Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 No brown stuff, Sherlock. So no explanation then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 So no explanation then ? Can you give an explanation, as to why Aberdeen would receive a ?2 million, crisis loan, on condition that the stadiums sold by March 2011, if they didn't have to? Serious question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 So no explanation then ? Drylaw, as previously stated there is no point in discussing financial matters with someone like you who cannot understand the difference between a borrower and a lender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Can you give an explanation, as to why Aberdeen would receive a ?2 million, crisis loan, on condition that the stadiums sold by March 2011, if they didn't have to? Serious question. Does the Stadium only have to be sold if the can't pay back the loan though ? Because the way you and your buddy are putting it across it seems that they were given the money on the condition the stadium is sold FULL STOP. It appears to me that Aberdeen have taken out a loan and used the Stadium as collateral. If that is not the case then please explain otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Does the Stadium only have to be sold if the can't pay back the loan though ? Because the way you and your buddy are putting it across it seems that they were given the money on the condition the stadium is sold FULL STOP. It appears to me that Aberdeen have taken out a loan and used the Stadium as collateral. If that is not the case then please explain otherwise. Drylaw's explanation got of to a bad start, when the first sentence was a question, then went downhill after that A simple "I don't know" would have sufficed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Drylaw, as previously stated there is no point in discussing financial matters with someone like you who cannot understand the difference between a borrower and a lender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Yet he's so much of a fan that rather than put any more of his own money in, he took a loan from HBoS on the condition that Pit Tawdry was separated from the football club and sold by March 2011. I'm not sure whether you're genuinely dim or just at the wind-up, but here's the real bad news for you. The council may indeed state that Pit Tawdry will be suitable until 2014, but that is irrelevant because Aberdeen's agreement to sell Pit Tawdry by March 2011 is a legally binding contract with HBoS. Unless the loan is paid back in full - I would assume. Obviously. But if Wiggy and Gilbert didn't put money in when the crisis loan was needed, why would they do it in March 2011? Particularly when they could have benefited from the interest Aberdeen is paying to HBoS. I suggest you take a deep breath and think for a change before answering. No need for a deep breath. But can you confirm that Pittodrie has actually been sold, as you and Picky Bum have stated or has a loan just been taken out with Pittodrie being used as collateral ? 2 very different things as you will be aware. Also, have Aberdeen actually confirmed that they will be playing at Inverness within the next 3 Seasons ? Or is this pure conjecture on your part ? As for attempting to explain why a very rich Businessman would have to borrow, what is essentially loose change to him, I don't know. And I would guess you don't either. Again, it would pure conjecture on your behalf. Yes. The transaction has not taken place but HBoS only made the loan in return for a guarantee that Pit Tawdry will be sold by March 2011. It is an educated guess based on: 1. Pit Tawdry will be sold by March 2011 under the terms of a legally binding agreement with HBoS. 2. The council stadium Aberdeen were pinning their hopes on will not be built. There is a massive hole in Aberdeen Council's finances and they are under investigation by the Audit Office. There is no money for flights of fancy like a new stadium. 3. They will have to play at an SPL-standard ground which will mean Inverness or Tannadice. You obviously don't understand the world of finance. Where did I say Wiggy or Gilbert would have to borrow? What I said was that either of them could have provided the football club with the money it needed and, in return, would have benefited from interest on the loan. Yet they chose not to, a clear signal that they will not put any more money into Aberdeen. Bye bye Pit Tawdry. I will end myself laughing when this happens. I would be willing to bet that IF Aberdeen FC leave Pittodrie it will be in similar circumstances to which we may have to leave if our Stadium does get redeveloped. Or It will be for a new stadium. If you can't even get your head round the simple concept that Wiggy and Gilbert have not borrowed money, then I shall not waste any more time discussing the Aberdeen situation with you. Yet you said he has borrowed money. Did he borrow or did he not ? The point is, Aberdeen have recieved a crisis loan, on the condition Pittodrie is sold by March 2011, and the entire Aberdeen support - not many I'll admit - are choosing to ignore this fact, hoping it will just go away I wouldn't if I were you. My facts are correct. Aberdeen entered into a legally binding agreement with HBoS to sell Pit Tawdry by March 2011 in order to repay the crisis loan. The only way you can get out of this is if Wiggy/Gilbert stick their hands in their pocket to pay off the bank, something they could have done long before now and earned some interest payments at the same time. And yet they chose not to.....I wonder why? They want their hands on the land. When March 2011 comes there will be no alternative financing in place and no community stadium. However, Wiggy and Gilbert will blame the sale on the nasty bank insisting on the loan being repaid, and trouser the money from Pit Tawdry - which is what their objective's been all along. Basically, your diddy team and diddy fans are screwed. Why not admit it and try to do something about it rather than trying to convince yourselves there is not a problem. Bye bye Pit Tawdry. I can't wait. So to summarise........... 