Shrimpsvoices

Surprised this hasn't been on yet, so what do we all think

http://www.thevisitor.co.uk/news/moreca ... -1-8326336

It would be good so we can keep the land and it doesn't get sold outside the club also making sure we had access to the match day security center but do any of these facilities make or could make money or would we have to keep finding cash to keep it going.

So £5k pledged. How much would it cost to get this off the ground?

The book value of the assets are £1.2 million, presumably the land, buildings, pitches etc. The secured debts (to the banks etc) are around £700k. The administrators have to find the best deal for all involved, i.e. staff, shareholders, creditors, banks etc. The biggest creditors, the banks, would be unlikely to accept a huge loss, so would probably block any deal where they don't get the lion's share of their money back. Especially if the land/buildings have a high development value for housing etc - if so, the banks would expect the land to be sold for such to get their money back, even if it meant redundancies and bulldozing the facilities. It's all a matter of compromise and it all depends on the development value of the land and the likelihood of selling it for development. All parties will want a quick resolution.

I may be tempted, is this not an ideal scheme for the trust to be involved in?

[quote="KenH"]The book value of the assets are £1.2 million, presumably the land, buildings, pitches etc. The secured debts (to the banks etc) are around £700k.

So would they want the full 700k back or would they be happy to carry on the mortgage with the new owners. Even so I would be worried if the business isn't making any money how the new owners would manage to keep paying it, if we (the supporters through the trust) took it on I would be worried about who would be liable if we couldn't keep up with payments.

Also before anyone took it on I think they would want questions answering about why this was set up as a separate company and why there is such a big mortgage against it. Is it because PMG knew he could get finance by mortgaging the land round the ground but not on the actual ground it's self because of the trust?

I'd like to match the £1k. How do I do it?

Contact supermarketshrimp would be a good starting point

I've been approached with an anonymous donation, which would take it to £7,000 minimum.

KenH wrote:The book value of the assets are £1.2 million, presumably the land, buildings, pitches etc. The secured debts (to the banks etc) are around £700k. The administrators have to find the best deal for all involved, i.e. staff, shareholders, creditors, banks etc. The biggest creditors, the banks, would be unlikely to accept a huge loss, so would probably block any deal where they don't get the lion's share of their money back. Especially if the land/buildings have a high development value for housing etc - if so, the banks would expect the land to be sold for such to get their money back, even if it meant redundancies and bulldozing the facilities. It's all a matter of compromise and it all depends on the development value of the land and the likelihood of selling it for development. All parties will want a quick resolution.

The book value is nonsense though if it's value can't be realised. If someone bought it for property, how likely is planning permission if everyone opposed it?

A vote of thanks is due to Neil Marsdin for instigating this.

Posh wrote:

KenH wrote:The book value of the assets are £1.2 million, presumably the land, buildings, pitches etc. The secured debts (to the banks etc) are around £700k. The administrators have to find the best deal for all involved, i.e. staff, shareholders, creditors, banks etc. The biggest creditors, the banks, would be unlikely to accept a huge loss, so would probably block any deal where they don't get the lion's share of their money back. Especially if the land/buildings have a high development value for housing etc - if so, the banks would expect the land to be sold for such to get their money back, even if it meant redundancies and bulldozing the facilities. It's all a matter of compromise and it all depends on the development value of the land and the likelihood of selling it for development. All parties will want a quick resolution.

The book value is nonsense though if it's value can't be realised. If someone bought it for property, how likely is planning permission if everyone opposed it?

Millwall fans are opposing it but it is still going to happen

halftimeresults wrote: Millwall fans are opposing it but it is still going to happen

Their plight is quite an eye opener, too.. similar goings on but their council are working on compulsory purchase. Strange they don't know who owns the property developer, seems to be par for the course nowadays

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailym ... -home.html

Posh wrote:The book value is nonsense though if it's value can't be realised. If someone bought it for property, how likely is planning permission if everyone opposed it?

Depends on what grounds they opposed it and who the objectors were. Most objections are ignored if they don't fall within certain eligible reasons. Lots of people (hundreds) opposed a new housing development in Bolton Le Sands for genuine reasons (not NIMBYism) but it still went ahead.

I think the bigger potential blight for housing would be whether or not it has access to it other than crossing MFC property - i.e. whether the deeds include a right of way or whether it can be annexed to other access roads (either the new houses near the bridge or the school estate). If there is no right of access, then it's virtually worthless to anyone other than MFC as a buyer would have to negotiate/buy access which MFC could ensure was prohibitively expensive (a ransom strip).

