How are we going to meet the balloon payment?

In October 2016 the balloon payment becomes due. If nothing substantial changes between now and then it will be a sum of almost £2m that needs to be found in one hit to pay off the contractual obligation that enables the club possession of its "Golden Share".

Make no mistake: failure to meet the balloon payment in full and on time will have serious, very serious, potentially catastrophic, repercussions. At the very least a huge points penalty looms which will almost certainly ensure relegation. If we are still in L2 then that means we're out of the league. They might throw us out of the league anyway... The club's continuing existence is at stake here. Again.

The issue is that serious and it has been known for nearly 3 years now during which time almost no reduction in the final sum due has been achieved.

When, reluctantly, the club has been cornered into making some sort of statement about how this is going to be dealt with it was insistent that the only way it could be met was by the profit generated by the new grandstand and the only way we got the new grandstand was as a by-product of the wider HHP development.

HHP appears to be in tatters as far as a meaningful project is concerned and even if it goes ahead it won't start in time to be finished in time. That means no operating profits. That means we cannot meet the balloon payment because, as we have been repeatedly told: "either it all goes ahead or none of it does" and "there is no alternative" or "there is no Plan B".

Changing the subject, denigrating those who raise the issue, assuming that everything will be OK and avoiding the issue do not change the urgency, immediacy or magnitude of a problem looming ever larger on a horizon getting ever nearer.

Now is the time for Mr Brent to assure us that the matter is in hand and will be dealt with in full and on time, to explain how that may be achieved in terms that are credible and to apologise for misleading us about the being no other possible option in the first place.

And if he can't do that at least we have a little over 2 years to try to do something about it. It isn't yet a lost cause but with every day that passes the possibility to do something about it recedes.

£1.9m.

Are we running at a profit? Our crowds are bigger than most in this league, and the team isn't better -> Is there a chance the team will make, say, £150k this season and next to bring it down towards 1.5m?

Will an away draw at a big'un in the 3rd round of the FA Cup be our only hope?

Do we have 10k fans willing to chip in £200, or 5k to chip in £400? If we could get that, how much of the club could 'fans' end up owning in return - I'd want all of it for that much!

What else can we sell - naming rights?

Mock Cuncher wrote:

£1.9m.

Are we running at a profit? Our crowds are bigger than most in this league, and the team isn't better -> Is there a chance the team will make, say, £150k this season and next to bring it down towards 1.5m?

Will an away draw at a big'un in the 3rd round of the FA Cup be our only hope?

Do we have 10k fans willing to chip in £200, or 5k to chip in £400? If we could get that, how much of the club could 'fans' end up owning in return - I'd want all of it for that much!

What else can we sell - naming rights?

I certainly wouldnt chip in if that banker was still involved, in fact unless the fans a controlling interest no chance - so thats that really, what a waste this 2/3 years has been!!

Mock Cuncher wrote:

£1.9m.

Are we running at a profit? Our crowds are bigger than most in this league, and the team isn't better -> Is there a chance the team will make, say, £150k this season and next to bring it down towards 1.5m?

Will an away draw at a big'un in the 3rd round of the FA Cup be our only hope?

Do we have 10k fans willing to chip in £200, or 5k to chip in £400? If we could get that, how much of the club could 'fans' end up owning in return - I'd want all of it for that much!

What else can we sell - naming rights?

Marvin Morgan

What I don't want to happen is for the GTs and other associated rattlers raise the sum for Brent, Brent has fooked up big style, he's not wanted at the club by the majority of fans now, time for him to make a plan B, move the fook out of the way and let US rescue our club yet again.
Once he is gone I hope we never return to the arse licking, forelock tugging subservience that has been shown to the biggest danger the club has ever faced.
BRENT OUT YESTERDAY!

With a big struggle it seems...

Come October 2016, we could all talking in a past tense.

Brent buys the freehold and immediately remortgages the club?

Sells the pitch to the AFT or via the Trust - uses that money plus a loan from Akkeron to subsidies the rest?

Whatever its a very worrying and increasingly pressing situation.

Part of me still beleives this season is boom or bust for the club with much of our being gambled on attaining promotion.

£400,000 bought 20% of the club.

£1.9m buys 95% of the club?

Dougie wrote:

Brent buys the freehold and immediately remortgages the club?

Sells the pitch to the AFT or via the Trust - uses that money plus a loan from Akkeron to subsidies the rest?

Whatever its a very worrying and increasingly pressing situation.

Part of me still beleives this season is boom or bust for the club with much of our being gambled on attaining promotion.

Unless promotion is achieved this season and next season too [in front of a packed HP], the writing could well be on the wall.

We have to get out of this league to give us some cushion from the admin. penalty when it arrives. What's so frustrating is that if Brent fecks it up he will dissappear still owning the freehold to the car park land next to a non league club.

