Fan's View Fan's View - Northampton

[Paul B]

Fan's View - Northampton

 

[DannyW]

Thanks Paul, spot on on ownership and the game. We need the manager sorted out pronto, and if we give Macalany the same chances next Saturday we will loose. I saw a tweet of Tiger photographed outside the OUFC shop and the comments posted below make you despair of humanity, as you say why would anyone want to own a football club.

 

[Victor1986]

Excellent as always Paul. What's the odds of Conor Mac scoring against us on Saturday I wonder?

 

[West Oxon U’s]

...With the inevitable newspaper headline of “ Fleetwood Mac”

 

[Deleted member 462]

...With the inevitable newspaper headline of “ Fleetwood Mac”

Or return of the Mac

 

[West Oxon U’s]

OUFC Issues new shares and receives £2.4m of fresh funds from Tiger’s new investment vehicle
who now hold the said new shares in OUFC. Looks like Ensco.gets some funds to tidy up its balance sheet?
OUFC’s balance sheet is strengthened with a larger capital base as more capital (shares) has been issued.

Where’s Mark G when you need him?!

 

[Foley]

Cheers Paul.

With some of the bickering and nonsense posted on here at times ( re DE and some of the takeover comments)it is always good to read a sensible perspective.

 

[Paul Cannell]

"Yet we’ve had really abusive food based insults directed at DE, the best Chairman we’ve had for years. Which again adds to the argument of why do it?"

I'm not much bothered but Slippery brought the opprobrium on himself with his pint-buying, hot-dog scam and simply false statements which grew more and more detached from any reasonable man's estimate of verity as he became increasingly keen to reduce his outgoings.

He may be the best chairman we've had for years but that's more of an indictment than a eulogy(and I am broadly pro-Lenagan).

Really abusive is a different kettle of fish from anything on this powder-puff forum.

 

[Maggiesdad]

Informing read as usual. Thanks.

 

[werthersoriginal]

"Yet we’ve had really abusive food based insults directed at DE, the best Chairman we’ve had for years. Which again adds to the argument of why do it?"

I'm not much bothered but Slippery brought the opprobrium on himself with his pint-buying, hot-dog scam and simply false statements which grew more and more detached from any reasonable man's estimate of verity as he became increasingly keen to reduce his outgoings.

He may be the best chairman we've had for years but that's more of an indictment than a eulogy(and I am broadly pro-Lenagan).

Really abusive is a different kettle of fish from anything on this powder-puff forum.

Powder puff forum? If that means it’s not infested by abusive violent morons then that’s a good thing. Why would people get abusive over a bit of football? Some of our fans are serious snowflakes

 

[Manorlounger]

I agree with Paul C on this. Slippery may well have been on watch as we progressed and had success but, I would not be inclined to give him the credit for this alone. Circumstantial credit.
He has had his fun and is now making a good exit with money in his pocket.

 

[Lundinsponytail]

Fan's View - Northampton

Beautiful, informed football writing; the financial stuff needs some work and, dare I say it, some basic research!
It, or most of it, has all been laid out on this forum before by several financially-inclined supporters. The long and the short of it is that DE will make 1 or 2 million, but that will be cloaked for all but the dedicated by some fiddling around with the debt levels.
As for paying himself, no, not in wage slaves terms but it is no great secret that external 'administrative and management services' have become an increasingly significant budget line at OUFC.
But, as I say, this has all been deconstructed before, though probably on the 'old forum '.
It should be noted that one or two million is not a vast sum to make in four years (for a venture capitalist) The idea, as sold to DE by Ashton, was that we could make it to the Championship, at which point the profit - that we would all have been delighted for him to make - would have been more like 15 million.
Having not made that business target, 'getting out ahead ' - even by only 1 or 2 million - is probably a pretty good result, certainly in football terms.
If I have a moment tomorrow, Paul, I shall try to lay it all out for you.
Of course, the great irony is that Ashton and Appleton remain convinced that they would have made him the big win if they had just been allowed to get on with it before the train set became irresistible. Given the team and asset base they had constructed, they may well be right.

 

[MJB]

Fan's View - Northampton

Beautiful, informed football writing; the financial stuff needs some work and, dare I say it, some basic research!
It, or most of it, has all been laid out on this forum before by several financially-inclined supporters. The long and the short of it is that DE will make 1 or 2 million, but that will be cloaked for all but the dedicated by some fiddling around with the debt levels.
As for paying himself, no, not in wage slaves terms but it is no great secret that external 'administrative and management services' have become an increasingly significant budget line at OUFC.
But, as I say, this has all been deconstructed before, though probably on the 'old forum '.
It should be noted that one or two million is not a vast sum to make in four years (for a venture capitalist) The idea, as sold to DE by Ashton, was that we could make it to the Championship, at which point the profit - that we would all have been delighted for him to make - would have been more like 15 million.
Having not made that business target, 'getting out ahead ' - even by only 1 or 2 million - is probably a pretty good result, certainly in football terms.
If I have a moment tomorrow, Paul, I shall try to lay it all out for you.
Of course, the great irony is that Ashton and Appleton remain convinced that they would have made him the big win if they had just been allowed to get on with it before the train set became irresistible. Given the team and asset base they had constructed, they may well be right.

Was Ashton actually pushed then?

From memory he left here and was soon in the Bristol City job, and making rather a success of it.