To the average fan the maths look complicated, we sold CP for a reputed 12 million, and moved to westgate, tbere doesn't look to be a great deal of stadium etc. for 12 million , but hey ho,and then , actually , Nigel Adams owns the land at the front, the council own some of the car park etc, and now it seems, a shady brazilian man owned all the community pitches plus one of the buidings, we also owe the bank loads of money.

We cannot go back, but as I said To the average fan.......

Straying slightly off topic, why was the Hurley Flyer land sold to Marstons rather than leased? Surely the latter would've ensured an ongoing income...?

John L wrote:Straying slightly off topic, why was the Hurley Flyer land sold to Marstons rather than leased? Surely the latter would've ensured an ongoing income...?

Presumably needed the cash flow of a couple of hundred thousand for the sale rather than a couple of tens of thousands every year. When the club is losing half a million on average each year, it needs big inflows of cash. In a perfect world with smaller losses, keeping the land and renting it out would be better, but needs must to plug such a huge black hole every year.

KenH wrote:

John L wrote:Straying slightly off topic, why was the Hurley Flyer land sold to Marstons rather than leased? Surely the latter would've ensured an ongoing income...?

Presumably needed the cash flow of a couple of hundred thousand for the sale rather than a couple of tens of thousands every year. When the club is losing half a million on average each year, it needs big inflows of cash. In a perfect world with smaller losses, keeping the land and renting it out would be better, but needs must to plug such a huge black hole every year.

Anyone only has so much family silver to sell, so unless you are royalty, the Forestry Commission or the family of the Duke of Westminster, you will soon have a black hole with nothing to fill it with.
Very short sighted IMO, to sell your prime piece of roadside land when we had Directors who had brewery connections and one who has since invested ££££££££££'s in local pubs, houses and restaurants.

The house outside, looks like it's going to overshadow the main stand when it is finished. Any potential investor will now be looking thinking what is there actually left to invest in

marky No.1 wrote:Anyone only has so much family silver to sell, so unless you are royalty, the Forestry Commission or the family of the Duke of Westminster, you will soon have a black hole with nothing to fill it with.
Very short sighted IMO, to sell your prime piece of roadside land when we had Directors who had brewery connections and one who has since invested ££££££££££'s in local pubs, houses and restaurants.

I fully agree - should never have got into such a bad situation that they had to start selling off the assets, and yes, sooner or later, there are no assets left to sell off as you say. It's as if the Board/PMG were just hoping something would come along to stem the losses - perhaps it's been for sale a lot longer than we know about (maybe they assumed a buyer would be put off if someone else had a 5 year sponsorship deal). After all, 3 years ago, the Board said they had a 3 year plan for the club to break even, but nothing actually changed, so what was their plan, other than to sell it?

I'd be happy to put something in the moneypot too.

KenH wrote:

marky No.1 wrote:Anyone only has so much family silver to sell, so unless you are royalty, the Forestry Commission or the family of the Duke of Westminster, you will soon have a black hole with nothing to fill it with.
Very short sighted IMO, to sell your prime piece of roadside land when we had Directors who had brewery connections and one who has since invested ££££££££££'s in local pubs, houses and restaurants.

I fully agree - should never have got into such a bad situation that they had to start selling off the assets, and yes, sooner or later, there are no assets left to sell off as you say. It's as if the Board/PMG were just hoping something would come along to stem the losses - perhaps it's been for sale a lot longer than we know about (maybe they assumed a buyer would be put off if someone else had a 5 year sponsorship deal). After all, 3 years ago, the Board said they had a 3 year plan for the club to break even, but nothing actually changed, so what was their plan, other than to sell it?

I did say at the last "Sadarse" meeting that I would have expected draft accounts for the year ended May 2016 to have been prepared and I think the answer was that the loss had reduced from the 2014/15 horror comic but no circa figure was given.

marky No.1 wrote:

KenH wrote:

John L wrote:Straying slightly off topic, why was the Hurley Flyer land sold to Marstons rather than leased? Surely the latter would've ensured an ongoing income...?

Presumably needed the cash flow of a couple of hundred thousand for the sale rather than a couple of tens of thousands every year. When the club is losing half a million on average each year, it needs big inflows of cash. In a perfect world with smaller losses, keeping the land and renting it out would be better, but needs must to plug such a huge black hole every year.

Anyone only has so much family silver to sell, so unless you are royalty, the Forestry Commission or the family of the Duke of Westminster, you will soon have a black hole with nothing to fill it with.
Very short sighted IMO, to sell your prime piece of roadside land when we had Directors who had brewery connections and one who has since invested ££££££££££'s in local pubs, houses and restaurants.