My bet is there will be a smaller payment (say 250K) and the rest will be renegotiated on another 3 or 5 year cycle. As long as payments continue to be made and debts are reducing, most creditors would usually agree to a plan like this.

Jon L wrote:

My bet is there will be a smaller payment (say 250K) and the rest will be renegotiated on another 3 or 5 year cycle.  As long as payments continue to be made and debts are reducing, most creditors would usually agree to a plan like this.

I think entertaining the entire notion, given the repercussions should it not happen, is entirely irresponsible.

There is no precedent for such an arrangement and no indication that there ever will be.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Jon L wrote:

My bet is there will be a smaller payment (say 250K) and the rest will be renegotiated on another 3 or 5 year cycle.  As long as payments continue to be made and debts are reducing, most creditors would usually agree to a plan like this.

I think entertaining the entire notion, given the repercussions should it not happen, is entirely irresponsible.

There is no precedent for such an arrangement and no indication that there ever will be.

Could be another "first in football".

First club to sign a 5 year deal with no plan in place to keep it?

We'd deserve to be chucked out of the League even if we weren't!

Can we just park the idea that the 5 years will be extended in any way? It won't.

TBH I'm shocked that there's anybody out there that thinks this is a realistic possibility.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />

If the deal was five years, then it is five years. I can't see the FL extending it [unless it is a very tiny amount that is owed].

That is why it is really vital that Argyle get promoted this season and consolidate in L1 until that time arrives [or get promoted to the Championship before October 2016], a tall order i know, but it can be done.

If Argyle do go up this season, perhaps the Play-Offs would be the best option for the club, as money will be made by this route and that could go towards the balloon payment being paid off before or by the agreed date.

If Argyle somehow fail to meet the payment come october 2016, what is the worst the FL can do, a points deduction and instant relegation.

Argyle can't get expelled from the league for failing to meet said payment, surely. It would be petty of the FL to boot Argyle out of the league. The only way that that could happen is if a points deduction was so severe that Argyle found themselves doing a Luton Town, where Conference football is forced onto them.

The club would have done its best to meet the deadline date and final payment, plus they would have paid off a fair amount already.

Personally, i think the club will meet the deadline, but with a struggle - don't quote me on that in October 2016...

VillageGreen wrote:

If the deal was five years, then it is five years. I can't see the FL extending it [unless it is a very tiny amount that is owed].

That is why it is really vital that Argyle get promoted this season and consolidate in L1 until that time arrives [or get promoted to the Championship before October 2016], a tall order i know, but it can be done.

If Argyle do go up this season, perhaps the Play-Offs would be the best option for the club, as money will be made by this route and that could go towards the balloon payment being paid off before or by the agreed date.

If Argyle somehow fail to meet the payment come october 2016, what is the worst the FL can do, a points deduction and instant relegation.

Argyle can't get expelled from the league for failing to meet said payment, surely. It would be petty of the FL to boot Argyle out of the league. The only way that that could happen is if a points deduction was so severe that Argyle found themselves doing a Luton Town, where Conference football is forced onto them.

The club would have done its best to meet the deadline date and final payment, plus they would have paid off a fair amount already.

Personally, i think the club will meet the deadline, but with a struggle - don't quote me on that in October 2016...

Portsmouth went into administration twice. The second time they still had Football Creditor debt to pay, mainly in the form of players wages . Each time there was a points deduction . In coming out of administration for the second time the agreement with the Football League was for full repayment of the Football Creditor debt over a four year period so there is a precedent for the re-scheduling of debt.

It is the sanction of a points deduction and its implications that is the real issue. With two years to go before full repayment is due there remains every chance that the Football Creditor can be reduced to manageable proportions either by better than budgeted gate receipts from improved performances on the pitch, a beneficial cup run, player sales or further investment in the club or a combination of all of those.

I find it almost amusing that nobody ever mentions a wildly radical solution. That solution being that the multi-millionaire owner of the football club uses a couple of his multiple millions of £££'s to simply pay the debt HE signed up to?

Is that really too 'off the wall'?

Czarcasm wrote:

I find it almost amusing that nobody ever mentions a wildly radical solution. That solution being that the multi-millionaire owner of the football club uses a couple of his multiple millions of £££'s to simply pay the debt HE signed up to?

Is that really too 'off the wall'?

Yeah, right.....

Would he though..

VillageGreen wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

I find it almost amusing that nobody ever mentions a wildly radical solution. That solution being that the multi-millionaire owner of the football club uses a couple of his multiple millions of £££'s to simply pay the debt HE signed up to?

Is that really too 'off the wall'?

Yeah, right.....

Would he though..

Well if it were a case of him defaulting on the agreement he signed up to, with almost certain relegation via a points deduction as well as another period of possible Administration as a consequence, then yeah, he fookin well should!

