ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well I was in two minds, but I like a laugh, so I'll be there.


You're going to try and twat Elvis, yes?

No, I am not a bully but I will ask him to explain himself. Time to let this thread get back to what it is supposed to be about so lets leave it there
 
Just catching up on the extremely bizarre events of today...

So you'd eat me for breakfast, then spit me out in the shape of a swan?



Ooooooooooh, I'm scared.


And aroused.

Post of the thread!

The connotation is still racist

It's a racially loaded term. Weaste is kidding himself and presumably excusing his behaviour

Sounds like Weaste wants to play "will they/won't they?" :nervous:

Crerand, some of your best mates are coloured aren't they?

Just what do you mean by...'mates'.

well?

His driver, his maid, his cook, and his gardener. Sounds a bit like my grandmother's "black friends", but then she was born in Alabama in 1918.

(Obviously just kidding CL, I have no idea if you have a black driver.)

Last post, you are at your work and on a wum with a few others I hope the admin take note. Will you ever grow up? Next time I see you in Tollgate btw I am going to ask you about what you were on about tonight, see how big a chap you are then

I'm told he's about 5"2'.

Also, just a reminder that we're all modern now, so it is perfectly fine to hit a 'man' with glasses. Please let us know how it turned out.

Pics or it didn't happen.

----------


OK, regular service resumed now...
 
Don't be silly, if this is locked they'll be at it all over the forum!

It's better this thread is just considered the mental asylum of the caf.

Tmrd had a bit too many pink wines, went nuts, and then proceeded to threaten people with his typing finger death style.

A few queens showed up and argued over whether or not he's racist, whilst the rest of us were posting jokes with various success. He's now on a time out to save him from himself.


Now normal service can be resumed.

:lol:
 
This thread is basically Fred, Rood, Cider, RedRichio, TMRD and a few others all insulting each other. It'd be better if it was locked, because it hasn't served any purpose for a while.

It's all been worth it for last night. That's the hardest I've laughed in months. I tried to explain to the missus when I was guffawing in bed last night but just couldn't articulate it properly. Obviously tmrd what the instigator of the fun but kudos to crerand and redlambs in particular for making me injure my insides the most.
 
It's all been worth it for last night. That's the hardest I've laughed in months. I tried to explain to the missus when I was guffawing in bed last night but just couldn't articulate it properly. Obviously tmrd what the instigator of the fun but kudos to crerand and redlambs in particular for making me injure my insides the most.

This thread expands too fast... give me a post / page number to start reading the hilarity.

Edit: No need, got through it in my lunch time. Classic work, tards, keep it up!
 
in an attempt to get the thread back on track, here is something for the accounting types out there ...

Was looking through the notes in the financials and came across this:

9 Profits of holding company
The directors have taken advantage of the exemption available under Section 408 of the Companies Act
2006 and have not presented a profit and loss account for the company alone. The Company’s profit for the
financial year was £202,799,000 (2009: Loss of £31,099,000) which includes dividends received of
£266,951,000 from direct subsidiary undertakings.​

So what's that all about then?

No ideas?

It could be something simple like money being moved around as a result of the bond issue but some clarification from someone would be good !
 
9 Profits of holding company
The directors have taken advantage of the exemption available under Section 408 of the Companies Act 2006 and have not presented a profit and loss account for the company alone. The Company’s profit for the financial year was £202,799,000 (2009: Loss of £31,099,000) which includes dividends received of
£266,951,000 from direct subsidiary undertakings.

It'll be something to do with the "closing funds flow" post bond issue. Red Football Ltd (the company) held all the bank debt, but MU Finance plc (its subsidiary) raised all the bond debt. Money flowed into RF to pay the bank debt off, partly from RFJV as a capital contribution and presumably partly from MUF plc as a dividend. We'll only be able to see the details when all the group companies post their accounts at Companies House.

RF has virtually no costs of its own so any dividend roughly = profits.
 
It'll be something to do with the "closing funds flow" post bond issue. Red Football Ltd (the company) held all the bank debt, but MU Finance plc (its subsidiary) raised all the bond debt. Money flowed into RF to pay the bank debt off, partly from RFJV as a capital contribution and presumably partly from MUF plc as a dividend. We'll only be able to see the details when all the group companies post their accounts at Companies House.

RF has virtually no costs of its own so any dividend roughly = profits.

Am I right in saying that RFJV Ltd now directly owns 28% of MU Ltd's shares?
 
Am I right in saying that RFJV Ltd now directly owns 28% of MU Ltd's shares?

No. That's RF Junior Ltd. RFJV own 100% of RF which owns 72% of MU direct and 28% through its 100% ownership of RFJ!

Clear. As. Mud.
 
What's the point of having these holding companies and subsidiaries?

It's all to do with the financing in 2005, 2006 and 2010. RFJ was formed to buy the Irish's stake (hence the 28% holding).

RFJV has to sit separately above RF because it is the "PIKCO" in the structure. It exists to hold its 100% holding in RF and to issue the PIKs which are secured on those shares. Above RFJV sits RF Shareholder which is the top UK business. Above that the US companies.
 
