[gazberg]

I don't particularly trust either Dowling or Lai.

I wonder if the full truth will ever come out

[Standaman]

I am calling out Dowling's BS. Pereira was not sold for £30m. What is in the report and accounts for the relevant year is a profit on player sales of £16.9m. The vast bulk of that is the Pereira fee. That number would be north of £20m had we sold him for £30m bearing mind we would need to deduct roughly 75% of whatever we paid for him to get the profit number.

The lesser figure is what the club received. This is the amount was on the deal sheet and it would have been reconciled with the amounts that were paid into the clubs accounts. This has been audited and that would have been demonstrated to the auditors satisfaction.

If Dowling has evidence to the contrary then he needs to take it to the relevant authorities and this would potentially be a criminal matter. Otherwise he needs to shut up.

[Albionic]

I am calling out Dowling's BS. Pereira was not sold for £30m. What is in the report and accounts for the relevant year is a profit on player sales of £16.9m. The vast bulk of that is the Pereira fee. That number would be north of £20m had we sold him for £30m bearing mind we would need to deduct roughly 75% of whatever we paid for him to get the profit number.

The lesser figure is what the club received. This is the amount was on the deal sheet and it would have been reconciled with the amounts that were paid into the clubs accounts. This has been audited and that would have been demonstrated to the auditors satisfaction.

If Dowling has evidence to the contrary then he needs to take it to the relevant authorities and this would potentially be a criminal matter. Otherwise he needs to shut up.

I think you underestimate the duplicity of the Chinese / Saudis / Brazilians and over estimate their respect for UK financial reporting law.

[Standaman]

I think you underestimate the duplicity of the Chinese / Saudis / Brazilians and over estimate their respect for UK financial reporting law.

I absolutely do not. However to syphon off £10m from a deal then the UK based officers e.g. Dowling himself and the FD have to facilitate it. They have to cooperate or at the very least turn a blind eye. Now the main parties involved might have very little to fear from UK law or the football authorities but those individuals do.

Like I say if Dowling has proof of anything to the contrary then he needs to go to the authorities. I would add while there are monies outstanding to Lai on the sale that offers a route to recover funds that have been stolen from the club, so sooner rather than latter would be good.

Otherwise it is BS.

[BalisPen]

Most fans suspected there was the declared "fee" for MP and an under the counter payment into a possible Chinese bank account.

In his desperation for a new job, and being rushed into answer it looks like LD has let cat out the bag, maybe thinking the new regime won't enforce any NDA.

[overseas baggie]

I absolutely do not. However to syphon off £10m from a deal then the UK based officers e.g. Dowling himself and the FD have to facilitate it. They have to cooperate or at the very least turn a blind eye. Now the main parties involved might have very little to fear from UK law or the football authorities but those individuals do.

Like I say if Dowling has proof of anything to the contrary then he needs to go to the authorities. I would add while there are monies outstanding to Lai on the sale that offers a route to recover funds that have been stolen from the club, so sooner rather than latter would be good.

Otherwise it is BS.

Coincidentally it was around the time that the FD and the auditors resigned

[overseas baggie]

To my memory he demanded to leave and nobody else came in for him offering those types of wages. West Ham were interested, but the wages were like £45kpw under UK tax law or £100kpw tax free. MP said he'd only go to Saudi Arabia. So that was that. We were forced.

He demanded to leave and go to the Saudi club offering him a huge wage.  In normal circumstances we’d have been in a position to say that we don’t care what wages they are offering to pay you, as that’s irrelevant if they don’t offer our asking price.

What put MP in this bargaining position?  I think he and his agent had the club over a barrel because of the failed attempted dodgy deal in the January.  The club would have been in huge trouble if it hadn’t allowed him to go to Saudi.  MP held all the aces if what I believe is correct.

[NJS]

Wouldn't be surprised if some payment went from Al-Hilal to China using the hawala route, avoiding banks and cross border transfers.

