| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo 13:22 - Oct 5 with 8745 views | TractorBoyOlly |
Evans has no money and uses ITFC as a tax haven.
If Hurst fails, the only viable option?
Discuss |  |
| |  |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:15 - Oct 5 with 2017 views | Guthrum |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 17:49 - Oct 5 by Binner |
If you're looking for a former manager to try to get us out of trouble then by far the best option would be Mick McCarthy. |
Yes, altho I doubt he'd be wanting to come back here in a hurry. |  |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:21 - Oct 5 with 2019 views | Coastalblue |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:02 - Oct 5 by Warhurst |
If the money is borrowed from other Evans enterprises, that's still his own personal money is it not? He is still losing out overall then? I genuinely don't know how businesses/tax work just curious. |
The Club is part of the Empire for want of a better word, any money spent and lost in the club is money that's either coming out of profit or not being reinvested in other parts.
There are probably staff in the ME Group who hate the club, sucking funds out that could otherwise go toward wages or bonuses, or reinvested in an area that actually turns a profit. |  |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:48 - Oct 5 with 2006 views | Warhurst |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:21 - Oct 5 by Coastalblue |
The Club is part of the Empire for want of a better word, any money spent and lost in the club is money that's either coming out of profit or not being reinvested in other parts.
There are probably staff in the ME Group who hate the club, sucking funds out that could otherwise go toward wages or bonuses, or reinvested in an area that actually turns a profit. |
Ok, I get that the club is part of an overall empire. But how does having an unprofitable part of an empire benefit him overall? Wouldn't he be better off not having ITFC, then other part of his business would be even more profitable than before? |  | | |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:56 - Oct 5 with 1996 views | jeera |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 17:42 - Oct 5 by stewartm |
Evans loses six million or runs up Ipswich debt by six million borrowing against the club? I could not see banks lending money so Evans borrows from other Evans enterprises? I am no financial whizz kid but one thing I can very confidently write, Evans has not spent 1 pound of his own personal money and do not listen to any of the kn,bs on here talking sh,t that they know how it works! [Post edited 5 Oct 2018 17:56]
|
That doesn't even make sense. |  |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 19:34 - Oct 5 with 1977 views | Guthrum |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:48 - Oct 5 by Warhurst |
Ok, I get that the club is part of an overall empire. But how does having an unprofitable part of an empire benefit him overall? Wouldn't he be better off not having ITFC, then other part of his business would be even more profitable than before? |
It doesn't really benefit him, apart from a bit of raised profile. Tax offsets are going to save him less than a fifth of what he's spending on running the club.
If this were a brutal cost-cutting excercise, ITFC would go. Except that you can't easily shut down a football club like you can with an unprofitable subsidiary company. | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 19:40 - Oct 5 with 1970 views | ghostofescobar |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 17:49 - Oct 5 by Binner |
If you're looking for a former manager to try to get us out of trouble then by far the best option would be Mick McCarthy. |
Ironic isn't it. |  |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:31 - Oct 5 with 1933 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:02 - Oct 5 by Warhurst |
If the money is borrowed from other Evans enterprises, that's still his own personal money is it not? He is still losing out overall then? I genuinely don't know how businesses/tax work just curious. |
Taxes is a different subject, limited company money is not personal money! |  |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:34 - Oct 5 with 1929 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 18:56 - Oct 5 by jeera |
That doesn't even make sense. |
Really? [Post edited 5 Oct 2018 22:48]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:41 - Oct 5 with 1928 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 19:34 - Oct 5 by Guthrum |
It doesn't really benefit him, apart from a bit of raised profile. Tax offsets are going to save him less than a fifth of what he's spending on running the club.
