777 Partners / Whatever the hell you like

[Bazlar]

Each to their own mate.

But if he was way off the mark over the finances, why wouldn't they want or ask for a retraction and apology ?

Why should they. At the end of the day he is just another fan like you or I. I understand he is your mate but even you have to agree he has been wrong so many times now it is becoming embarrassing

 

[blulouie]

Matt Hughes klaxon

Has some Park End Da bummed him in a previous life.
I can understand it if there was no lube involved.

 

[blulouie]

If Matty made podcasts...

This lad seriously needs to re evaluate his vocation.
What a sorry sight.

 

[siddharth]

Do any of their other clubs have any quality players we can now buy for 50p?

 

[Martin Alvito]

Help the clubs financial position?

I dont think so. This helps an owner desperate to sell for any return and a buyer who clearly doesn’t have the cash to complete the purchase.

This has nothing to do with helping the club finances.

Don’t fall for this B.S.

I would give this ten thumbs up if I could. I thought exactly the same thing upon reading it.

Something I was going to write was house of cards, it just has the look and structure of a get rich scheme that I'd going to crumble down around them.

It feels a lot like a Ponzi scheme. The problem with those is their dependence upon continual growth to stay out in front of the 'interest' payments to 'investors'. These guys are probably banking on there being a perpetual market for the high-yield bonds they appear to be funding the whole thing with. The SEC will let a company make private debt issues without the usual accounting scrutiny that accompanies participation in US capital markets. In essence, the law says that whale investors chasing high returns without the standard sureties can be assumed to know the associated risks.

If 777 is a money laundering front, odds are that market isn't going anywhere unless they get caught. If not, the problem is that if their businesses get killed in a downturn, that will quickly become obvious to any external observer. The market for their bonds will dry up, they'll get stuck in a liquidity crisis due to the leverage and they'll go under. It's what broke Donald Trump's businesses, along with loads of other people, in the early '90s once the junk bond boom hit bottom. He couldn't stay in front of the huge interest payments on the bonds for the Trump Taj Mahal, and ran out of takers for debt issues to keep the light bill paid.

 

[siddharth]

The most worrying part of 777 is how rapidly they are trying to expand the portfolio, they are bound to want to get an NFL team or alike in North America and are we all just a way of raising funds to make that come true. I don't see them staying focused long enough to really build something here as it will be in the bag you go with the rest of them and on to the next acquisition.

I would say the real worrying thing is that, if our reported deal is anything to go by, then they are incentiviced to do poorly on and of the field until they feel ok enough to pay the bills. They can still super duper commercialize all of these clubs for the they would probably not have that many fair weather fans seeing as they are all legacy clubs. Why would any league in the right mind give the ok for this deal?

 

[USABlue]

Club continues to attract charlatans

 

[Neiler]

I would give this ten thumbs up if I could. I thought exactly the same thing upon reading it.


It feels a lot like a Ponzi scheme. The problem with those is their dependence upon continual growth to stay out in front of the 'interest' payments to 'investors'. These guys are probably banking on there being a perpetual market for the high-yield bonds they appear to be funding the whole thing with. The SEC will let a company make private debt issues without the usual accounting scrutiny that accompanies participation in US capital markets. In essence, the law says that whale investors chasing high returns without the standard sureties can be assumed to know the associated risks.

If 777 is a money laundering front, odds are that market isn't going anywhere unless they get caught. If not, the problem is that if their businesses get killed in a downturn, that will quickly become obvious to any external observer. The market for their bonds will dry up, they'll get stuck in a liquidity crisis due to the leverage and they'll go under. It's what broke Donald Trump's businesses, along with loads of other people, in the early '90s once the junk bond boom hit bottom. He couldn't stay in front of the huge interest payments on the bonds for the Trump Taj Mahal, and ran out of takers for debt issues to keep the light bill paid.

Where do they get these ‘instalment’s’ if true

As no else has brought it up. I will.

Can I just highlight the glaring red flag and concern here.

Essentially we have new owners, who have shady dealings littered all across multiple business sectors and litigation in regard to business practices. Who are struggling to put the cash together to buy us and have a highly structured deal.

Correct me if Im wrong but if we do badly or are relegated then they stand to possibly save themselves 10s of millions possibly more for all we know.

Essentially there is a financial incentive for them for us to fail. They are incentives to run us poorly.

Massive red flags, verging on anti - competition, sporting integrity and corruption.

 

[mightymoyes]

I don't think they're interested in NFL..

As if these chancers would even have the $8 billion+ it would take to buy the next one that is for sale

 

[Librarian]

As no else has brought it up. I will.

Can I just highlight the glaring red flag and concern here.

Essentially we have new owners, who have shady dealings littered all across multiple business sectors and litigation in regard to business practices. Who are struggling to put the cash together to buy us and have a highly structured deal.

Correct me if Im wrong but if we do badly or are relegated then they stand to possibly save themselves 10s of millions possibly more for all we know.

Essentially there is a financial incentive for them for us to fail. They are incentives to run us poorly.

Massive red flags, verging on anti - competition, sporting integrity and corruption.

I don’t think they will want to fail but if they are paying by instalment, and don’t have the cash, what’s to stop them using club generated cash to ‘pay later’, that to me is the bigger worry

 

[pfim]

As no else has brought it up. I will.

Can I just highlight the glaring red flag and concern here.

Essentially we have new owners, who have shady dealings littered all across multiple business sectors and litigation in regard to business practices. Who are struggling to put the cash together to buy us and have a highly structured deal.

Correct me if Im wrong but if we do badly or are relegated then they stand to possibly save themselves 10s of millions possibly more for all we know.

Essentially there is a financial incentive for them for us to fail. They are incentives to run us poorly.

Massive red flags, verging on anti - competition, sporting integrity and corruption.

I would assume they stand to lose much more not being in the Premier League

 

[Neiler]

I don’t think they will want to fail but if they are paying by instalment, and don’t have the cash, what’s to stop them using club generated cash to ‘pay later’, that to me is the bigger worry

Another red flag mate. Moshiri won’t care where the money comes from as long as he gets it.

I absolutely do think theyd let us do badly if it was in their financial interests, no doubt. The fact that is incentivised is hideous. Regulator can’t come quick enough. This is gangster stuff.

 

[Neiler]

I would assume they stand to lose much more not being in the Premier League

We don’t know the exact detail, the report said factors - which suggests a few and not wholly or even relegation - that’s an assumption- it may be one clause but the report indicates there may be many.

 

[siddharth]

I don’t think they will want to fail but if they are paying by instalment, and don’t have the cash, what’s to stop them using club generated cash to ‘pay later’, that to me is the bigger worry

This I consider to be a given I think, we are weirdly like our own debtors. But the question is which column of the 'club generated cash', are they dipping into commercial contracts, match day income, broadcast revenue, or asset sales. Some of those are not directly linked with any improvement on the 'on or off' the field performances.

 

[Librarian]

Another red flag mate. Moshiri won’t care where the money comes from as long as he gets it.

I absolutely do think theyd let us do badly if it was in their financial interests, no doubt. The fact that is incentivised is hideous. Regulator can’t come quick enough. This is gangster stuff.

They can win financially by committing some of their own money now, letting Everton pay the balance in instalments to Moshiri and then selling sans stadium launch at a profit