1) Aberdeen have sold Pittodrie 2) Aberdeen have taken out a loan secured against Pittodie 3) Wiggy hasn't borrowed any money though 4) Aberdeen will be playing at Inverness by 2011 5) Aberdeen will be playing at Inverness or Tannadice by 2011 6) All of the above is only relevant if Wiggy doesn't repay the loan by 2011 All of the above was posted by one member who states his facts are correct. All I need to is work out which of the above is 'fact' and which of the above is crap. This will not be easy. Wish me luck. I'm not trolling. I'm just simply utterly confused by what you are posting. All i'm looking for is a clear explanation, without contradictions, on what is the situation at Aberdeen from a financial expert such as yourself. I'm genuinley confused. You're help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. P.S. If there any other financial experts on JKB who can help me decipher the 'facts' in this thread I would be willing to shell out the standard rate of pay. Pit Tawdry is worth a bit more than the value of the loan, albeit not much. Wiggy and Gilbert will pocket the difference. They are trying to unwind from Aberdeen, hence their decision to go to the bank for a crisis loan, rather than fund it themselves and benefit from interest payments but be in even more deeply. I am sure the Pit Tawdry site will be added to the Milne Homes land bank. It'll be ironic that you lot could probably afford one of the homes that'll be built on it if you weren't spending so much on travel to and from Inverness. Can you give an explanation, as to why Aberdeen would receive a ?2 million, crisis loan, on condition that the stadiums sold by March 2011, if they didn't have to? Serious question. Drylaw, as previously stated there is no point in discussing financial matters with someone like you who cannot understand the difference between a borrower and a lender. Does the Stadium only have to be sold if the can't pay back the loan though ? Because the way you and your buddy are putting it across it seems that they were given the money on the condition the stadium is sold FULL STOP. It appears to me that Aberdeen have taken out a loan and used the Stadium as collateral. If that is not the case then please explain otherwise. Drylaw's explanation got of to a bad start, when the first sentence was a question, then went downhill after that A simple "I don't know" would have sufficed Drylaw, as previously stated there is no point in discussing financial matters with someone like you who cannot understand the difference between a borrower and a lender. Is it any wonder I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Is it any wonder I'm confused. He's trying to bore us into submission now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 He's trying to bore us into submission now With all this too'ing and fro'ing you could have explained it to me by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Post #207 is incredible. :eek: :eek: :eek: Drylaw needs to get out more. Preferably to a library where he can look up a dictionary to discover the meaning of "lender" and "borrower". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 With all this too'ing and fro'ing you could have explained it to me by now. I'm trying to think of another way of putting "Aberdeen recieved a ?2 million loan, on condition the sale of Pittodrie goes through by March 2011" but I can't think of one What part do you still need explained? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Post #207 is incredible. :eek: :eek: :eek: Drylaw needs to get out more. Preferably to a library where he can look up a dictionary to discover the meaning of "lender" and "borrower". I give up asking you to explain this to me. I will just sit it out and wait until 2011 and see where Aberdeen FC are playing their home matches. From your posts it will be one of a few options :- Inverness - which is favourite as you've mentioned that the most. Tannadice - only one mention so you're clearly not convinced about that option. New Pittodrie - doubtful as ACC don't have the funds. Old Pittodrie - No chance as it's been sold. Although it hasn't. Or has it ? I can assure you I will remember this thread for many, many years and I look forward to the eventual outcome. Meantime............... I'm off to the library. For a dictionary apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 [quote=Drylaw Hearts;314088Meantime............... I'm off to the library. For a dictionary apparently. Good lad. It's for the best. Remember to ask for one with pictures in it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westendorfer Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I can only put the inability of a couple of posters to understand the AFC accounts down to the fact that their club doesn't publish them anymore. Therapist, you've clearly given up defending your false statement that Pittodrie has been sold - please take some time to re-read the accounts so you can try and enlighten yourself. Most of the Jambos I've met have been decent guys, but comments like yours make the rest of us eagerly await the day that your nutcase owner disappears and leaves you up the swanny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I'm trying to think of another way of putting "Aberdeen recieved a ?2 million loan, on condition the sale of Pittodrie goes through by March 2011" but I can't think of one What part do you still need explained? I think the confusion started here Picky Bum : Yet he's so much of a fan that rather than put any more of his own money in, he took a loan from HBoS on the condition that Pit Tawdry was separated from the football club and sold by March 2011. I'm not sure whether you're genuinely dim or just at the wind-up, but here's the real bad news for you. The council may indeed state that Pit Tawdry will be suitable until 2014, but that is irrelevant because Aberdeen's agreement to sell Pit Tawdry by March 2011 is a legally binding contract with HBoS. :) :) Unless the loan is paid back in full - I would assume. Below Therapist seems to be agreeing with me that Pittodrie will be sold unless the loan is repaid. Obviously. But if Wiggy and Gilbert didn't put money in when the crisis loan was needed, why would they do it in March 2011? Particularly when they could have benefited from the interest Aberdeen is paying to HBoS. I suggest you take a deep breath and think for a change before answering. I'm trying to think of another way of putting "Aberdeen recieved a ?2 million loan, on condition the sale of Pittodrie goes through by March 2011" but I can't think of one What part do you still need explained? Yet you appear to be adamant that they got the money on the condition that Pittodrie is sold FULL STOP. Which one is it ? One of you has to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Drylaw has OCD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Drylaw has OCD. Don't be sad about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAYEL Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 http://www.petitiononline.com/afctrust/petition.html Signed !