If this were a brutal cost-cutting excercise, ITFC would go. Except that you can't easily shut down a football club like you can with an unprofitable subsidiary company. |
Taxes are not my thing but the point for me is, if ITFC get relegated and Evans cannot borrow any more money and if he cannot sell is he brutal enough to shut up shop or would the losses to other Evans enterprises be enough to deter such a brutal action. His next move might show desperation! [Post edited 5 Oct 2018 21:46]
| |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 22:27 - Oct 5 with 1906 views | Warhurst |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:31 - Oct 5 by stewartm |
Taxes is a different subject, limited company money is not personal money! |
I still don't understand how he hasn't spent any of his own money, I googled what limited company money is and that makes sense to me, but if he uses that money there is an opportunity cost to that, that money could have been used to invest in other parts of the business empire? | | | |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 22:37 - Oct 5 with 1898 views | jeera |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:34 - Oct 5 by stewartm |
Really? [Post edited 5 Oct 2018 22:48]
|
So not only are you a bit thick, you're also abusive.
Your post makes no sense.
Get it? | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 22:57 - Oct 5 with 1891 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 22:37 - Oct 5 by jeera |
So not only are you a bit thick, you're also abusive.
Your post makes no sense.
Get it? |
I removed the name (my patience runs short with the financial experts on here) my apologies for being abusive! I am by no means a money man and as for tax matters I would run a mile. As for my post, Evans has not spent a penny of his personal fortune! Everything spent above the income of the club(including profit on transfer fees) is borrowed. I could not tell you who from and how much and tbh I could not be bothered to read the yearly finances. For me ITFC being in so much debt is just too depressing! | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 01:08 - Oct 6 with 1857 views | Guthrum |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:41 - Oct 5 by stewartm |
Taxes are not my thing but the point for me is, if ITFC get relegated and Evans cannot borrow any more money and if he cannot sell is he brutal enough to shut up shop or would the losses to other Evans enterprises be enough to deter such a brutal action. His next move might show desperation! [Post edited 5 Oct 2018 21:46]
|
He is running Ipswich Town through a subsidiary of Marcus Evans Group. That is how the money is routed in and relegation is not going to affect the situation. It may make ITFC a less attractive financial prospect to persist with, as while expenses may be a bit lower, so will income be, as well as then being two stages removed from a genuinely lucrative payday in the Prem.
It's not very easy to close down a football club, the League might have something to say about it. Plus that would entail getting back pretty much none of the money he's put in. his best option would still be to sell, albeit probably having to sharply discount the debt he's owed (as happened when he bought the club in the first place). | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 01:17 - Oct 6 with 1855 views | Guthrum |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 21:31 - Oct 5 by stewartm |
Taxes is a different subject, limited company money is not personal money! |
The result of reducing the profits in his network of limited companies is that there will be less money available to take out of the business as shareholder dividends - so directly impacting Evans' income. | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 09:20 - Oct 6 with 1788 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 01:17 - Oct 6 by Guthrum |
The result of reducing the profits in his network of limited companies is that there will be less money available to take out of the business as shareholder dividends - so directly impacting Evans' income. |
His pay as Chief Executive is the same no matter what, Limited companies lending to a company that cannot repay the debt (obviously impacting share dividends) would be a matter for FSA. Again ME has not spent a penny of his own personal money. As ME being the saviour of the club and pumping in his own money to keep ITFC afloat is a load of old codswallop believed by sycophants and ‘wallies’. Evans was looking for promotion to the premiership not because he was a ITFC fan because of the money. It did not work and the result is not my opinion it is what we are all seeing, poor players poor manager and management, serious under investment (not just in transfers) unrealistic targets and to top it all off, a very big debt (that out ways the value of the club). It’s like a horror story come true! [Post edited 6 Oct 2018 9:27]
| |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 09:31 - Oct 6 with 1782 views | sparks |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 09:20 - Oct 6 by stewartm |
His pay as Chief Executive is the same no matter what, Limited companies lending to a company that cannot repay the debt (obviously impacting share dividends) would be a matter for FSA. Again ME has not spent a penny of his own personal money. As ME being the saviour of the club and pumping in his own money to keep ITFC afloat is a load of old codswallop believed by sycophants and ‘wallies’. Evans was looking for promotion to the premiership not because he was a ITFC fan because of the money. It did not work and the result is not my opinion it is what we are all seeing, poor players poor manager and management, serious under investment (not just in transfers) unrealistic targets and to top it all off, a very big debt (that out ways the value of the club). It’s like a horror story come true! [Post edited 6 Oct 2018 9:27]
|
You really dont understand this stuff do you?
