Hilton’s new statement

[Cliff Byrne’s Right Peg]

Swann’s reasoning for moving the ground under Coolsilk’s name was also to increase the likelihood of attracting investors for the development of the site. I can’t remember the quote exactly but it was something along the lines of investors don’t like working with football clubs.

[Deereyme66]

I would have preferred it if he’d not racked up the debt at all Cass. Though I appreciate there was pressure from the ‘no ambition’ lobby to spend to progress, there were equally those who urged caution.

[Apollo11]

I’m no Swann apologist, at all, but I do appreciate fairness and balance.

As I said earlier, Swann removing GP from the club and transferring it to Foolsilk was totally unforgivable (from a club and community perspective) but understandable (from a selfish business perspective).

Additionally, which do people find preferable? Swann’s method of dealing with those people who questioned him and called out, or Hilton’s? In other words: Solicitor’s letter or vile online attacks, doxxing and threats?

[Ferrite]

cassidystash wrote:

But if Swann valued the ground at £11m when he swapped that for an £11m debt and then he sold it to us for £3m we look to have done OK don’t we? Admitedly the debt was down to him but he looks to have lost out financially.

I would look at it like this: under his stewardship, SUFC lost £11m. By transfering the ground to his ownership and receiving £3m for it, he has reduced his losses to £8m.

Had he not done that, his losses (which I repeat were accrued when he was owner & chairman of the club) would have remained £11m.

[Ferrite]

Apollo11 wrote:

Additionally, which do people find preferable? Swann’s method of dealing with those people who questioned him and called out, or Hilton’s? In other words: Solicitor’s letter or vile online attacks, doxxing and threats?

I know which caused me more sleepless nights and it wasn’t the latter.

[Apollo11]

I would look at it like this: under his stewardship, SUFC lost £11m. By transfering the ground to his ownership and receiving £3m for it, he has reduced his losses to £8m.

Had he not done that, his losses (which I repeat were accrued when he was owner & chairman of the club) would have remained £11m.

The ‘losses’ can’t be both his AND the club’s though, surely?

Wouldn’t it be a more accurate appraisal to say that he put 11m into the club and got 3m out by selling the ground to Michelle and her CIC..?

Therefore HE lost 8m.

Even then, the term ‘lost’ actually suggests he got nothing for his money. I’d completely disagree. He got plenty. Amongst many other things he got the kudos of being able to say he was a league football club chairman, and the privilege of being able to sit at the head of the Board and direct its future.

So I think ‘spent’ would be a better way to put it, rather than ‘lost’. He spent, in the end, on balance, 8m. An expensive ego trip!

[IronIronIron]

The ground was never valued at £11M. IIRC it was valued at £5.5M.

Swann “wrote off” the £11M when he took the ground. He then sold it for £3M. An £8M loss.

He could have left the debt, and the ground with the Club. He could then have called in the £11M he was owed & bankrupted the Club. He would have claimed whatever value was raised from any sale of any assets. It could have been more than £8M, but it would probably have been less.

He was not a good Chairman at all. However, he could really gave shafted the Club big time if he had wanted to.

[Sanfran49]

Still do not understand how someone spends £11m can then ask for the £11M back when he it was he who loaned the club the money that he then spent having loaned HIMSELF the money and did so with seeking advice as to how risky the whole thing was !!

[Apollo11]

Sanfran49 wrote:

Still do not understand how someone spends £11m can then ask for the £11M back when he it was he who loaned the club the money that he then spent having loaned HIMSELF the money and did so with seeking advice as to how risky the whole thing was !!

You just said it yourself. He loaned the club the money.

2 users thanked author for this post.

IronIronIron, SODIron

[Awaywego]

After the £11 million he was still here long enough to accrue a further debt which he passed on to Hilton nee Michelle.
Now if he was the only owner to do it then he’d be a total shitster but its the norm and nothing any joe fan can do about it.
Michelle and co will make the decisions going forward just the same without any input from us, it’s a business like 64 once said, so within that in mind I won’t contribute to anything else other than match tickets just the same as with previous incumbents.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

… it’s a business like 64 once said, so within that in mind I won’t contribute to anything else other than match tickets just the same as with previous incumbents.

