mkowl

Certainly compared to Mrs Winco

I would have a few beers as well. It will help you get over the fee note I am sending

Snap Lets go to basics 1) Chansiri over the years has pumped in circa 80m into the football club as loans. Actual commitment on top probably includes 40m to acquire the shares from Mandaric (that is not public record). Over and above this there are significant sums per year he puts into the football club by way of sponsorship and marketing payments. Thus the largest creditor in the football club accounts ie who is owed money is Chansiri himself. 2) the last accounts to 31st July 22 however also include about 8m in taxes (probably VAT legitimately deferred during covid). 3) There is also a loan of 6m plus accrued interest. It is a moot point what this relates to. Chansiri has stated on the record this is an old sum inherited as a liability relating back to Mandaric's time. It has only been the last couple of years it has been disclosed specifically in the accounts. 4) it would appear this is the loan that is secured against the stadium. It does get confusing because it is shown on the Companies House record of Sheffield 3 Ltd (the company to which the stadium was transferred) even the money itself is a loan to the football club 5) There is nothing unusual in that regard. People who loan money quite like to have security / charges over assets to protect their funds 6) the partial confusion is that each year the loan gets renewed for another year and a new updated charge is registered. The old ones could in theory be satisfied because there is a new one. This has not arisen. Again not unusual that this does not happen. I can promise in real life I have had client companies with outstanding charges for long settled loans. It doesn't surprise me in this case the lender insists on them remaining. 7) now there is a theoretical possibility it is new loans everytime. And thus the indebtedness is 24m not 6m. There is nothing on the public record that proves or disproves what the actual sum is. I err on it being only 6m and this is a renewed loan each year, but there is a lack of evidence for me to 100% conclude 8 as we know the stadium sale was an attempt to circumvent FFP. You create a profit in the football club by valuing this at 60m. Hence SWFC sold this to Sheffield 3 for this sum but by way of an accounting entry Dr Intercompany loan Cr Sale of stadium It states this is repaid in 8 annual instalments of 7.5m At the same time Sheff 3 Limited rents the stadium for (stand to be corrected) 2.5m per annum for 30 years to the football club 9 it is this lease that creates / justifies the value of 60m for the stadium sale. Its never what the plot is worth as houses 10 that lease could be changed, amended, varied at any time. Chansiri is a party to both sides so can unilaterally cancel the lease if he so chose. It would not budge the stadium sale price 11 when it comes to cash, then if I owe you 7.5m and you owe me 2.5m each year, then actually you owe a net 5m. However the accounting alchemy is that real money does not have to change hands here. I can pretend to pay this and simply post journal entries to create the pretence. 12) but accounting needs to balance up, so to complete this I pretend that Chansiri is the notional bank manager. By doing this his loan in the football club is effectively reduced, but his loan in Sheffield 3 is increased 13 Basically over time his loan, or part thereof, is moved from one company to the other. The amount isn't changing at this level 14 However his loan overall is still increasing because he is funding the club no different to before 15 Hence none of this stadium stuff matters UNLESS Chansiri only sells the football side and keep the stadium. But the lease could be re-negotiated if that arose

All this simply begs the question of where do we go from here. 1) Chansiri sells out at an acceptable price for him to a new owner with funds 2) Chansiri sells out for £1 but keeps the stadium 3) Nothing happens but Chansiri keeps adequate funding going 4) Nothing happens but funding is restricted - whether deliberately or not. The end of November will be the next test on that front 5) HMRC force a situation if there is lack of funds and a new owner saves the situation 6) We go into administration or worse I mean that is the broad brush possibilities The crux is no one aside from Chansiri knows a) his price b) his inclination c) his available funds. This Club sadly just seems at another crossroads. I have no idea which direction we are going

I have pondered this and conclude No

I mean if his analysis in any way decided on Ashley Fletcher being an appropriate signing he has been stealing a living

Francis Jeffers ducked out of doing it

It could set an interesting precedent that's for sure

Manslaughter is a lower burden of proof - doesn't require intent - so almost simply your actions killed a person. Could be as simple as a landlord failing to undertake a gas safety check and then a tenant dies after a gas explosion.

Glad I am not the only one who couldn't decipher the names

Tonight's missive from the 1867 Group

https://www.change.org/p/an-open-letter-to-the-sheffield-wednesday-community?recruiter=1321674860&recruited_by_id=3110b4e0-827f-11ee-89ea-f95ccd7d102d&utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=share_for_starters_page&utm_medium=copylink

Tbh there was so much inaccuracy in your first statement its hard to get back to basics Perhaps search some of the older threads in the OO archive and this will give you the detail on the stadium transaction. I could blow your mind to say I could account for all this without a single pound moving from one bank account to another. In fact its on a thread a few months back around the time the accounts were released. With a few notable exceptions on Stalk, namely Harrowby Owl, Kobayashi to name a couple the rest is utter shite

Corrected for you

Can I be paid for it

I have chosen not to watch said incident and indeed if the legal route is now being followed we have to be careful what is said. I look at this at a more overall sporting level. Clearly this is an extreme case but you can see somebody elbowing deliberately, rugby with the big high hits, it could happen. The defence was always "it's part and parcel of the game" but this type of legal action could be a bit of a game changer

Will Chansiri actually engage in the process. I know someone who has offered to at least work as an introducer due to their US business contacts and simply as no feedback from up on high.

Tbf most of us are to coin a Queen song "Waiting for the Hamas to fall"

I appreciate there is a range of opinions on here. Some don't want any protest, most of us certainly don't want it on matchdays, some would have him frogmarched to Gaza. For me Chansiri has taken the Club as far as its feasible. You can't be an hands on owner but do it from Thailand despite the communication capability. We can't really force him to sell, but honestly it would be better for him, better for the Club if there was serious moves for a transfer to a new owner.

Be interesting if that's gone before daylight

https://twitter.com/The1867Group/status/1724178204632420750?t=a42b5zlp3UhwYhgWF68QXQ&s=19

You dancing on Strictly

Reesh - can you confirm there won't be much dogging up Greno woods this time of year

Sucking off Corbyn

In light of the political news today - I reckon we should bring back Carlton Palmer