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 http://www.petitiononline.com/afctrust/petition.html Signed !! The cod heads version of a begging letter. Hilarious. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 FAO Picky Bum and Therapist : There is a wee question on Post #215 that remains unanswered. Would one of you guys be so kind as to answer it or I won't sleep tonight. Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Drylaw has OCD. OCD is actually ok. I quite like it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 OCD is actually ok. I quite like it now. It's actually fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 FAO Picky Bum and Therapist : There is a wee question on Post #215 that remains unanswered. Would one of you guys be so kind as to answer it or I won't sleep tonight. Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 FAO Picky Bum and Therapist : There is a wee question on Post #215 that remains unanswered. Would one of you guys be so kind as to answer it or I won't sleep tonight. Thanks in advance. Now that both you guys are up.................. Any chance you could answer this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Now that both you guys are up.................. Any chance you could answer this ? No. As I've explained before you do not understand even the basics of finance - such as the meaning of "borrower" and "lender" - so there really is no point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Now that both you guys are up.................. Any chance you could answer this ? The loan was granted on condition the sale of Pittodrie went through by 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 No. As I've explained before you do not understand even the basics of finance - such as the meaning of "borrower" and "lender" - so there really is no point. I do undertsand this Therapist. But if you take the time to read Post #215 you will understand why I'm confused. It's simple really. Either the loan can be repaid and Pittodrie is safe, as you have implied, or it can't and Pittodrie will definately be sold, as you and Picky Bum have also implied. I do not understand your reluctance to answer what appears to be a simple question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The loan was granted on condition the sale of Pittodrie went through by 2011 Ok. So Therapist was wrong when he confirmed to me that Pittodrie would be safe if the loan was repaid. Thanks. Now that's cleared up I fully understand the situation. I look forward to seeing Aberdeen FC definately playing at Inverness by 2011. Or is it Tannadice ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westendorfer Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The loan was granted on condition the sale of Pittodrie went through by 2011 Still wrong. If the stadium were to remain unsold after five years (by which time it would be expected that the value of the stadium would have increased), Talltray would have to pay to the Bank the full amount of its term loan outstanding and the rolled up interest on it, unless suitable alternative financing arrangements were agreed at the time. Pickybum and Therapist seem to be out of their depth. Stick to the shallow end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Still wrong. Pickybum and Therapist seem to be out of their depth. Stick to the shallow end. If they are wrong and personally I have no idea if they are. What was/is the loan secured against? If you are so in the know what's the truth dolly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Still wrong. Unfortunately for you and your diddy club, that's exactly what was voted through at the shareholder's meeting. We've given you the link. There's not much I can do if you choose to ignore the facts. Red Ostrich Ultras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Still wrong. If the stadium were to remain unsold after five years (by which time it would be expected that the value of the stadium would have increased), Talltray would have to pay to the Bank the full amount of its term loan outstanding and the rolled up interest on it, unless suitable alternative financing arrangements were agreed at the time. Pickybum and Therapist seem to be out of their depth. Stick to the shallow end. Will the confusion never end ? I don't know what to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 If they are wrong and personally I have no idea if they are. What was/is the loan secured against? If you are so in the know what's the truth dolly? Seymour, he's a wind-up merchant who's deliberately ducking the issue. Here's the link. It states quite clearly that the financing was secured on condition that Pit Tawdry is sold by 2011. This is the deal that was approved at the shareholders meeting. Can't get much clearer than that. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/5125522.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Still wrong. Pickybum and Therapist seem to be out of their depth. Stick to the shallow end. Are you telling me, that the crisis loan wasn't granted, on condition you agreed to sell Pittodrie by March 2011? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 "Additional borrowing and investment has been secured, conditional on the sale of Pittodrie and the division of the club into two companies". Copied and pasted directly from the BBC report. Can anyone think of another way of putting it, so Drylaw and his dim witted cod head mates can take it in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Seymour, he's a wind-up merchant who's deliberately ducking the issue. Here's the link. It states quite clearly that the financing was secured on condition that Pit Tawdry is sold by 2011. This is the deal that was approved at the shareholders meeting. Can't get much clearer than that. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/5125522.stm So you were wrong when you said replied "obviously" when I suggested that Pittodrie would be safe if the loan was paid back in full ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 "Additional borrowing and investment has been secured, conditional on the sale of Pittodrie and the division of the club into two companies". Copied and pasted directly from the BBC report. Can anyone think of another way of putting it, so Drylaw and his dim witted cod head mates can take it in? I fully understand now Picky Bum. It was a poorly chosen word by Therapist that confused me. It was poorly chosen because it appears it was the competely wrong. Therapist replied "Obviously" when he should have replied "No". Agreed ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westendorfer Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Read the accounts. I'll post the link again since you evidently failed to read them last time - page 24 point 9 is the bit you need to examine: http://www.afc.premiumtv.co.uk/staticFiles/b2/e4/0,,10284~58546,00.pdf This is the only place you'll see the full break-down of what has been legally agreed. Therapist - earlier on you stated Pittodrie had already been sold - care to back that up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Read the accounts. I've read them and it changes nothing. Bye bye Pit Tawdry. Bye bye sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Irrespective of what conditions are on that loan, someone could buy the debt from the bank. The question is valid in one sense in that why would Milne and Gilbert do that given that they could have resorted to this measure without asking the bank to provide the capital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 why would Milne and Gilbert do that given that they could have resorted to this measure without asking the bank to provide the capital Exactly Geoff. It's even worse when you consider they would have earned interest on any loans they made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westendorfer Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Since you've given up trying to defend your statements Therapist, I'll bid the forum adieu for today. I can only hope your summer is completed by Peter Cech joining Inter and Chelsea signing Boruc as a replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 26. Post Balance Sheet Event (continued)The detailed proposals are as follows:- 1. Pittodrie Stadium and the surrounding land presently owned by the Club would be sold to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Club, Talltray Limited ("Talltray"), which would immediately lease back the property to the Club. 2. The price would be ?15 million, representing current open market value. ?11.7 million of the price would be paid to the Club immediately; with the balance of ?3.3 million left outstanding as a loan due by Talltray to the Club. 3. Talltray would obtain borrowing facilities from Bank of Scotland up to a maximum of ?12.15 million (?9.7 million Term Loan and ?2.45 million Interest Facility) and would also borrow ?1 million from Stewart Milne Group Limited and ?1 million from Aberdeen Asset Management PLC. 4. The Club’s existing borrowings would be repaid in full, although it would have an overdraft facility of ?0.5 million from the Bank. 5. Talltray and the Club would each guarantee repayment of the other’s borrowings from the Bank. 6. Talltray and the Club would enter into a long lease of the stadium. The Club would pay to Talltray a total rental of ?1 million in the first five years which would in turn be paid in full by Talltray to the Bank to offset some of the interest payable to the Bank. Repayment of capital and the remainder of the interest to the Bank would be deferred until March 2011, or the earlier sale of the stadium. The rental payable by the Club to Talltray after the first five years would be the higher of (a) market rental, and ( the amount of Talltray’s interest payments to the Bank in respect of the loan facilities obtained by Talltray to purchase the stadium. 7. The Bank would be secured by, amongst other things, a floating charge and a standard security over the stadium from Talltray. Talltray would grant further standard securities over the stadium, to have priority after the Bank’s standard security and floating charge, to the Club (for the deferred element of the purchase price and for any other advances made by the Club to Talltray ) and to the major investors (for their loans). In addition, the major investors would grant guarantees/letters of comfort in favour of the Bank to cover the rolled up interest payable to the Bank up to a maximum of ?2.45 million. 8. The ?2 million loan stock from the major investors would carry a maximum return of 10% per annum compounded. Importantly, however, repayment of the capital amount of, and any interest on, the stock would be wholly dependent on the sale of the stadium. If the guarantees/letters of comfort granted by the major investors were called upon, Talltray’s liability to the guarantors would be satisfied by the issue to them of secured loan stock bearing a fixed rate of 8% and redeemable after ten years (being the same arrangement as applies in relation to the existing guarantees of ?2.25 million). 9. If the stadium were to remain unsold after five years (by which time it would be expected that the value of the stadium would have increased), Talltray would have to pay to the Bank the full amount of its term loan outstanding and the rolled up interest on it, unless suitable alternative financing arrangements were agreed at the time. Point 9 does seem to contradict the claims by Therapist and Picky Bum that "Pittodrie has been sold". Has something else happened in the last 2 years that contradicts Point 9 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.