Breaking News Ron's Blog

[Reg Martin]

you bet it is!

a good reply, how did you know I had you in mind? ;)
deserves some green but have to spread it around for now.

 

[ElstreeBlue]

Please read Ron Martin's very short answer to Matthew Walker's good question about servicing the club's debt. This was just a few months ago, long after the credit crunch.

Does anyone NOW seriously think the answer has any credibility?

As far as I'm aware, he has STILL not clearly set out the financial plan for how the club would be financially better off at the new stadium (which the club wouldn't own) when it's currently losing £2.4m a year, and that is without it even being charged any rent at the moment, and the club is in massive and spiralling debt. Somehow, despite all these financial problems which the board must have known about a few months ago, the blog said that the club would not have any debts to service when we're at the new stadium.

Answers on a postcard please.

 

[shrimperton]

Rons blog should bve renamed RONS BLAG!!

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

What is the anticipated level of debt that the club (including the club's directly related companies and any SPVs set up to facilitate the move) will be servicing once the stadium move is complete, net of any proceeds from the development of the Roots Hall site?
Matthew Walker

The important issue here is that it is not intended that the Club has any debt, moreover substantially greater income and capital from the stadium plans to provide the Club with real impetus and with an infrastructure to maintain, as I have said previously, the upward spiral both on the pitch and also off.

In short, Southend United Football Club will not be servicing any debt which reflects the position I have established for the benefit of the football club in recent years whilst at Roots Hall.

Hhhmmmm.

 

[A Century United]

Please read Ron Martin's very short answer to Matthew Walker's good question about servicing the club's debt. This was just a few months ago, long after the credit crunch.

Does anyone NOW seriously think the answer has any credibility?

As far as I'm aware, he has STILL not clearly set out the financial plan for how the club would be financially better off at the new stadium (which the club wouldn't own) when it's currently losing £2.4m a year, and that is without it even being charged any rent at the moment, and the club is in massive and spiralling debt. Somehow, despite all these financial problems which the board must have known about a few months ago, the blog said that the club would not have any debts to service when we're at the new stadium.

Answers on a postcard please.

You are confusing our destination with our journey. The question has always been, are Ron's pockets deep enough to see the project through? If they are then with the money to be made there is no reason to doubt Ron's intentions to write off our debt. But we have to get there first.

As I type, my 150% guaranteed reliable inside informant assures me that Ron is searching his sock drawer and old coat pockets for those last few pennies, and his family is down the beach with the metal detectors right now. There is hope!

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Please read Ron Martin's very short answer to Matthew Walker's good question about servicing the club's debt. This was just a few months ago, long after the credit crunch.

Does anyone NOW seriously think the answer has any credibility?

As far as I'm aware, he has STILL not clearly set out the financial plan for how the club would be financially better off at the new stadium (which the club wouldn't own) when it's currently losing £2.4m a year, and that is without it even being charged any rent at the moment, and the club is in massive and spiralling debt. Somehow, despite all these financial problems which the board must have known about a few months ago, the blog said that the club would not have any debts to service when we're at the new stadium.

Answers on a postcard please.

The important issue here is that it is not intended that the Club has any debt, moreover substantially greater income and capital from the stadium plans to provide the Club with real impetus and with an infrastructure to maintain, as I have said previously, the upward spiral both on the pitch and also off.In short, Southend United Football Club will not be servicing any debt which reflects the position I have established for the benefit of the football club in recent years whilst at Roots Hall.

I agree he has been very vague on the details of how it will happen, but seeing as we are losing £2.4m a year, what exactly is the case for staying at Roots Hall?

I don't know whether the new stadium will be the answer to all our problems, but I think it is pretty clear that staying put isn't.

The club isn't financing the new stadium through debt (although who will be financing it and how remains unclear). The club does not even have an overdraft facility and it does not have any assets that could be used as security. This is different from saying that the club does not have any tax bills that have to be settled. The answer to MtS's question prompts plenty more questions, but yes, I think the answer still has credibility.

 

[ElstreeBlue]

I agree he has been very vague on the details of how it will happen, but seeing as we are losing £2.4m a year, what exactly is the case for staying at Roots Hall?

I don't know whether the new stadium will be the answer to all our problems, but I think it is pretty clear that staying put isn't.

The club isn't financing the new stadium through debt (although who will be financing it and how remains unclear). The club does not even have an overdraft facility and it does not have any assets that could be used as security. This is different from saying that the club does not have any tax bills that have to be settled. The answer to MtS's question prompts plenty more questions, but yes, I think the answer still has credibility.

I have not been in favour of us staying at RH for 20 years, well before it was popular among fans to want to move away from RH. I was certainly very much in favour of the move when the club would make money from the new complex. In fact, I refused to go to Garons Park on principle for a long time because of the Council's refusal to co-operate with the club's wishes to move at the time.

I am in favour of Ron Martin being up front with us about what moving to a new stadium actually means financially for the club (as opposed to his company that would own the stadium and complex), considering that the club will be a mere tenant there rather than the company entitled to share in the rent from other tenants. Would the club have to pay rent? How much? How could the club afford that? Ron Martin has never explained this. I wonder why not? Might the explanation not be very popular? Is it better not to be clear now? If he ever gave us a clear explanation of what the financial implications would be for the club, and how the club's tenure would be safeguarded at FF, I think we could all make a reasoned judgement as to whether it's in the club's interests. I hope it would be for the club's good, but we just don't know because it's never been explained.

It would be far better for the club to own the stadium so that the club could share some of the financial benefits of the new stadium complex. Ron's companies could have owned a large amount of the club's shares to reward them for their part in the investment. No one would begrudge them a large share of the cake. But where's the financial up-side for the club (as a separate legal entity to Ron's other companies)?

