Chairman Grant Ferguson Interview

[m]

Is there anything Ferguson and Williams can say that'll get people onside?

Well let's sincerely hope not.

It's what people DO that matters, not what people say. IMO, of course.

 

[JayOx88]

What will likely happen is that the ‘rent’ will appear very affordable but the ‘cost’ will not be the same number.

Eg. The amount applied as ‘rent’ for the stadium is £500,000 per year but the total ‘cost’ of servicing the debts and the shareholder yields are £4million per year. This could potentially mean that the money from the bar and restaurant, all usual match day revenues, and maybe even the club shop turnover may have to go towards servicing this, but technically it wouldn’t be ‘rent’. The devil is in the detail.

This is why when Ferguson says he understands that the club could be able to keep all the profit above and beyond servicing the debt, it’s a really delicate issue. There is no guarantee that there will be any profit, and if the stadium is owned by the markets then the shareholders reserve the right to increase the fees and charges over time. Even if the ‘rent’ is locked in at a fixed rate, what about the interest on the debt or the other miscellaneous charges applied to the site?

If anything, as far as I’m concerned that interview with Ferguson has left me more worried than ever that this is going to be an absolute stitch up.

Agreed, there are so many ways to present it that appear more favourable on the surface but might not be so the deeper you dig. And the point you make about shareholders and charges is what worries me the most, we're now moving to a scenario where the club might have no control over the terms of its liabilities into the future and we could potentially be at the mercy of absolute sharks.

So it's vitally important we keep digging and asking questions at every turn.

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

And what happens if the club is unable to meet those obligations for whatever reason? Who is liable?

They clearly have this all worked out, but what they don’t want to do is tell anybody. Even though the fans are the people who have campaigned the hardest to get it to this point and will be the ones ultimately stumping up to keep paying for it for decades to come.

That's why the stadium company and OUFC need to be linked by common directors and personal guarantees to ensure the directors personally have their cock on the block and will feel the pain should either company struggle.

Having personal responsibility and standing to lose a few quid personally always focuses the mind I've found.

 

[Scotchegg]

Without a new stadium we're fucked. There are going to be very few people who are willing and able to spend £3m+ every year on a mid table league one club with no home of its own and limited finance streams.

We currently have owners who are rich enough that they can cover this for a few years, and those years have to date given us 2 playoff campaigns, another where we fell just short, and this one where we are still in contention (on paper).

They have also given us a proper training ground of our own and have invested in the youth set up, the women's team and other community groups.

Things could be a lot worse.

However, we have to ensure that a new stadium doesn't leave us just as fucked as before and that there is the opportunity to build on the improvements we have seen and go from playoff campaigns to promotion and championship sustainability, and make Oxford United central to the lives of our communities.

I've heard a lot previously that gives me confidence that there are good intentions and the club will be protected. However, talk is cheap and at a time when the future of our club is on a knife edge, now is the time to get the details out in the open and ensure that the club has legal protection for future generations.

As for Ferguson and Williams, they are merely employees and I don't think we need to get too huge up on personalities and focus on actions over words. It's not long ago that some on this same forum were mocking Niall McWilliams as being a miserable school teacher. But he is the one person who has got us to the brink of having planning permission and has fought every step of the way to ensure that our club is protected.

Again, this isn't about protecting anyone. But we need answers not meaningless soundbites.

 

[Yellow River]

What will likely happen is that the ‘rent’ will appear very affordable but the ‘cost’ will not be the same number.

Eg. The amount applied as ‘rent’ for the stadium is £500,000 per year but the total ‘cost’ of servicing the debts and the shareholder yields are £4million per year. This could potentially mean that the money from the bar and restaurant, all usual match day revenues, and maybe even the club shop turnover may have to go towards servicing this, but technically it wouldn’t be ‘rent’. The devil is in the detail.

This is why when Ferguson says he understands that the club could be able to keep all the profit above and beyond servicing the debt, it’s a really delicate issue. There is no guarantee that there will be any profit, and if the stadium is owned by the markets then the shareholders reserve the right to increase the fees and charges over time. Even if the ‘rent’ is locked in at a fixed rate, what about the interest on the debt or the other miscellaneous charges applied to the site?