[Albionic]

I absolutely do not. However to syphon off £10m from a deal then the UK based officers e.g. Dowling himself and the FD have to facilitate it. They have to cooperate or at the very least turn a blind eye. Now the main parties involved might have very little to fear from UK law or the football authorities but those individuals do.

Like I say if Dowling has proof of anything to the contrary then he needs to go to the authorities. I would add while there are monies outstanding to Lai on the sale that offers a route to recover funds that have been stolen from the club, so sooner rather than latter would be good.

Otherwise it is BS.

As stated below the auditors and FD made a sharp exit, I appreciate that auditors are required to sign off on accounts / reports however I maintain it's naive to think there was no skulduggery here.
There are bent people in football and huge sums swilling around which are too tempting to resist

[baggie82]

I am calling out Dowling's BS. Pereira was not sold for £30m. What is in the report and accounts for the relevant year is a profit on player sales of £16.9m. The vast bulk of that is the Pereira fee. That number would be north of £20m had we sold him for £30m bearing mind we would need to deduct roughly 75% of whatever we paid for him to get the profit number.

The lesser figure is what the club received. This is the amount was on the deal sheet and it would have been reconciled with the amounts that were paid into the clubs accounts. This has been audited and that would have been demonstrated to the auditors satisfaction.

If Dowling has evidence to the contrary then he needs to take it to the relevant authorities and this would potentially be a criminal matter. Otherwise he needs to shut up.

As much as I do not trust Lai this seems over the top and smacks of jumping to conclusions. The accounts to June 2022 recorded an overall £16.9m profit from transfer sales but also showed that the club was owed an additional £8.5m for player sales within the following 12 months. Most of that must have been the Pereira sale as well. As is standard practise Al-Hilal are likely to be paying the transfer fee over several seasons. It quite plausible that Pereira was sold for £30m and that the accounts to end of June 2023 record a further large sum due payable, e.g. with the fee structured over three years overall, amounting to a total of £30m.

[Standaman]

As much as I do not trust Lai this seems over the top and smacks of jumping to conclusions. The accounts to June 2022 recorded an overall £16.9m profit from transfer sales but also showed that the club was owed an additional £8.5m for player sales within the following 12 months. Most of that must have been the Pereira sale as well. As is standard practise Al-Hilal are likely to be paying the transfer fee over several seasons. It quite plausible that Pereira was sold for £30m and that the accounts to end of June 2023 record a further large sum due payable, e.g. with the fee structured over three years overall, amounting to a total of £30m.

Profits and losses on player trading are shown in the year that they are realised, regardless of when the money is paid. The £8m in regard to transfer fees owed on the balance sheet will include whatever is outstanding on the Pereira fee.

[baggie82]

Profits and losses on player trading are shown in the year that they are realised, regardless of when the money is paid. The £8m in regard to transfer fees owed on the balance sheet will include whatever is outstanding on the Pereira fee.

Assuming that is correct (nothing I could see in the accounts to explain their methodology) how do we second guess the figures and make them add-up? Accounts to June 2022 show a profit of £16.9m from disposal of player registrations and they include the sale of Pereira (TBC), Hegazy (£2.5m) Harper (peanuts) & Field (maximum £1m). As much as I distrust the former ownership it is still hard to believe that we sold Pereira to the Middle East money-men for a circa £13-14m. That would reek of corruption. The other possibility is that Dowling is right and that half or more of the transfer fee disappeared off the books in a rotten deal straight to Lai, the type that was allegedly discussed in the prior January window.

[overseas baggie]

Profits and losses on player trading are shown in the year that they are realised, regardless of when the money is paid. The £8m in regard to transfer fees owed on the balance sheet will include whatever is outstanding on the Pereira fee.

