New Owner

[AndyMac]

53 minutes ago, javeajag said:

You really are talking nonsense really 

Let's hope so

[dl1971]

14 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

These people aren’t football people , they’ve never played  the game , been involved in the game , these people are investors interested in making money by whatever means and we seem to have taken the bait .

 

I know that. My point was about forum contributors thinking they know more about football tactics than experienced professionals. Similarly very few forum folk have enhanced knowledge of land values and the like, so those views have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. There is absolutely no evidence that Firhill is being sold of for development. 

[javeajag]

8 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

Let's hope so

I don’t think these guys are property developers .... it’s a football play 

[KemoAvdiu]

23 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

These people aren’t football people , they’ve never played  the game , been involved in the game , these people are investors interested in making money by whatever means and we seem to have taken the bait .

 

The same could be said for a huge proportion of football club owners. Our current board aren’t “football people” either, with the exception of Alan Rough who I understand isn’t the most active of directors. 

In what sense is it “by whatever means”? What are you basing this on? 

[AndyMac]

51 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

So does this mean that our ground and the grounds of Nice and Barnsley will all be razed to the ground to build houses on? Or is this just our fate? 

This is no Santa Claus outfit, that's for sure.

The consortium have saddled Nice with £20 Million of debt chargeable at 9% interest. If that's the type of investment on offer they can keep it.

Barnsley? They would get jailed if they tried to sell that ground.

[jlsarmy]

5 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

I know that. My point was about forum contributors thinking they know more about football tactics than experienced professionals. Similarly very few forum folk have enhanced knowledge of land values and the like, so those views have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. There is absolutely no evidence that Firhill is being sold of for development. 

Think because everything is so sketchy, fans as I am are thinking how can this work , getting players on loan from Barnsley and they do well at PTFC only adds value to the parent club , not PTFC . As regards transfers in our division, at this moment it just doesn’t happen , so I’ve no idea how they get a return on their investment.

[javeajag]

3 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

This is no Santa Claus outfit, that's for sure.

The consortium have saddled Nice with £20 Million of debt chargeable at 9% interest. If that's the type of investment on offer they can keep it.

Barnsley? They would get jailed if they tried to sell that ground.

They have reduced Barnsley debt by £6m 

[jlsarmy]

7 minutes ago, KemoAvdiu said:

The same could be said for a huge proportion of football club owners. Our current board aren’t “football people” either, with the exception of Alan Rough who I understand isn’t the most active of directors. 

In what sense is it “by whatever means”? What are you basing this on? 

Probably the debt they’re leaving Nice in after 18 months 

[dl1971]

2 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Think because everything is so sketchy, fans as I am are thinking how can this work , getting players on loan from Barnsley and they do well at PTFC only adds value to the parent club , not PTFC . As regards transfers in our division, at this moment it just doesn’t happen , so I’ve no idea how they get a return on their investment.

Agreed. Very difficult to understand the motivation behind this. Hopefully not nefarious but not impossible. On the bright side it's taken the focus away from our lack of signings!

[AndyMac]

1 hour ago, stolenscone said:

Andy - I have worked in the commercial property industry for nearly 20years. I have a senior role within my firm. It’s fair to say that I have a good understanding of how property development works.

You day that any land has a value and that these people won’t overpay. At its most basic - any property development has a cost, and if the build cost is higher than the profit, then there isn’t much point in starting the process by buying the land, no matter how good a deal you get.

I struggle to see this particular piece of land as being an attractive proposition. As I said before, there are many other sites which could be picked up cheaply, would be easier to develop, would be less risky and which would likely lead to a higher profit.

I struggle to see how this stacks up financially from a land perspective.

Anything goes.

They built a school on a landfill site in North Lanarkshire. Blue water runs out the taps.

Land can be worth very little, get the right planning permission for it, then it's worth a lot.

 

[javeajag]

12 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

Anything goes.

They built a school on a landfill site in North Lanarkshire. Blue water runs out the taps.

Land can be worth very little, get the right planning permission for it, then it's worth a lot.

 

 

12 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

Anything goes.

They built a school on a landfill site in North Lanarkshire. Blue water runs out the taps.

Land can be worth very little, get the right planning permission for it, then it's worth a lot.

 

No anything does not go 

[AndyMac]

1 hour ago, dl1971 said:

There are people on here who think they have better knowledge and football acumen than, ahem football professionals with 20 years experience. No doubt this will apply to land development debates also lol.

I may be wrong, I may be talking total nonsense. At the end of the day it's a fans forum, with people are just giving their opinions and speculating a bit.

One thing I have noticed. You always try to make a mug of people that don't agree with you.

Why is that?

[jaf]

14 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Probably the debt they’re leaving Nice in after 18 months 

 

When they bought Nice, they bought 80%

The previous owner retained 20%

The loan that everyone is so keen on banging on about was to buy out the remaining 20% of the previous owner

In UK, or French debt terms, 9% is high. However it is cheap versus the cost of equity, and some international debt markets, and so financially one could argue it makes sense, plus it has got Nice into the position that they could be sold to the UKs richest man, in which case one would imagine the debt would immediately be repaid, and ultimately the Nice fans perhaps may be happy with the outcome, who knows.

 

 

 

 

 

[javeajag]

4 minutes ago, jaf said:

 

When they bought Nice, they bought 80%

The previous owner retained 20%

The loan that everyone is so keen on banging on about was to buy out the remaining 20% of the previous owner

In UK, or French debt terms, 9% is high. However it is cheap versus the cost of equity, and some international debt markets, and so financially one could argue it makes sense, plus it has got Nice into the position that they could be sold to the UKs richest man, in which case one would imagine the debt would immediately be repaid, and ultimately the Nice fans perhaps may be happy with the outcome, who knows.