No. That's RF Junior Ltd. RFJV own 100% of RF which owns 72% of MU direct and 28% through its 100% ownership of RFJ!

Clear. As. Mud.

Yeah I remember that now. Although it should be reported in the accounts that Red Football Ltd own 100% of MU Ltd's shares given that RF Junior Ltd is a subsidiary undertaking of RF Ltd. There was a change this year (09/10) from previous periods in so much as the accounts for 09/10 report that RF Ltd own 72% of MU Ltd's shares when earlier accounts report RF Ltd as owning 100% of MU Ltd's shares. Why the change?
 
Yeah I remember that now. Although it should be reported in the accounts that Red Football Ltd own 100% of MU Ltd's shares given that RF Junior Ltd is a subsidiary undertaking of RF Ltd. There was a change this year (09/10) from previous periods in so much as the accounts for 09/10 report that RF Ltd own 72% of MU Ltd's shares when earlier accounts report RF Ltd as owning 100% of MU Ltd's shares. Why the change?

Good spot. Proof that PWC can make mistakes?
 
It's all to do with the financing in 2005, 2006 and 2010. RFJ was formed to buy the Irish's stake (hence the 28% holding).

RFJV has to sit separately above RF because it is the "PIKCO" in the structure. It exists to hold its 100% holding in RF and to issue the PIKs which are secured on those shares. Above RFJV sits RF Shareholder which is the top UK business. Above that the US companies.

Is there a football club in there somewhere?
 
Does make you think doesn't it that with all the layers within the complex structures, companies, subsidiaries, shareholdings etc that we (or more accurately, the Glazers) make money from moving money around, rather than actually playing football.

Yip, sad that die hard football fans have to take an interest in all this financial bollox because the owners are constantly at some trick or other to convince us they have money
 
Does make you think doesn't it that with all the layers within the complex structures, companies, subsidiaries, shareholdings etc that we (or more accurately, the Glazers) make money from moving money around, rather than actually playing football.

Though i've never seen them play, i'd be genuinely surprised if the Glazers had the talent and training necessary to play football professionally.
 
Yip, sad that die hard football fans have to take an interest in all this financial bollox because the owners are constantly at some trick or other to convince us they have money

Nobody's trying to convince us that they have money, only that the club can function successfully with them at the helm.

It can, and the sooner you accept that then the sooner you can begin to feel good about our football club again.

If you cannot ever accept it then i feel sorry for you.
 
They're trying to convince us they have OUR money. (not yours Cider)

Probably had a party last night when they heard Rooney asked for a transfer, "all we need now is for Sir Alex to say that there is no value out there and we could be 50m richer" . That is meant to be light hearted before a certain poster loses the rag
 
Probably had a party last night when they heard Rooney asked for a transfer, "all we need now is for Sir Alex to say that there is no value out there and we could be 50m richer" . That is meant to be light hearted before a certain poster loses the rag

Where do you work? I'm going to...



...no let's not start that again ;)



In the interest of everybody's mental health though, can we not mention Rooney here for a while? There's going to be plenty of pages on that if/when it happens :boring:
 
Where do you work? I'm going to...



...no let's not start that again ;)



In the interest of everybody's mental health though, can we not mention Rooney here for a while? There's going to be plenty of pages on that if/when it happens :boring:

As I said it was meant to be light hearted and not a serious comment. Lets hope it is nipped in the bud quickly if not it is going to be a long haul to at least January
 
Not that violent but I will confront him, I deal with people like him all the time and Im sure a few words will be suffice. I have seen him in Tollgate before

:lol: Come off it Crerand, if you seriously can't tell that I'm winding you up you need to have a word with yourself. You've always had a bit of a problem with me ever since I asked whether the Virgin Mary was actually a virgin.
 
It'll be something to do with the "closing funds flow" post bond issue. Red Football Ltd (the company) held all the bank debt, but MU Finance plc (its subsidiary) raised all the bond debt. Money flowed into RF to pay the bank debt off, partly from RFJV as a capital contribution and presumably partly from MUF plc as a dividend. We'll only be able to see the details when all the group companies post their accounts at Companies House.

RF has virtually no costs of its own so any dividend roughly = profits.

Ye I thought it was something about a different financial structure after the bond but didnt understand what exactly the amounts represented.

You can also see some of the money flow in Note 15 (Debtors)
 
You'll have to pardon me for having paid less attention to this thread as it has grown into a quite giant discussion.

But are we not simply drifting into oblivion [well, relative to the club people have become accustom to in the modern era]? The scrabbling elephant in the footballing room that the media touches on from time to time and assumes there is a rescuer for?

It is similar to a book read about the American Revolution, British held New York for all intents was under siege and yet people went about as if all was normal, holding ever grander parties to shut out their concerns.

In our case of course it is things like transfers, progression in the Champions League and...City, that are the distraction. Supporters have a natural partiality however the media and the Premier League/FA should be more responsible.

Such mass denial it seems to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.