If anything, as far as I’m concerned that interview with Ferguson has left me more worried than ever that this is going to be an absolute stitch up.

The lack of detail is very worrying.

I hope at the fans forum pressure can be brought to bear on Ferguson and Williams to be more open and honest about the financial implications for the club in the future if the stadium goes ahead.

It’s important that whoever is chairing the questions (Oxvox ?) makes sure that straight answers are given, attempts by the board members to fudge, or brush off concerns should be called out.

Also importantly in my view the person who has asked the question needs to have the right of reply to the answer given.

 

[Yellow River]

And what happens if the club is unable to meet those obligations for whatever reason? Who is liable?

They clearly have this all worked out, but what they don’t want to do is tell anybody. Even though the fans are the people who have campaigned the hardest to get it to this point and will be the ones ultimately stumping up to keep paying for it for decades to come.

Are we (the fans) viewed as useful idiots?

 

[LeftSideLarry]

There are lots of questions about the financing of the potential new stadium and clearly there are some very knowledgeable people here on this subject. It strikes me that it is they who’re most unhappy with what they’re hearing, so can any of them, Ryan/Colin for example, lay out what ‘great/good’ looks like from the perspective of an arrangement that balances the protection the club with a financial structure that gives the owners a reason outside of ego and image to do it?

 

[Symp59]

Are we (the fans) viewed as useful idiots?

No ,it's how we feel because at the end of the day we have no say. Every club ,even your Man utds of this world have no say. Maxwell did us Kassamm is still doing us. Reading are in a terrible place ,Bury ,it goes on and on. Hopefully at the minute our direction is a new ground a new promised land and not A new Maxwell or Kassamm. But at the end of the day as well image if this forum ran the club .I always like the saying the committee that runs it should be an odd number of which 3 is too many.

 

[Sarge]

whats the odds the bulk of what was said gets regurgitated in his 'updates' at the FF ?

thus eating into valuable time that would be better used for taking and answering questions- which is the real point of holding a FF

brings to mind the late great James Brown tune, which for me sums up what GF said on the Dub...

 

[Carlislehotdog]

There are lots of questions about the financing of the potential new stadium and clearly there are some very knowledgeable people here on this subject. It strikes me that it is they who’re most unhappy with what they’re hearing, so can any of them, Ryan/Colin for example, lay out what ‘great/good’ looks like from the perspective of an arrangement that balances the protection the club with a financial structure that gives the owners a reason outside of ego and image to do it?

I've worked with project finance quite a bit although not anything like stadiums or hotels to be fair. I think we've got to be realistic about how much detail we will get about the financing of the stadium, but what I would want to hear is that:

1) They are confident that revenue from the development will be enough to meet the ongoing cost of financial repayments to debt and equity providers.
2) Following on from 1 that the project will be sufficiently revenue generating without having to push rent up to unrealistic levels for the club.
3) That there will be a covenant that the club has exclusive or priority access to use of the stadium and that it can't be knocked down or repurposed without club approval
4) That any debt attached to the project vehicle will be ringfenced completely from OUFC club finances.

Just saying that doesn't guarantee anything but a verbal commitment to that would be a reassuring thing for me.

 

[oxfordkits]

Why do our wealthy owners want to outsource the financing of this? Are they getting cold feet?

What 'external markets' will want to invest in a project with zero equity?

If the club could not service the repayments, what then? Do the owners cover financing payments to investors whilst adding this debt to OUFC? Or is this solely on the owners taking on a personal financial risk?

Are we jumping out of the frying pan into the fire here?

 

[Paul Cannell]

The company that owns the stadium must be inextricably linked to OUFC Ltd by common directors and guarantees so if one company starts to feel pain the other one does too. That way its in the bests interest of everyone for both companies to trade sustainably.

Why should the football company be penalised for losses in the property speculation, which is by its nature more risky?

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

Why should the football company be penalised for losses in the property speculation, which is by its nature more risky?

With personal guarantees the directors personally would be liable.

I'd like to see common directors between the stadium company and OUFC Ltd and personal guarantees granted to secure the borrowings of both. That way its in the directors' personal interests to ensure both companies don't default on their liabilities.