MEG is his company. Its his money. Money that MEG spends on the club is money he doesnt get to take out of the company, or enjoy the benefit of in terms of the company's value. This is not some PLC with public ownership.
You say "Everything spent above the income of the club(including profit on transfer fees) is borrowed. I could not tell you who from and how much" Its basically all provided by MEG. So not "borrowed" as such, but shifted from one company owned by ME to another. The debt reflects his investment. It is common sense for it to be on the books as loans for numerous reasons. However, unless or until the club becomes vastly more profitable, there is no prospect of any repayment. One imagines there will come a point where it is simplest to write chunks off.
The idea that he was in it for the money is also silly. The man is not a fool, and would be well aware that the best way to make a small fortune out of a football club is to start with a big fortune. |  |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 10:06 - Oct 6 with 1764 views | stewartm |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 09:31 - Oct 6 by sparks |
You really dont understand this stuff do you?
MEG is his company. Its his money. Money that MEG spends on the club is money he doesnt get to take out of the company, or enjoy the benefit of in terms of the company's value. This is not some PLC with public ownership.
You say "Everything spent above the income of the club(including profit on transfer fees) is borrowed. I could not tell you who from and how much" Its basically all provided by MEG. So not "borrowed" as such, but shifted from one company owned by ME to another. The debt reflects his investment. It is common sense for it to be on the books as loans for numerous reasons. However, unless or until the club becomes vastly more profitable, there is no prospect of any repayment. One imagines there will come a point where it is simplest to write chunks off.
The idea that he was in it for the money is also silly. The man is not a fool, and would be well aware that the best way to make a small fortune out of a football club is to start with a big fortune. |
I know when ME took over ITFC he inherited some debt (again I do not know how much) but to keep matters simple, every year Towns debt is increasing and Towns assets (example quality of players)are decreasing, no matter how you put it (you seem more educated than me) ITFC is up the creek without a paddle, the “writing chunks off” let’s hope so, let’s hope ME is not brutal and perhaps being brutal would cost more. My opinion and perhaps common sense, ME is a businessman and a club in the Premiership is worth a lot of money.... | |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 10:41 - Oct 6 with 1750 views | sparks |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 10:06 - Oct 6 by stewartm |
I know when ME took over ITFC he inherited some debt (again I do not know how much) but to keep matters simple, every year Towns debt is increasing and Towns assets (example quality of players)are decreasing, no matter how you put it (you seem more educated than me) ITFC is up the creek without a paddle, the “writing chunks off” let’s hope so, let’s hope ME is not brutal and perhaps being brutal would cost more. My opinion and perhaps common sense, ME is a businessman and a club in the Premiership is worth a lot of money.... |
The debt is entirely owed to MEG. It increases, because the club makes a loss every year, and is therefore subsidised by ME through his company. There would be nothing to gain from "shutting it down". If he wants out that badly, he can sell for £1. | |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 11:01 - Oct 6 with 1739 views | connorscontract |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 14:16 - Oct 5 by ghostofescobar |
Just one point: if Burley and Butcher had no connection to Town whatsoever, but let's say they had success as players 40 odd years ago at, say Villa, then one of them had a good managerial spell at, let's say Villa again, 20 years ago (before getting them relegated after just 2 seasons in the Prem), who on this board would want them? Anyone? Hands up at the back. And if you wouldn't, then it boils down to them having a past at the club, albeit successful in different capacities at different times (many, many years ago). That's it. Your prime reason for thinking they will succeed is that they once worked well at PR (I'm obviously being a little flippant there). And Klug has had no noticeable success managing the first team and has repeatedly said he doesn't want the job.
Burley/Butcher/Klug should be THE LAST option (well, maybe Arry should be the last option) |
The closest parallels would be John Gregory or Brian Little.
Or, to look wider than Villa, maybe Ossie Ardiles, or Steve McMahon. | | | |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 13:23 - Oct 6 with 1711 views | Benno1960 |
| Burley/Butcher/Klug Combo on 14:19 - Oct 5 by J2BLUE |
Can you explain in detail how he uses the club as a tax haven? |
ME stashes cash inside Crazee
Its no secret |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
