General Fans Forum - Kassam Stadium - 7th March @ 6.30pm

[tonyw]

I was going to lead onto what the current year looks like, as we're three quarters of the way through it and then (with an approximate debt figure available) ask what the situation was regarding turning this debt into equity. It's OK saying that the owners are covering the debt and not charging interest, that's fine until it's not fine. Debt is debt, whether it's "soft debt" or not and we as a club are vulnerable while we have it sitting as debt. The pool of people able to buy a club with £40m of debt is far smaller than the pool of people able to buy a club with negligible debt and football is full of clubs who thought they were OK until their owners ran out of cash, or lost interest, or became unable to get cash out of their respective countries.

Colin, am I not right in saying that the previous year, they converted about £2m of debt into equity? Someone on here posted the transaction from Companies House recently.

I presume they did that because it's the only way to run a playing budget as high as we are doing and still scrape under the Salary Cost Management Protocol cap (they certainly won't have done it because they want to, as it's clearly in the club's and not the owners' favor for them to do this).....and if that's right, they will be similarly obliged to do the same (or possibly even more) this year as well, as our playing budget has only gone up and we've not made any money from player sales?

Which still doesn't put us in a good situation - because the debt is still rising - but thankfully not at the £5m a year it might be if SCMP didn't exist......

Which again brings me back to the point that I can't work out, which is why on Earth are our owners plowing so much of their own money into the club, and planning on presumably at least part-financing a £150m stadium.........I still can't come up with an answer that makes any sense other than that they view the club (and future stadium) as a shiny toy that they want to show off to their billionaire mates.

 

[LowerSouth]

It was a shame that the question wasn’t handled better. As you say, TW could’ve easily just said “I can’t divulge that yet”. I don’t know what your relationship is with him/them, but it was clear that they knew you and were perhaps more wary of the direction the question may have gone in. I thought it was the low point of the night.

Agreed.
The “low point” in equal part

 

[WALLY OX]

Good on you Colin for pressing them for an answer.

With clubs in serious in recent weeks (Rochdale and Torquay) and other clubs like Reading constantly in trouble, the debt situation needs to be clarified much more transparently than the answers that were given last night.

Also, how has the cost of the stadium risen so much?? Wasn’t it £100m a month ago and now it’s £150m!?

(Apologies if this has been covered, I have read all comments on all 17 pages)

 

[Berliner]

Colin, am I not right in saying that the previous year, they converted about £2m of debt into equity? Someone on here posted the transaction from Companies House recently.

I presume they did that because it's the only way to run a playing budget as high as we are doing and still scrape under the Salary Cost Management Protocol cap (they certainly won't have done it because they want to, as it's clearly in the club's and not the owners' favor for them to do this).....and if that's right, they will be similarly obliged to do the same (or possibly even more) this year as well, as our playing budget has only gone up and we've not made any money from player sales?

Which still doesn't put us in a good situation - because the debt is still rising - but thankfully not at the £5m a year it might be if SCMP didn't exist......

Which again brings me back to the point that I can't work out, which is why on Earth are our owners plowing so much of their own money into the club, and planning on presumably at least part-financing a £150m stadium.........I still can't come up with an answer that makes any sense other than that they view the club (and future stadium) as a shiny toy that they want to show off to their billionaire mates.

I can't stress enough how absolutely f*cked we would be if they start getting itchy feet and bailed out. Especially if the stadium hits the buffers.

 

[Colin B]

Colin, am I not right in saying that the previous year, they converted about £2m of debt into equity? Someone on here posted the transaction from Companies House recently.

I presume they did that because it's the only way to run a playing budget as high as we are doing and still scrape under the Salary Cost Management Protocol cap (they certainly won't have done it because they want to, as it's clearly in the club's and not the owners' favor for them to do this).....and if that's right, they will be similarly obliged to do the same (or possibly even more) this year as well, as our playing budget has only gone up and we've not made any money from player sales?

Which still doesn't put us in a good situation - because the debt is still rising - but thankfully not at the £5m a year it might be if SCMP didn't exist......

Which again brings me back to the point that I can't work out, which is why on Earth are our owners plowing so much of their own money into the club, and planning on presumably at least part-financing a £150m stadium.........I still can't come up with an answer that makes any sense other than that they view the club (and future stadium) as a shiny toy that they want to show off to their billionaire mates.