 

 

 

 

 

I would suggest people look at Barnsley rather than Nice it’s a more relevant comparator 

[dl1971]

5 minutes ago, AndyMac said:

I may be wrong, I may be talking total nonsense. At the end of the day it's a fans forum, with people are just giving their opinions and speculating a bit.

One thing I have noticed. You always try to make a mug of people that don't agree with you.

Why is that?

I was talking specifically about those who have zilch knowledge on land development, not you. My apologies if you took it that way. If you look carefully at what I've said I've made it clear I don't know what is going on. 

[Norgethistle]

2 hours ago, dl1971 said:

Ok. On the one hand the forum say the proposed takeover is to asset strip or player development for profit. If its neither what can it be? Tax avoidance is about the only option I can think off. But really....we all need to wait and say. All of the options above may be wrong! 

Maybe the new guy hates the old firm with such a passion that he’s decided to bankroll us breaking up their dominance 

[Jordanhill Jag]

1 hour ago, AndyMac said:

The land will have value, how much is it worth now and how much they will pay to get it is anyone's guess. Nevertheless, I don't think they will overpay.

I can't claim to be any kind of property/development expert, but it never cease to surprise me the state of some land that housing gets built on. Round our way, houses are routinely built upon old factories. The kind of old engineering works where millions of gallons of machine oils and metal coolants have leached through to the ground below, with asbestos, chromium, cyanide and other chemicals thrown in for good measure. There was no SEPA in those days! It's a joke, anything goes, they dig it up a bit, throw on some top soil and kid on that it's ok.

If you have enough money and you know the right people you will get what you want.

Firhill may not be Park Circus, but it does have value.

With the right planning consent, that value will only increase.

Andy - Im involved in the Construction Industry - demolishing and moving all the earth etc would cost circa £1MN - them there is the fact we get seepage from the Canal ie why the Corner in the City End always Freezes or is Water logged as we sit 10m below the Canal

Added into this there is a Clause in Scottish planning  commonly known as "The Steedman Clause" which makes it very difficult to get change of use from a Sporting Stadium  - I honestly dont think its Land - could be wrong and if they are - they are way overpaying for it 

[AndyMac]

1 minute ago, dl1971 said:

I was talking specifically about those who have zilch knowledge on land development, not you. My apologies if you took it that way. If you look carefully at what I've said I've made it clear I don't know what is going on. 

I apologise to you Dl1971. It was uncalled for what I said and out of order.

You are right though, I know nothing about land development. However, I do know there are a lot of sharks out there that try and do fool and cheat decent trusting people.

All the best to you and no harm done If you'll excuse me I had better get back to talking rubbish..........

[jlsarmy]

16 minutes ago, jaf said:

 

When they bought Nice, they bought 80%

The previous owner retained 20%

The loan that everyone is so keen on banging on about was to buy out the remaining 20% of the previous owner

In UK, or French debt terms, 9% is high. However it is cheap versus the cost of equity, and some international debt markets, and so financially one could argue it makes sense, plus it has got Nice into the position that they could be sold to the UKs richest man, in which case one would imagine the debt would immediately be repaid, and ultimately the Nice fans perhaps may be happy with the outcome, who knows.

 

 

 

 

 

They don’t seem to be 

[Jordanhill Jag]

37 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Think because everything is so sketchy, fans as I am are thinking how can this work , getting players on loan from Barnsley and they do well at PTFC only adds value to the parent club , not PTFC . As regards transfers in our division, at this moment it just doesn’t happen , so I’ve no idea how they get a return on their investment.

But we get cheap Players - and if they run the Off Park Side Tight we get a sustainable business Model ? 

[Auld Jag]

4 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

I was talking specifically about those who have zilch knowledge on land development, not you. My apologies if you took it that way. If you look carefully at what I've said I've made it clear I don't know what is going on. 

That is the whole problem. Nobody knows what is going on and the ones that do know are not saying anything. Speculation will continue until the silence is broken. For the record I like what Norgethistle says.

 

5 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

Maybe the new guy hates the old firm with such a passion that he’s decided to bankroll us breaking up their dominance 

 

[dl1971]

1 minute ago, AndyMac said:

I apologise to you Dl1971. It was uncalled for what I said and out of order.

You are right though, I know nothing about land development. However, I do know there are a lot of sharks out there that try and do fool and cheat decent trusting people.

All the best to you and no harm done If you'll excuse me I had better get back to talking rubbish..........

No problem Andy. I know hee haw about most things. The main think is we are all debating this. Will be ironic if the takeover does not materialise lol

[jlsarmy]

2 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

But we get cheap Players - and if they run the Off Park Side Tight we get a sustainable business Model ? 

Big gamble JJ year on year 

[AndyMac]

2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Andy - Im involved in the Construction Industry - demolishing and moving all the earth etc would cost circa £1MN - them there is the fact we get seepage from the Canal ie why the Corner in the City End always Freezes or is Water logged as we sit 10m below the Canal

Added into this there is a Clause in Scottish planning  commonly known as "The Steedman Clause" which makes it very difficult to get change of use from a Sporting Stadium  - I honestly dont think its Land - could be wrong and if they are - they are way overpaying for it 

Fair comment JJ.

You might be right. Barnsley don't own their ground. It belongs to the council.

Edited June 24, 2019 by AndyMac

[jaf]

4 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

They don’t seem to be 

Look at their history - they never are!

Its like a cultural thing - its what they do