 5:55 pm, in reply to "