Ex Player Roofe To Anderlecht

Manorlounger said:
This is getting quite concerning now. That charge should have been cleared months ago. If all the fees from earlier sales had come in then it should have been. The question was not answered by the MD.
Click to expand...

Hard to answer a question when he may not know the full answer..
 
Ian said:
Oxford, the city of spires, academic achievement and to be blunt, many thick supporters of Oxford United.

When Michael Glazer took over Manchester United, he borrowed heavily from financial institutions to buy the club from the previous owners, resulting in interest payments of over £60 million a year that the club has to pay...

When Tiger purchased Oxford United, rather than borrow money from hedge funds, etc. he reaches an agreement with DE to pay him in instalments. This is probably a cheaper way of financing the takeover than borrowing from profit hungry financial institutions.

So, Oxford United may well be winners from this arrangement. Tiger has capital to invest in players like Dickie, the debt to people who care nothing about Oxford is minimised and Darryl Eales gets his money when Oxford United can afford it... I presume that any interest to Darryl Eales is paid at a lower rate than Tiger could have got from a financial institution.

Yet the thick people only think that DE is taking money from the club... They can't get the fact through their thick skulls that Tiger hasn't purchased the club in full. I would much sooner have club debt owed to DE than a financial institution that could come knocking at anytime, and potentially landing Oxford with a 12 point penalty... If Oxford income drops, DE doesn't get his money. If we receive money from player sales, and are not in financial difficulties, DE gets his money.
Click to expand...


1. Thick supporters? Tread carefully, some on here may take that as a personal sleight.

2. An agreement to pay Eales? No. A legally binding charge over OUFC to clear £4.2 Million future income from player sales contracted during Eales' tenure. A charge which stipulates, not instalments but deadlines for specific sums to be paid to Ensco1070 It should be noted that these are preferential payments and take precedence over any other debt. And that means regardless of the financial status of the club. Eales comes first. READ THE CHARGE.

3. Tiger has purchased the club in full. He paid, part cash and part share issue (To Eales)

4. And, just to repeat, Eales gets paid first, before anyone else. It's all there in black and white. READ THE CHARGE.
 
Junior_1 said:
Hard to answer a question when he may not know the full answer..
Click to expand...
I gave this some thought and, initially, was not going to post but, having considered the implications of what you have said and, the fact that you do have a record of "knowing" a bit more than others, thought again.

If the MD of a concern does not have the facts and figures of his organisation at his fingertips, or at least a good idea of how the organisation stands, then what the hell is he doing in that role?
 
Manorlounger said:
I gave this some thought and, initially, was not going to post but, having considered the implications of what you have said and, the fact that you do have a record of "knowing" a bit more than others, thought again.

If the MD of a concern does not have the facts and figures of his organisation at his fingertips, or at least a good idea of how the organisation stands, then what the hell is he doing in that role?
Click to expand...


Or he could have said “ I’ll get back to you later on that one”;)
 
Manorlounger said:
1. Thick supporters? Tread carefully, some on here may take that as a personal sleight.

2. An agreement to pay Eales? No. A legally binding charge over OUFC to clear £4.2 Million future income from player sales contracted during Eales' tenure. A charge which stipulates, not instalments but deadlines for specific sums to be paid to Ensco1070 It should be noted that these are preferential payments and take precedence over any other debt. And that means regardless of the financial status of the club. Eales comes first. READ THE CHARGE.
Click to expand...
Not 4.2 million of future income. Much of it is past income, so it is the known cashflows (instalments) from the 4 main player sales during Eales's tenure. Some of it potential future cashflows from the 4 player sales (eg sell-ons / promotions / international add-ons) or other player related income (Tsun Dai / Whyte for instance).
Manorlounger said:
3. Tiger has purchased the club in full. He paid, part cash and part share issue (To Eales)
Click to expand...
Eales (Ensco) still have a <10% holding. Tiger didn't issue any shares to Eales, the club issued more shares to Tiger to take his holding to >90%. The club then used some of the money from the share issue to presumably pay of some of the Eales debt. Instead of paying cash up front to clear Eales debt and the club keeping the instalments and future player sales, Eales allowed the instalments to be used to pay off debt over time.
Manorlounger said:
4. And, just to repeat, Eales gets paid first, before anyone else. It's all there in black and white. READ THE CHARGE.
Click to expand...
It's just the player related cash that gets paid into the charged account. Not advertising or club shop sales or tv money or cup runs or season ticket sales or match day income. Although if those instalments weren't paid on the due dates, the club would be in default, with potential consequences such as interest.
 
Manorlounger said:
If the MD of a concern does not have the facts and figures of his organisation at his fingertips, or at least a good idea of how the organisation stands, then what the hell is he doing in that role?
Click to expand...

That’s the million dollar question..

Maybe we should ask KR the question as he certainly has a very much more hands on role at the club than everyone’s favourite Personal education teacher...


We shall see.....
 
yellowbow said:
So if my maths is correct, we sold him for £3M so 15% of £3.4M is £510,000

We give WBA 40% of that so pocket £306,000?
Click to expand...

That’s a bit of the charge I don’t understand. If the percentages are right, does 510k go into the charged bank account and out to Eales / Ensco if he hasn’t been paid enough? Then tiger / oufc has to still find the 40% due to wba? I don’t think that would have been the intention , but the charge is lacking on things like that and vat. A lawyer could perhaps say that gross receipts go into the bank and out to Ensco. But if Eales wants to be repaid and not bankrupt the club he’d have to accept the intention?
 
MarkG said:
That’s a bit of the charge I don’t understand. If the percentages are right, does 510k go into the charged bank account and out to Eales / Ensco if he hasn’t been paid enough? Then tiger / oufc has to still find the 40% due to wba? I don’t think that would have been the intention , but the charge is lacking on things like that and vat. A lawyer could perhaps say that gross receipts go into the bank and out to Ensco. But if Eales wants to be repaid and not bankrupt the club he’d have to accept the intention?
Click to expand...
All a bit tenuous. We just have to hope that DE will be decent and common sense will prevail.
 
MarkG said:
That’s a bit of the charge I don’t understand. If the percentages are right, does 510k go into the charged bank account and out to Eales / Ensco if he hasn’t been paid enough? Then tiger / oufc has to still find the 40% due to wba? I don’t think that would have been the intention , but the charge is lacking on things like that and vat. A lawyer could perhaps say that gross receipts go into the bank and out to Ensco. But if Eales wants to be repaid and not bankrupt the club he’d have to accept the intention?
Click to expand...

I would hope this would have been agreed ahead of time.
 
Marked Ox said:
I would hope this would have been agreed ahead of time.
Click to expand...
Didn't the charge specify receipts would go into a holding account and that we would only pay Eales amounts over certain thresholds on specific datesrather than all the income?
 
I would have thought that the sell on percentage would not figure in what OUFC "gain" from the sale. Only what is due to OUFC would be submitted to the designated account.
Still nice to see some profit come the way of the club. WBA getting 40% is a bitter pill, should OUFC have negotiated a better deal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Roofe
Replies
4
Views
2K
Malc
Malc
N
Roofe, Maguire, Dunkley, Hylton
Replies
13
Views
3K
Berliner
Berliner
chuckbert
Ex Player Kemar Roofe
2 3
Replies
52
Views
8K
MJB
MJB
Back
Top Bottom