The house outside, looks like it's going to overshadow the main stand when it is finished. Any potential investor will now be looking thinking what is there actually left to invest in

We went for short term gain and the the long term plan out of the window, so much for leasing the land to keep regular coming in and been self sufficient.

Next you will have Lloydie on about the strip of land between the pub and the housing estate it drives him mad, what can anyone do with that why didn't the pub just build up to the edge?

P/T Indie wrote:Next you will have Lloydie on about the strip of land between the pub and the housing estate it drives him mad, what can anyone do with that why didn't the pub just build up to the edge?

Good point that and I've never given it a thought before.

Nothing can be done with it now I guess and it'll be like that forever more?

KenH wrote: After all, 3 years ago, the Board said they had a 3 year plan for the club to break even, but nothing actually changed, so what was their plan, other than to sell it?

I quote The Visitor from February 2013 -

It has taken time for Morecambe fans to warm to their new £12M stadium.
The Shrimps simply had "no future" at Christie Park and PMG would have stepped down as Chairman had the move in 2010 not been rubber stamped.
"There's rumours about the club being for sale or me leaving. I'm spending more time here than I ever have. If someone comes and offers you £20M for this you would take it? Yes of course you would. If they offered you £20 would you take it? No you wouldn't. As far as I am concerned I'm here until that £20M offer comes in and I'm committed to working here to realise a dream I have"

"We have this vision where I see Morecambe Football Club and I will do all I can in my power to make sure we get there. That's probably three years down the line and then you take stock"
"As of today I'm not walking away"

Peter has long spoken of his desire for the Shrimps to be self sufficient. He expects that to become a reality next year.
"The facility has to be something that is here for the supporters of Morecambe football Club for years to come"
"It has to be financially viable and sustainable. You can't go on losing £500,000 or £600.000 a year."
"You have a facility here that can generate revenue in the Wright & Lord suite and the bars downstairs. At least we have that, a lot of clubs don't have that. And we own our own ground. There's a lot of clubs in the Football League who don't own their own ground and it's a huge difficulty"
Peter says his "vision" is a fully developed Christie way complex.

A new Marston's Hurley Flyer pub is scheduled to open at the gateway to the stadium at the end of April and talks are ongoing to sell other land around the pub.

"I think we'd look to fill in the North Terrace to replicate the community block with offices at the other end and then you'd have an office block in the middle of that overlooking the pitch, which will be used every day with car parking round the side. It would be enclosed and I think it would create a much better atmosphere and the club would be getting income from the rent of the offices"

"The offices will be higher, about 10', than the community block it will be as imposing as the main stand but will look fantastic"

"When we complete the development, whenever that may be, it will be a fantastic area of Morecambe where people can come down and have a drink and see the Globe arena and start coming to watch us. Before the start of the development it was just two mounds of earth and looked awful. It didn't look inviting at all but once everything is up it's really going to be the focal point of this part of Morecambe"
"If we continue where we are now you'd like to think we'll get above 2,000 average attendances again"

Offers are on the table including from unnamed fast food companies for the "mounds of earth" but the club won't be rushing into any decisions.
"We want something that is complementary to the whole of the site. Within the next few months we'll be making decisions about where we want to go. There's nothing worse than selling something and it going up and looking horrible. we want people to come along the front and say "wow".
"I think we have done a brilliant job in getting where we are"

http://www.thevisitor.co.uk/news/moreca ... -1-5407481


Seems quite odd reading this again

For me the reason why the extra facilities that the development provided has failed is due to the lack of marketing by people who understand the entire process of promoting and marketing an outdoor facility.

It has been left to individuals with no experience in knowing how to attract a public wanting to make use of outdoor facilities. I don't accept that its location has stopped custom after all the majority of users elsewhere in the area have to access similar facilites by car not public transport.

The initial idea was excellent but a complete lack of promition has resulted in its decline and it is hard to see how a change in ownership without extensive and costly marketing will improve an already dire situation.

Christies Child wrote:For me the reason why the extra facilities that the development provided has failed is due to the lack of marketing by people who understand the entire process of promoting and marketing an outdoor facility.

It has been left to individuals with no experience in knowing how to attract a public wanting to make use of outdoor facilities. I don't accept that its location has stopped custom after all the majority of users elsewhere in the area have to access similar facilites by car not public transport.

The initial idea was excellent but a complete lack of promition has resulted in its decline and it is hard to see how a change in ownership without extensive and costly marketing will improve an already dire situation.

The gym should have been put out to tender for companies wishing to operate it that knew how to market and run it. The club or PMG Leisure Limited would then have had a steady income stream from rental income.