I had always assumed that the new role was the reason he left here. Is the implication that he was sacked and then was fortunate that an even better job fell in his lap?

 

[Paul B]

Beautiful, informed football writing; the financial stuff needs some work and, dare I say it, some basic research!
It, or most of it, has all been laid out on this forum before by several financially-inclined supporters. The long and the short of it is that DE will make 1 or 2 million, but that will be cloaked for all but the dedicated by some fiddling around with the debt levels.
As for paying himself, no, not in wage slaves terms but it is no great secret that external 'administrative and management services' have become an increasingly significant budget line at OUFC.
But, as I say, this has all been deconstructed before, though probably on the 'old forum '.
It should be noted that one or two million is not a vast sum to make in four years (for a venture capitalist) The idea, as sold to DE by Ashton, was that we could make it to the Championship, at which point the profit - that we would all have been delighted for him to make - would have been more like 15 million.
Having not made that business target, 'getting out ahead ' - even by only 1 or 2 million - is probably a pretty good result, certainly in football terms.
If I have a moment tomorrow, Paul, I shall try to lay it all out for you.
Of course, the great irony is that Ashton and Appleton remain convinced that they would have made him the big win if they had just been allowed to get on with it before the train set became irresistible. Given the team and asset base they had constructed, they may well be right.

That would be great. The accounts I have gone through have not led me to that view, but then again I'm not a qualified accountant. I look forward to the next set of accounts with interest. (No pun intended).
I can't honestly remember what I read on this matter on the old forum or what I then did and didn't believe.

And what's in it for Tiger?

 

[Paul B]

"Yet we’ve had really abusive food based insults directed at DE, the best Chairman we’ve had for years. Which again adds to the argument of why do it?"

I'm not much bothered but Slippery brought the opprobrium on himself with his pint-buying, hot-dog scam and simply false statements which grew more and more detached from any reasonable man's estimate of verity as he became increasingly keen to reduce his outgoings.

He may be the best chairman we've had for years but that's more of an indictment than a eulogy(and I am broadly pro-Lenagan).

Really abusive is a different kettle of fish from anything on this powder-puff forum.

Absolutely. Nothing on here I was referring to.

 

[Paul B]

"Yet we’ve had really abusive food based insults directed at DE, the best Chairman we’ve had for years. Which again adds to the argument of why do it?"

I'm not much bothered but Slippery brought the opprobrium on himself with his pint-buying, hot-dog scam and simply false statements which grew more and more detached from any reasonable man's estimate of verity as he became increasingly keen to reduce his outgoings.

He may be the best chairman we've had for years but that's more of an indictment than a eulogy(and I am broadly pro-Lenagan).

Really abusive is a different kettle of fish from anything on this powder-puff forum.

I genuinely would like to know what statements DE has made which have proved to be false, PC. I must have missed something.

 

[Paul Cannell]

Probably 'made or caused to be made' - how about the kerfuffle over not being allowed to bid by the council when the club had made a non-compliant bid, the smoke and mirrors about investment in the lead up to Appleton walking. He was hardly transparent over the disappearance of several staff iirc.

 

[Lundinsponytail]

Was Ashton actually pushed then?

From memory he left here and was soon in the Bristol City job, and making rather a success of it.

I had always assumed that the new role was the reason he left here. Is the implication that he was sacked and then was fortunate that an even better job fell in his lap?

Yup. He was fired. The chairman said at the time that there was only room for one person making decisions at the top of the club and that he had decided that that would be him.
Not long after, and rather at odds with the reason for firing Ashton, he appointed another chief exec, and then undermined him publicly and then fired him as well (trailing that sacking to a bunch of people in a pub before telling the man himself).
In the meantime, a myriad of other people arrived at the club and swiftly left. Two commercial directors, a marketing manager, two if not three fan engagement people. Truly, it has been a chaotic last two years behind the scenes.
Of course, if all you care about is turning up to watch football, then most of this passes you by (hence Paul B's genuine astonishment that DE has ever, ahem, told a porkie or taken any money out of the club) - you just take the pat line doled out in the match programme as read.
Which may be a bit exasperating for those of us who are paying close attention, but does mean that they have a life!

 

[Lundinsponytail]

Or

Probably 'made or caused to be made' - how about the kerfuffle over not being allowed to bid by the council when the club had made a non-compliant bid, the smoke and mirrors about investment in the lead up to Appleton walking. He was hardly transparent over the disappearance of several staff iirc.

Or the claim that no bid had been made by Sartori?

 

[Lundinsponytail]

Very good read.

Could someone explain what the last bit of the chairman section about strengthening the capital base means in simple terms ?

Yes, broadly it means strengthening the underlying financial support for a company.
It usually applies to struggling firms who apply to their shareholders or banks for more funds, either by means of a rights issue (more shares, diluting the holding of anyone who does not take part) or an increase in debt.
I suspect in this case that you will see a 'porting of debt' to Tiger, a rights issue to start the process of wiping out the small shareholders and then an injection of debt from Tiger to fund the club (currently losing 150k a month).
The key figure to watch will be total debt. DE 'bought ' 4 million of Ian Lenagans debt for 1 pound. He then promised to wipe out any further debt accrued on his watch. So the maximum amount of debt 'ported ' to Tiger should be 4 million (And ideally nothing, as the club will not owe anybody anything, in moral terms, other than the 2.5 million that Lenagan lost and he is long gone).