 

[Colin B]

There are lots of questions about the financing of the potential new stadium and clearly there are some very knowledgeable people here on this subject. It strikes me that it is they who’re most unhappy with what they’re hearing, so can any of them, Ryan/Colin for example, lay out what ‘great/good’ looks like from the perspective of an arrangement that balances the protection the club with a financial structure that gives the owners a reason outside of ego and image to do it?

I’ve just arrived in Portsmouth, but will post something later/tomorrow regarding how the financial business plan for the stadium was going to look.

That said, it seems as though that may have changed?

 

[greatunclekip]

Is there anything Ferguson and Williams can say that'll get people onside? Seems bridges have been burnt in some fans eyes.

Nope. I have zero faith in either of them.

 

[Joey]

Only just got round to listening to this interview and what a load of crap. Deliberately vague regarding the stadium but a couple of nuggets dropped in about the cost of the debt as opposed to purely rent, doesn't see anything wrong with how they've communicated with fans and a couple of outright lies regarding the support Buckingham has been given (he said Des wanted Hackett, we acted quickly to get Luke Taylor on board). Also the usual fob about why we didn't get the assistant manager we wanted. Can't say I'm the slightest bit reassured.

Still, nice of him to pop up after over a year, 10 days or so before a fans forum and a week or so after planning permission was submitted. What a guy.

 

[unification]

I've had a chance to listen back. If another opinion on it is needed, here is it.

The stadium finance question was by far the most concerning one for me. Taking it on face value, the owners should know where the money is coming from. It is not an benevolent act and there is no chance the club could finance a stadium on their own, so we know we need sugar daddies or angel investors to take build it for us. How much of that cost will be levied against the club itself? How will the investors make a return? GF either knows the answer and won't tell us or doesn't know which makes it all the more concerning that we have got this far without a financial plan.

I'm still not all convinced on the Assistant Manager issue. We know an offer was made but were any more offers made to others?

Good of GF to talk about communication. He seemed to acknowledge that it was an issue and something would be done to rectify it.

It was good to hear from him but overall we don't hear from him enough. Absent chairmen, even if they have underlings to do their work, are always going to be questioned because visibility is so important in football. A quarterly check in is probably enough but we don't even get that.

 

[kingoftheroad]

Without a new stadium we're fucked. There are going to be very few people who are willing and able to spend £3m+ every year on a mid table league one club with no home of its own and limited finance streams.

We currently have owners who are rich enough that they can cover this for a few years, and those years have to date given us 2 playoff campaigns, another where we fell just short, and this one where we are still in contention (on paper).

They have also given us a proper training ground of our own and have invested in the youth set up, the women's team and other community groups.

Things could be a lot worse.

However, we have to ensure that a new stadium doesn't leave us just as fucked as before and that there is the opportunity to build on the improvements we have seen and go from playoff campaigns to promotion and championship sustainability, and make Oxford United central to the lives of our communities.

I've heard a lot previously that gives me confidence that there are good intentions and the club will be protected. However, talk is cheap and at a time when the future of our club is on a knife edge, now is the time to get the details out in the open and ensure that the club has legal protection for future generations.

As for Ferguson and Williams, they are merely employees and I don't think we need to get too huge up on personalities and focus on actions over words. It's not long ago that some on this same forum were mocking Niall McWilliams as being a miserable school teacher. But he is the one person who has got us to the brink of having planning permission and has fought every step of the way to ensure that our club is protected.

Again, this isn't about protecting anyone. But we need answers not meaningless soundbites.

and what's happened to Niall ? but lets not ask

 

[DannyW]

and what's happened to Niall ? but lets not ask

Jerome did mention the ex MD rumoured to be leaving in that list of leavers and wasn't contradicted. End of the season?

 

[RgYellows]

Why do our wealthy owners want to outsource the financing of this? Are they getting cold feet?

What 'external markets' will want to invest in a project with zero equity?

Seeking debt doesn’t stop you contributing equity.

Why should the football company be penalised for losses in the property speculation, which is by its nature more risky?

In the sense that our football club making a loss is one of the safest bets around, whilst property sometimes makes a profit?

With personal guarantees the directors personally would be liable.

I'd like to see common directors between the stadium company and OUFC Ltd and personal guarantees granted to secure the borrowings of both. That way its in the directors' personal interests to ensure both companies don't default on their liabilities.

Pretty easy to change Directors though.