Farhad Moshiri

[hibbo'sclass]

@The Esk
Probably already been posted, but the RMF charge is now on Companies House and is not dissimilar to last year - substitute basic award 2017/18 for 2016/17 and you're pretty much there.

My question is, that given the alleged injection of cash by way of loan from BHHL and the alleged repayment of RMF and or Pru Trustees, why renew this facility?

Wouldn't be needed for cash-flow/working capital if previous RMF loan was paid from alleged BHHL loan/basic award surely?

Think on analyzing the 2015 accounts, there seemed to be quite a difference between calculated interest from group borrowings and the actual accounts figure, which led me to suggest that like a zero rate credit card transfer/advance there may be finance costs up front, but this is speculation on my part.


Sorry to bang on about this, but I simply don't believe that RMF 2016/17 loan was paid off in June, Pru/AIB loan paid off and I am somewhat skeptical about the alleged injection of funds unless they are ring-fenced.

I am also skeptical that this is merely putting a facility in place - my reasoning being that an increased overdraft could have been negotiated on at least equal terms.

Call me thick, but I just don't get it - or am I just a miserable sod who won't believe anything until it's proven?

Just one other point - if BHHL did loan the club money to clear debt, and if there were penalty charges attached, the loan would have to be for a greater amount than the original loan, so the debt position worsens.

OK I know it would probably be on more favourable terms, but what's wrong with a bit of pedantry.

 

[Goat]

@The Esk
Probably already been posted, but the RMF charge is now on Companies House and is not dissimilar to last year - substitute basic award 2017/18 for 2016/17 and you're pretty much there.

My question is, that given the alleged injection of cash by way of loan from BHHL and the alleged repayment of RMF and or Pru Trustees, why renew this facility?

Wouldn't be needed for cash-flow/working capital if previous RMF loan was paid from alleged BHHL loan/basic award surely?

Think on analyzing the 2015 accounts, there seemed to be quite a difference between calculated interest from group borrowings and the actual accounts figure, which led me to suggest that like a zero rate credit card transfer/advance there may be finance costs up front, but this is speculation on my part.


Sorry to bang on about this, but I simply don't believe that RMF 2016/17 loan was paid off in June, Pru/AIB loan paid off and I am somewhat skeptical about the alleged injection of funds unless they are ring-fenced.

I am also skeptical that this is merely putting a facility in place - my reasoning being that an increased overdraft could have been negotiated on at least equal terms.

Call me thick, but I just don't get it - or am I just a miserable sod who won't believe anything until it's proven?

Just one other point - if BHHL did loan the club money to clear debt, and if there were penalty charges attached, the loan would have to be for a greater amount than the original loan, so the debt position worsens.

OK I know it would probably be on more favourable terms, but what's wrong with a bit of pedantry.

Nothing will be the same.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Nothing will be the same.

Ironic font missing?

 

[Goat]

Ironic font missing?

Sell to buy
Loans all over the show
Shocking accounting

Its like Bill never left, oh wait!

 

[Dymak]

As @The Esk Has Said Satisfied debts don't necessarily show up on companies house immediately or for months even. And we don't have access to the paper work so at the moment it IS hearsay and guess work.. I'd not worry too much currently. It's been literally 6 months since he bought in to the club. Give him 2 years before starting to worry.

So you admit that anyone believing the hearsay is doing so because they choose to rather than basing their beliefs on evidence. My questions about how any alleged investment has been structured is entirely pertinent to this discussion, and the fact that the answer is nobody knows because he is keeping it a secret is at best unorthodox business practice given the set-up at Everton, and is at worst a complete load of nonsense, as was the claims of us having a 100milliin pound transfer budget and being able to sign whoever we want. It simply wasn't true.

 

[The Esk]

Sorry to bang on about this, but I simply don't believe that RMF 2016/17 loan was paid off in June, Pru/AIB loan paid off and I am somewhat skeptical about the alleged injection of funds unless they are ring-fenced.

The RMF loan was definitely cleared on the final receipt of broadcasting revenues from the Premier League.

I can only repeat what my initial source said and has re-confirmed, I have no additional evidence currently re the Pru/AIB loan

I am also skeptical that this is merely putting a facility in place - my reasoning being that an increased overdraft could have been negotiated on at least equal terms.

I've long held the view that a bank could offer better terms on a loan which is essentially backed by Sky PLC's ability to meet its obligations. Sky can borrow money at 2.25%. For effectively the same credit risk Everton pay 8.2%. If I was on the board of Everton I'd be asking Sky to advance the money at a discount. The documentation is for a facility with an undetermined "utilisation date" for drawdown, so without knowing that date it's impossible to say if it's a loan or a facility currently.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

So you admit that anyone believing the hearsay is doing so because they choose to rather than basing their beliefs on evidence. My questions about how any alleged investment has been structured is entirely pertinent to this discussion, and the fact that the answer is nobody knows because he is keeping it a secret is at best unorthodox business practice given the set-up at Everton, and is at worst a complete load of nonsense, as was the claims of us having a 100milliin pound transfer budget and being able to sign whoever we want. It simply wasn't true.