That is quite the ridiculous thing to say and a terrible attitude to have. Surely you have learned, in the time since Michelle and co took over (and most have realised what is at stake, and started putting proper love and care into the club) that United is much more than just a business?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Iron-awe]

Not sure what the current numbers are but contributing a tenner a month into the club draw would be a good way for fans to contribute extra much needed income.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Apollo11]

Apollo11 wrote:

Awaywego wrote:

… it’s a business like 64 once said, so within that in mind I won’t contribute to anything else other than match tickets just the same as with previous incumbents.

That is quite the ridiculous thing to say and a terrible attitude to have. Surely you have learned, in the time since Michelle and co took over (and most have realised what is at stake, and started putting proper love and care into the club) that United is much more than just a business?

On reflection, it’s absolutely and entirely your prerogative to only buy match tickets. Not everyone has the inclination – or the ability – to give.

[Awaywego]

Cant be that many Ironawe, the numbers haven’t increased to allow the jackpot prize to rise like they said it would do.
I joined for 2 draws saw they couldn’t be arsed to promote it more, so i cant be arsed to give them my money.

[TwoWrights]

Talk of Swann losing £8m is just that, talk. It takes no account of group tax relief, which he probably took advantage of.

[Apollo11]

TwoWrights wrote:

Talk of Swann losing £8m is just that, talk. It takes no account of group tax relief, which he probably took advantage of.

So did he put more in than he (eventually) took out?

[Ferrite]

Apollo11 wrote:

Therefore HE lost 8m.

Even then, the term ‘lost’ actually suggests he got nothing for his money. I’d completely disagree. He got plenty. Amongst many other things he got the kudos of being able to say he was a league football club chairman, and the privilege of being able to sit at the head of the Board and direct its future.

I get what you’re saying but effectively he cut his losses by £3m in this way. And I would use the term “losses” because from the club’s point of view there was very little to show for his time in charge, aside from memories & rancour. But you’re right, the “goodwill” of being a chairman had some benefit I’m sure.

IronIronIron wrote:

He could have left the debt, and the ground with the Club. He could then have called in the £11M he was owed & bankrupted the Club. He would have claimed whatever value was raised from any sale of any assets. It could have been more than £8M, but it would probably have been less.

If he’d done that, would he have been any better off? Given it took so long and such a complex formula to sell the ground, would he have made any more than £3m without a football club to sell it to?

[Iron-awe]

Awaywego wrote:

Cant be that many Ironawe, the numbers haven’t increased to allow the jackpot prize to rise like they said it would do.
I joined for 2 draws saw they couldn’t be arsed to promote it more, so i cant be arsed to give them my money.

You may well be right about the numbers being low, I was just reckoning if every adult season ticket holder set up a debit for a tenner a month into the draw it could well bring in around £10,000 a month, it’s regular income for the club and you don’t miss £120 a year unless your really struggling financially in which case you probably wouldn’t be a season ticket holder anyway. In some cases the difference between buying a season ticket plus the monthly draw fee or paying game by game over a season wouldn’t be that much more.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

… the numbers haven’t increased to allow the jackpot prize to rise like they said it would do…

Perhaps they actually just have a specific target number of subscribers they want to reach, at which point the jackpot prize goes up?

[MK Iron]

Just see it as a way of helping the club financially when they (we) need it most.

I did win a small prize and donated it back. I would and will do the same whatever the prize until we are debt free. When we get to that point I would prefer the prize to be in club shares or at least to have that as an option.

On that topic I know the board are looking into this but if there was a simple way of buying shares in say £100 blocks I think the rest of the debt could be cleared very quickly.

[Apollo11]

MK Iron wrote:

Just see it as a way of helping the club financially when they (we) need it most.

I did win a small prize and donated it back. I would and will do the same whatever the prize until we are debt free. When we get to that point I would prefer the prize to be in club shares or at least to have that as an option.

On that topic I know the board are looking into this but if there was a simple way of buying shares in say £100 blocks I think the rest of the debt could be cleared very quickly.

Donating back only makes sense if the prize you win is financial.

[Author]

Posts