Yes, Tony they did convert £2m into equity last June, and a further £1.5m the previous June. But that still left us with negative equity of £18m and a P&L Reserve of minus £25m, before the 2023 accounts are taken into consideration.

My point was that, if the debts are allegedly never to be called in, why not convert more, or all, of it to equity? It's as broad as it is long to them, but makes a huge difference to us (the club). On the one hand I'm grateful they're doing what they're doing, but we are in a hell of a high risk game of poker as long as we have the debt sitting there as debt, and the stakes are catastrophically high. As @Berliner says above, we would be royally fucked if they went, leaving all of this debt sitting on the balance sheet.

 

[LeftSideLarry]

Yes, Tony they did convert £2m into equity last June, and a further £1.5m the previous June. But that still left us with negative equity of £18m and a P&L Reserve of minus £25m, before the 2023 accounts are taken into consideration.

My point was that, if the debts are allegedly never to be called in, why not convert more, or all, of it to equity? It's as broad as it is long to them, but makes a huge difference to us (the club). On the one hand I'm grateful they're doing what they're doing, but we are in a hell of a high risk game of poker as long as we have the debt sitting there as debt, and the stakes are catastrophically high. As @Berliner says above, we would be royally fucked if they went, leaving all of this debt sitting on the balance sheet.

My thoughts are that they are much more likely to convert the lot to equity once they have a club that’s worth something. OUFC becomes a much more attractive proposition once the Kassam issue is behind it and a new stadium is built.

 

[Oslernorth]

It looks very slight. I've drawn a rectangle (blue lines) on the elevation to show it.
View attachment 18179

You’d be surprised by the difference that would make!

 

[ThatSlopesATwelfthMan]

You’d be surprised by the difference that would make!

It sure will. It'll send away noise up and out, focus home noise inside but subtle enough for low frequencies to rumble throughout. The fans forum re-enforced my view that the stadium project is top notch. Every time I delve into the detail I come out more excited.

Around Christmas I had some big worries about the cause of delay with planning. Since then they've largely been assuaged. It really does appear that a few extra weeks on the detail at this stage have been spent to save us months down the line. The stadium elements of this fans forum backed this up - professional, detailed, visionary.

I'm generally with Colin re. the financial side of things and can't for the life of me see how the owners expect to make a return on their investment. That would be true whether it were £5m or £100m. Having said that there are a multitude of ways they could be approaching this which are less ambitious and more cynical. Given that the 'as is' for our club at the current stadium would see us eventually die and that any new stadium, even a cheap crap one, would involve tens of millions I can't help feeling that what we have here is the best of a bunch of existentially risky options.

 

[BrockBuster]

*Dons steel helmet*

I found myself agreeing with TW about comms. Is it the *amount* that matters, or the quality - what he called meaningfulness?

It's also easy to forget that comms is myriad. I was stunned to hear that we only sell 600 programmes per game. Can that really be right? And if it is right, does it justify the time and effort it must demand each week from OUFC employees who - as I think we'd all agree - must have other ways to spend their time?

I would hate to see the programme go, but likewise it's easy enough to understand why online channels with many times the number of followers might be prioritised.

It's also obvious from reading this forum that there's no consensus about what 'good comms' actually is. It's a classic case of being able to please some of the people some of the time, etc...

However, it's obviously good news that TW was talking about monthly Q&As and it'll be interesting to see how the new SLO implements parts of the Fan Engagement Strategy.

Last couple of times I've been to a game with a mate who likes to get a programme at every match he attends we've had to almost walk around the entire stadium to find somewhere to buy one from. 600 doesn't surprise me anyway, but having a bit of consistency in where they're being sold (appreciate we may have just got unlucky a couple of times) may help.

 

[Northernyellow]

I'd make three points on the ground and investment...1. There is very little chance of the owners getting their investment back, even over 10-15 years. I can only assume it's the Oxford name which is the draw, and is part of a longer term 'legacy' project for the owners. The Bakrie/FIFA theory (building a club from the ground up enhances his chances of getting Infantino's job one day) is the only thing I've heard that makes any sort of sense ..2. There is no Plan B because there can't be. Planning permission in Oxfordshire for this type of development is hugely difficult. If this falls through, it's very difficult to see what the future is for the club. Despite his late PR burst Uncle Firoz (hands up who believes he's actually a fan?) has no intention of letting us stay on once the lease expires...3. The timelines for the stadium build are extremely tight. If we are not ready in time (and it's 50/50 at best) MKD is the preferred stadium for a season's ground share. Points 1&2 are my opinion. I know I am correct on point 3.

