Playing staff went up from 69 to 82, as per my post earlier.
The wage bill surprised me too. Loans will have been expensive.
As I have consistently posted, without Gibson's Group loans the club would go under.
Agree 100%
Which is why he won't, which is why the
only option is to eventually write them off, which is why any further conclusion that considers any other possibility doesn't make any sense to me?
The club has horrendous negative value and is unsaleable.
Yes, because it's carrying the loans at 100%, when we all know the market value of that debt is probably 0%. Again, it's only a problem if the debt is called in, and as you say it can't be.
Only promotion and a run in the top flight will bring the revenue to make the club self sufficient, enable some reduction in the Group debt (as with the last PL season) and give Gibson an option to sell.
I doubt even that would be enough, but fingers crossed.
At the minute he could not give it away.
He could, if he writes off the debt, which he eventually has to do, etc, etc
Other owners do convert loans to equity and formally write off what they are owed by something they already own. This means they are real businesses, with nett value and people will always buy them.
Boro (and most other clubs) are inherently loss-making. Injecting equity to cover historic losses doesn't turn them into investable "real businesses" going forward.
Gibson does what he does to ensure his position is impregnable, which he is so long as Bulkhaul stays so profitable and he can play with balance sheets.
Here's where you lose me. You are assigning motive to Gibson's actions that you simply have no evidence for.
As I say there are only 4 other clubs in Britain who are in a worse financial mess (Brighton, Stoke, West Ham and Cardiff)
Haven't been through every other club's finances so I'm coming at this from a position of ignorance. However, I assume you are basing those figures on net liabilities? If so, I'd rather Boro had £198m of interest-free loans from an owner who "can't call them in" than £19.8m debt to an owner who wanted 10% interest and eventual capital repayment. Also, just to pick one example: are you saying that you think Coventry are in a better financial position than Boro?
The losses he offsets with loans are only made as a consequence of the big decisions he makes. For 16 years he has made largely poor ones. (Managers, Execs, Structures, Budgets, Pricing). He is literally paying for his mistakes, so honourable, but he hasn't got any option unless he is prepared to actually write off the money he is owed in Group loans.
If we stay in the Championship, we will lose money simply bumbling along in mid table.
Agree with most of that. Some of it is hindsight (for every appointment and signing, you'll find some fans who agreed with it at the time), and you'd be hard pushed to find any chairman/owner at any club who has made more than one successful managerial appointment, but it's his job as chairman to get the big decisions rights so the buck stops with him.
a market value above book
Never going to happen. If your criteria for a successful chairman is one who makes MFC a viable investment, you're going to be disappointed. It's a hobby and a vanity project, and will never be any more than that.