Czarcasm wrote:

VillageGreen wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

I find it almost amusing that nobody ever mentions a wildly radical solution. That solution being that the multi-millionaire owner of the football club uses a couple of his multiple millions of £££'s to simply pay the debt HE signed up to?

Is that really too 'off the wall'?

Yeah, right.....

Would he though..

Well if it were a case of him defaulting on the agreement he signed up to, with almost certain relegation via a points deduction as well as another period of possible Administration as a consequence, then yeah, he fookin well should!

Something to keep an eye on then... ..

Graham Clark wrote:

Portsmouth went into administration twice. The second time they still had Football Creditor debt to pay, mainly in the form of players wages . Each time there was a points deduction . In coming out of administration for the second time the agreement with the Football League was for full repayment of the Football Creditor debt over a four year period so there is a precedent for the re-scheduling of debt.

It is the sanction of a points deduction and its implications that is the real issue. With two years to go before full repayment is due there remains every chance that the Football Creditor can be reduced to manageable proportions either by better than budgeted gate  receipts from improved performances on the pitch, a beneficial cup run, player sales or further investment in the club or a combination of all of those.

The Portsmouth case was a little 'artificial' in that the PFA helped negotiate down the level of outstanding player debt, with some players reducing their amounts or waiving them, and the final parachute payment almost exactly covering the remaining debt. Without that, it's questionable if the PST takeover, as admirable as that's been, would have succeeded.

What we don't know is the current balloon amount. It was stated to be £1.9m back in April 2012. It's likely fallen since then due to 'unbudgeted income', of which I believe 50% goes to reducing that figure. For example, half of Hourihane's sale fee would presumably have been put towards that.

And we don't know the sanction the club faces if the payment isn't made. Is there precedent elsewhere?

Tim

How much does Brent owe the Green Taverners?

Tim Chown wrote:

Graham Clark wrote:

Portsmouth went into administration twice. The second time they still had Football Creditor debt to pay, mainly in the form of players wages . Each time there was a points deduction . In coming out of administration for the second time the agreement with the Football League was for full repayment of the Football Creditor debt over a four year period so there is a precedent for the re-scheduling of debt.

It is the sanction of a points deduction and its implications that is the real issue. With two years to go before full repayment is due there remains every chance that the Football Creditor can be reduced to manageable proportions either by better than budgeted gate  receipts from improved performances on the pitch, a beneficial cup run, player sales or further investment in the club or a combination of all of those.

The Portsmouth case was a little 'artificial' in that the PFA helped negotiate down the level of outstanding player debt, with some players reducing their amounts or waiving them, and the final parachute payment almost exactly covering the remaining debt. Without that, it's questionable if the PST takeover, as admirable as that's been, would have succeeded.

What we don't know is the current balloon amount. It was stated to be £1.9m back in April 2012. It's likely fallen since then due to 'unbudgeted income', of which I believe 50% goes to reducing that figure. For example, half of Hourihane's sale fee would presumably have been put towards that.

And we don't know the sanction the club faces if the payment isn't made. Is there precedent elsewhere?

Tim

The fact that Portsmouth were also a "Too big a club to let fail" also contributed to the PFA's "extra" help they gave them... Don't recall having that level of support from an apparent "Players Union" in Plymouths case.. Funny (and probably a question for Mr Webb) I always thought the whole point of a Union was to represent their members, and not the company (Portsmouth) that was going to sh*ft them of their wages??

Tim Chown wrote:

Graham Clark wrote:

Portsmouth went into administration twice. The second time they still had Football Creditor debt to pay, mainly in the form of players wages . Each time there was a points deduction . In coming out of administration for the second time the agreement with the Football League was for full repayment of the Football Creditor debt over a four year period so there is a precedent for the re-scheduling of debt.

It is the sanction of a points deduction and its implications that is the real issue. With two years to go before full repayment is due there remains every chance that the Football Creditor can be reduced to manageable proportions either by better than budgeted gate  receipts from improved performances on the pitch, a beneficial cup run, player sales or further investment in the club or a combination of all of those.

The Portsmouth case was a little 'artificial' in that the PFA helped negotiate down the level of outstanding player debt, with some players reducing their amounts or waiving them, and the final parachute payment almost exactly covering the remaining debt. Without that, it's questionable if the PST takeover, as admirable as that's been, would have succeeded.

What we don't know is the current balloon amount. It was stated to be £1.9m back in April 2012. It's likely fallen since then due to 'unbudgeted income', of which I believe 50% goes to reducing that figure. For example, half of Hourihane's sale fee would presumably have been put towards that.

And we don't know the sanction the club faces if the payment isn't made. Is there precedent elsewhere?

Tim

I take it that the Sky money from the Luton Town and Portsmouth live games will go towards the debt.