 

[Carlislehotdog]

If you take the owners at their word - that they are sincere and confident of making Oxford a top 30 club with the facilities and brand to match - then there's an obvious financial reason for them to invest in the stadium this way, that it would significantly increase the amount they could cash in when the club gets sold on to a private equity firm or sovereign wealth fund in the future. Depending on the amount of equity they put in, this is a relatively low risk (for them) way of raising funds for the project, because debt will be secured against club revenues, not theirs.

 

[Foley]

I'd make three points on the ground and investment...1. There is very little chance of the owners getting their investment back, even over 10-15 years. I can only assume it's the Oxford name which is the draw, and is part of a longer term 'legacy' project for the owners. The Bakrie/FIFA theory (building a club from the ground up enhances his chances of getting Infantino's job one day) is the only thing I've heard that makes any sort of sense ..2. There is no Plan B because there can't be. Planning permission in Oxfordshire for this type of development is hugely difficult. If this falls through, it's very difficult to see what the future is for the club. Despite his late PR burst Uncle Firoz (hands up who believes he's actually a fan?) has no intention of letting us stay on once the lease expires...3. The timelines for the stadium build are extremely tight. If we are not ready in time (and it's 50/50 at best) MKD is the preferred stadium for a season's ground share. Points 1&2 are my opinion. I know I am correct on point 3.

Not being ready in time does not necessarily mean a 1 year ground share.
There maybe ways round it if for example the delay is 2 to 3 months.

 

[Sarge]

Last couple of times I've been to a game with a mate who likes to get a programme at every match he attends we've had to almost walk around the entire stadium to find somewhere to buy one from. 600 doesn't surprise me anyway, but having a bit of consistency in where they're being sold (appreciate we may have just got unlucky a couple of times) may help.

another reason why the powers that be scored a mahoossive own goal by forcing Sue Trafford's stall outside the quadrangle to cease. You could get matchday programmes (among other things) from there

 

[OUSP]

another reason why the powers that be scored a mahoossive own goal by forcing Sue Trafford's stall outside the quadrangle to cease. You could get matchday programmes (among other things) from there

The stall is still there (just inside the Quadrangle) selling programmes, 50/50 tickets and badges every week.

 

[Sarge]

The stall is still there (just inside the Quadrangle) selling programmes, 50/50 tickets and badges every week.

it is muchless visible and much less of being a meeting point, which it most definately was when it was outside the quadrangle

 

[OUSP]

it is muchless visible and much less of being a meeting point, which it most definately was when it was outside the quadrangle

Agree, but important not to have people think it's "ceased".

 

[bazzer9461]

The stall is still there (just inside the Quadrangle) selling programmes, 50/50 tickets and badges every week.

And it’s inside apparently because the club didn’t like the look of it outside

 

[Sarge]

Agree, but important not to have people think it's "ceased".

fair comment- though it really isnt visible where it is now

 

[Steve Gilbert]

The stall is still there (just inside the Quadrangle) selling programmes, 50/50 tickets and badges every week.

Out of interest why has it moved inside rather than left where it was where everyone could see it as they walked past?

 

[RyanioBirdio]

I can only assume it's the Oxford name which is the draw, and is part of a longer term 'legacy' project for the owners. The Bakrie/FIFA theory (building a club from the ground up enhances his chances of getting Infantino's job one day) is the only thing I've heard that makes any sort of sense

Erick Thohir has already previously owned Inter Milan and DC United, where he signed Wayne Rooney and built a stadium 50% bigger than the one planned for the triangle. He also owned the Philadelphia 76ers as part of a consortium including Will Smith. This stuff I’ve seen suggested recently about his FIFA ambitions being enhanced by building a little stadium next to Oxford Parkway for a League One club is just… well, it’s bananas. Frankly.

We’re most likely being used as a front to legitimise Indonesian politics. Throw in Benny Wenda and there’s plenty of reasons worth their while to be involved, but the sheer amount it’s going to cost them is starting to get out of hand. It’s not difficult if people fancy looking around for an hour. As for “the Oxford name”, these people are hereditary billionaires with entire skyscrapers named after their families in one of Asia’s most up-and-coming economies. They’re really not that starstruck by a few old buildings off the High Street.

Looking forward to the losses being announced publicly soon. Hope they’re not double what people are expecting.