In fairness, EFC are terrible in the extreme at getting satisfied charges off their public record, but like yourself I am a skeptic

 

[The Esk]

In fairness, EFC are terrible in the extreme at getting satisfied charges off their public record, but like yourself I am a skeptic

They've only just sent their confirmation statement, nearly 3 weeks late....

 

[hibbo'sclass]

They've only just sent their confirmation statement, nearly 3 weeks late....

7 days to be fair - little darlings probably forgot that the confirmation statement filing date is 14 days rather than 28 days after the date as was the case with the old annual returns.

No porridge for the boys and girls - depressing.

 

[Barnfred 55]

No mate, I'm asking for evidence. Others are choosing to believe what they want to believe without evidence.

No mate. I think you do have an agenda.

I've only gone back a few posts and you have used the words covert or covertly I think 15 times. Why would you use such language if not to undermine Moshiri and make him out to be some sort of underhand operator.

You are very very good at twisting comments and throwing them straight back, and I don't think there's anything Esk, or anyone else for that matter, can say that will change your views. I have a wife who is exactly the same and I just know that I'd never ever win an argument with you. Your names not Susan by any chance is it?

 

[ashwuk76]

No mate. I think you do have an agenda.

I've only gone back a few posts and you have used the words covert or covertly I think 15 times. Why would you use such language if not to undermine Moshiri and make him out to be some sort of underhand operator.

You are very very good at twisting comments and throwing them straight back, and I don't think there's anything Esk, or anyone else for that matter, can say that will change your views. I have a wife who is exactly the same and I just know that I'd never ever win an argument with you. Your names not Susan by any chance is it?

His name is Susan only at the week ends....

 

[summerisle]

Reminds me of another quote, Dave......this time from The Bard.

At Caesar's funeral, Marc Antony steps up to give the oration......the old "Friends, Romans, countrymen" thingy.

He goes on to say......"the evil that men do lives after them.....the good is oft interred with their bones".

I feel there is a narrative among many of our friends on here that we had three awful years under Bobby.......the truth is the wheels only really came off around the turn of this year.

Even toward the end of 2015, whilst we weren't getting the results the football at times was exhilarating.

If we're going down the Shakespearean route I think this is quite apposite - Cassius : Men are masters of their own fates

 

[Goat]

No mate. I think you do have an agenda.

I've only gone back a few posts and you have used the words covert or covertly I think 15 times. Why would you use such language if not to undermine Moshiri and make him out to be some sort of underhand operator.

You are very very good at twisting comments and throwing them straight back, and I don't think there's anything Esk, or anyone else for that matter, can say that will change your views. I have a wife who is exactly the same and I just know that I'd never ever win an argument with you. Your names not Susan by any chance is it?

His agenda is to highlight that the majority of people who are "supporting" Moshiri are doing it based on assumptions that they hold or in certain cases information relayed from @The Esk s source who claims that debts have been paid off despite hard evidence showing thats not the case.

As ive said, I get that people still have faith in the man, I do myself, but I think hes currently holding a false position with some people.

We sold to buy
We still loan players
We still take loans
We still have debts
We are still at Goodison

Those are all undisputable facts.

I mean, lets look at the other way, which of Moshiris actions have impressed you and made you think hes taken the club forward?

 

[bcblue1878]

Thanks mate, although I've been messaging whilst being paid to work, and I don't come on here to provide you with entertainment. Good to see you sticking to debate, and not getting personal just because you can't deal with the topic being discussed.

Trust me you are not in the least bit entertaining! As for "sticking to debate", you're hardly debating, debate is a two sided thing and you have no intention whatsoever of listening to what anyone on the other "side" says purely because it doesn't suit your agenda! In the simplest of terms you're trying to impress people with your version of 1001 questions to Esk by asking the same question over and over again - give the bloke a break. I suspect he has a life to lead occasionally outside of this place, like most of us!

 

[D410]

Trust me you are not in the least bit entertaining! As for "sticking to debate", you're hardly debating, debate is a two sided thing and you have no intention whatsoever of listening to what anyone on the other "side" says purely because it doesn't suit your agenda! In the simplest of terms you're trying to impress people with your version of 1001 questions to Esk by asking the same question over and over again - give the bloke a break. I suspect he has a life to lead occasionally outside of this place, like most of us!

Debate the football club not the posters if you have the intelligence to do so.