Correct

[overseas baggie]

Assuming that is correct (nothing I could see in the accounts to explain their methodology) how do we second guess the figures and make them add-up? Accounts to June 2022 show a profit of £16.9m from disposal of player registrations and they include the sale of Pereira (TBC), Hegazy (£2.5m) Harper (peanuts) & Field (maximum £1m). As much as I distrust the former ownership it is still hard to believe that we sold Pereira to the Middle East money-men for a circa £13-14m. That would reek of corruption. The other possibility is that Dowling is right and that half or more of the transfer fee disappeared off the books in a rotten deal straight to Lai, the type that was allegedly discussed in the prior January window.

I’m confused by your maths.  The £16.9m is the profit from sales. That suggests that the profit on Peirera was £13m to £14m as I think the other players sold all had nil cost. Am I missing something?

[Standaman]

To calculate the profit on a sale the following equation is applied.

Fee-Book Value = Profit

Book Value is calculated as follows Fee Paid - Amortization (Fee Paid/contract term)x expired term of the contract.

Plugging in the numbers for the Pereira deal as per transfermarkt

I believe Pereira was on a four deal when he signed so it had run down to 3 at the point he was sold

He was bought for £8.25m and was 1 year into  a 4 year deal which gives a book value of £6.187m.

He was sold for £18m therefore the profit was £18m - £6.187m = £11.82m

If you add in £2m from the sale of Harper and Field (if we don't pay fee any fees received are 100% profit) plus the bulk of the Hegazy fee as I don't think he had much if anything left on his contract when we sold him. Then we aren't far short of £16.9m.   

[halifax_baggie]

To calculate the profit on a sale the following equation is applied.

Fee-Book Value = Profit

Book Value is calculated as follows Fee Paid - Amortization (Fee Paid/contract term)x expired term of the contract.

Plugging in the numbers for the Pereira deal as per transfermarkt

I believe Pereira was on a four deal when he signed so it had run down to 3 at the point he was sold

He was bought for £8.25m and was 1 year into  a 4 year deal which gives a book value of £6.187m.

He was sold for £18m therefore the profit was £18m - £6.187m = £11.82m

If you add in £2m from the sale of Harper and Field (if we don't pay fee any fees received are 100% profit) plus the bulk of the Hegazy fee as I don't think he had much if anything left on his contract when we sold him. Then we aren't far short of £16.9m.

Come now, transfermakt, believe - this is conjecture and making figures match your views. Almost like conspiracy theories on X

[overseas baggie]

To calculate the profit on a sale the following equation is applied.

Fee-Book Value = Profit

Book Value is calculated as follows Fee Paid - Amortization (Fee Paid/contract term)x expired term of the contract.

Plugging in the numbers for the Pereira deal as per transfermarkt

I believe Pereira was on a four deal when he signed so it had run down to 3 at the point he was sold

He was bought for £8.25m and was 1 year into  a 4 year deal which gives a book value of £6.187m.

He was sold for £18m therefore the profit was £18m - £6.187m = £11.82m

If you add in £2m from the sale of Harper and Field (if we don't pay fee any fees received are 100% profit) plus the bulk of the Hegazy fee as I don't think he had much if anything left on his contract when we sold him. Then we aren't far short of £16.9m.

Thanks - that’s clear to me.  Very helpful

[Standaman]

Come now, transfermakt, believe - this is conjecture and making figures match your views. Almost like conspiracy theories on X

No actually I am setting out how the profit and loss on player trading is calculated. Other than the number that is posted in the accounts there is no public domain numbers available on individual deals so I can't reconcile back to the number that appears in the clubs accounts. I used the numbers from transfermakt as a worked example.

The auditors will have access to deal level information they signed it off. As I have said earlier if someone has knowledge of an off the books transaction they need to put that information in front of the relevant authorities, if they don't then that is just so much hot air.

[baggie82]

Thanks - that’s clear to me.  Very helpful

Seconded.