Let's assume that Ron Martin wants what's best for the club. What happens after he sells his interest in the company that owns the stadium? What would the club be charged in rent after the new owner takes control?

And is he going to write off the mountain of debt that is claimed to be owed from the club to his other companies if it's never going to have to paid? If so, why hasn't he done that already?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I have not been in favour of us staying at RH for 20 years, well before it was popular among fans to want to move away from RH. I was certainly very much in favour of the move when the club would make money from the new complex. In fact, I refused to go to Garons Park on principle for a long time because of the Council's refusal to co-operate with the club's wishes to move at the time.

I am in favour of Ron Martin being up front with us about what moving to a new stadium actually means financially for the club (as opposed to his company that would own the stadium and complex), considering that the club will be a mere tenant there rather than the company entitled to share in the rent from other tenants. Would the club have to pay rent? How much? How could the club afford that? Ron Martin has never explained this. I wonder why not? Might the explanation not be very popular? Is it better not to be clear now? If he ever gave us a clear explanation of what the financial implications would be for the club, and how the club's tenure would be safeguarded at FF, I think we could all make a reasoned judgement as to whether it's in the club's interests. I hope it would be for the club's good, but we just don't know because it's never been explained.

It would be far better for the club to own the stadium so that the club could share some of the financial benefits of the new stadium complex. Ron's companies could have owned a large amount of the club's shares to reward them for their part in the investment. No one would begrudge them a large share of the cake. But where's the financial up-side for the club (as a separate legal entity to Ron's other companies)?

Let's assume that Ron Martin wants what's best for the club. What happens after he sells his interest in the company that owns the stadium? What would the club be charged in rent after the new owner takes control?

And is he going to write off the mountain of debt that is claimed to be owed from the club to his other companies if it's never going to have to paid? If so, why hasn't he done that already?

I think it is difficult to say exactly how it will work, because I don't think it has been decided. AFAIK the finances for the new stadium (and surrounding developments) haven't been finalised.

As for the rent point, the club is supposed to pay rent on Roots Hall. I therefore don't see it as being that different to the situation we currently find ourselves in, although the rent might be higher because it is a bigger, better stadium, this might be off-set somewhat by the location. Essentially if we have to pay market rent at either location we are screwed.

Ron has made hazy references to what might happen to the stadium and giving it to the club, but this could mean that SUFC or SUSCT gets the freehold subject to a 999 year lease at a peppercorn rent (ie worthless, and then we'd have to pay rent to the head landlord) or whether we'd be granted the long lease at the peppercorn rent. I don't expect much detail to be revealed until all the finances are in place, because until then I don't think RM knows how this is going to end up. As I've said before, I don't doubt so much his intentions as his capability to bring it about. Now that does leave us in a vulnerable position, because when things go wrong, we'll be the first ones to lose out. However as I don't see the club being able to survive at Roots Hall, I see the choice as being between folding at Roots Hall or moving to Fossetts and maybe folding, or maybe surviving.

 

[A Century United]

If RM writes off the debt now, he is no longer the major creditor of SUFC and will be in a much weaker position if we DO go into administration - that would be my best guess, anyway.

 

[ElstreeBlue]

If RM writes off the debt now, he is no longer the major creditor of SUFC and will be in a much weaker position if we DO go into administration - that would be my best guess, anyway.

Are you suggesting that the reason the debt was kept on the club's books for all those years rather than be written off (even when the finances were apparently more stable for a few years and we had planning permission for the new stadium that was meant to have been built within 2 years of planning permission being granted), was just in case we had the credit crunch that stopped the stadium getting built, and so that RM would be able to have more control over the administrator should the club go into administration?

 

[Beefy]

Writing off the rent debts would do absolutely nothing to improve our finances but would mean that if we were to go into Administration at some point (which considering the money problems in football could never have been totally ruled out) he'd have far less control over things. So why would he write the debt off?

 

[A Century United]

If RM writes off the debt now, he is no longer the major creditor of SUFC and will be in a much weaker position if we DO go into administration - that would be my best guess, anyway.

Are you suggesting that the reason the debt was kept on the club's books for all those years rather than be written off (even when the finances were apparently more stable for a few years and we had planning permission for the new stadium that was meant to have been built within 2 years of planning permission being granted), was just in case we had the credit crunch that stopped the stadium getting built, and so that RM would be able to have more control over the administrator should the club go into administration?

Writing off the rent debts would do absolutely nothing to improve our finances but would mean that if we were to go into Administration at some point (which considering the money problems in football could never have been totally ruled out) he'd have far less control over things. So why would he write the debt off?

Being the major (by far) creditor of the club is a position of strength in a lot of circumstances. As Beefy says, why would he write the debts off the books before he had too? Ken Bates certainly didn't.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

In short, Southend United Football Club will not be servicing any debt

Well, turns out he wasn't fibbing about that. Looks like we haven't been servicing anyone's debts, HMRC's included.

I'm sorry not to have asked the right question...

:'(

 

[TJC]

So, on the eve of Rons quoted deadline of 'knowing if the future is secure', can we expect a statement early tomorrow morning? My guess is if its good news and Ron has secured funds, it will be announced early, but the longer it drags on and if we get to this time tomorrow night with no statement - I think thats it guys, relegation scrap here we come!

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

So, on the eve of Rons quoted deadline of 'knowing if the future is secure', can we expect a statement early tomorrow morning? My guess is if its good news and Ron has secured funds, it will be announced early, but the longer it drags on and if we get to this time tomorrow night with no statement - I think thats it guys, relegation scrap here we come!

Doubt we'll get anything before lunchtime either way.