[MarkW]

Financial reports are actually on Companies House now. Loss of £7.6m

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07230595/filing-history

[MarkW]

I don't really know what it all means but some interesting notes from the accounts say we drew down £4m of the O'Shea money via a UK bank, with a 2 year repayment period and and 8.5% interest.

I think we already knew this but the Wisdom Smart loan is now repaid

[johnny Cash]

Couple of interesting points highlighted from Kieran McKenna….

The £20m loan was costing us £26k a week in interest
(The part he highlights also states a percentage of transfer revenue at the end of each window is also part of the agreed repayment schedule).

We paid 800k to release a player early. That must be Zohore who had 26 weeks left on his contract (on the basis even out of contract players are paid until the end of July). That amounts to £30k a week which suggests Zohore was happy to sit out his contract unless paid a very high percentage, if not all, his due money.

We were owed £8m in transfer fees, but owed £10m. We also owed up to £7.6m in for players dependent on hitting certain targets 

[Standaman]

On the face of it the results don't look too bad however the actions that were taken to keep the lights on were increasingly desperate.

 The O'Shea transfer is an absolute bin fire although I would stress one that was wholly down to our desperate circumstances.

Generally reported at £8m at the time although not confirmed by either club. It appears in the accounts as £6.54m and given no other significant sales last summer before the June 30th that is the fee. Although elsewhere in the accounts it is noted that player sales trigger repayments of the MSD loan and we repaid £0.6m to them during the period which would obviously reduce the profit shown in the P&L.

Nor did we take a reduced fee for more cash up front because we took out an additional loan secured against the future instalments of £4m at an interest rate of 8% over 2 years. That is roughly another £0.32m of interest payments.

If there was no other indication of how desperate our situation was prior to the takeover then that was it.

In terms of FFP result the fact the Wisdom Smart loan is shown in the 2023 accounts (even though it was paid in 2024) coupled with the " allowable" expenses gives us a break even result. The report was at great pains to point out that the future funding arrangements and the loan repayment were discussed with the EFL so one assumes they are comfortable with this position.

Finally Patel has put in an additional £2.5m in funding which when added to the loan repayment takes the cash injection since February to in excess of £7m. On the one hand the good news is we have an owner prepared to fund the club. However the fact that £7m has been spent just on shoring up our current trading position shows just how difficult our financial position remains. 

[SmethDan]

On the face of it the results don't look too bad however the actions that were taken to keep the lights on were increasingly desperate.

 The O'Shea transfer is an absolute bin fire although I would stress one that was wholly down to our desperate circumstances.

Generally reported at £8m at the time although not confirmed by either club. It appears in the accounts as £6.54m and given no other significant sales last summer before the June 30th that is the fee. Although elsewhere in the accounts it is noted that player sales trigger repayments of the MSD loan and we repaid £0.6m to them during the period which would obviously reduce the profit shown in the P&L.

Nor did we take a reduced fee for more cash up front because we took out an additional loan secured against the future instalments of £4m at an interest rate of 8% over 2 years. That is roughly another £0.32m of interest payments.

If there was no other indication of how desperate our situation was prior to the takeover then that was it.

In terms of FFP result the fact the Wisdom Smart loan is shown in the 2023 accounts (even though it was paid in 2024) coupled with the " allowable" expenses gives us a break even result. The report was at great pains to point out that the future funding arrangements and the loan repayment were discussed with the EFL so one assumes they are comfortable with this position.

Finally Patel has put in an additional £2.5m in funding which when added to the loan repayment takes the cash injection since February to in excess of £7m. On the one hand the good news is we have an owner prepared to fund the club. However the fact that £7m has been spent just on shoring up our current trading position shows just how difficult our financial position remains.

Meaning tighter purse strings for a while yet. Shilen Patel needs to be more creative moving forward than the unimaginative shower of brown splodge he's replaced. I'll be very interested to see if any new partners come aboard for the ride.

[robnewbold]

Knowing sod all about sod all, my instincts are, we were in an extremely precarious position and have been rescued at ten seconds to midnight.