I've just caught up with this thread and good heavens there's been some rubbish posted. I've chosen to respond to EP because of his comment about AH and in the article linked by Gumpy AH states "In reality, football clubs are no different from any other business, but there is this perception they are different entities that have to work in their own special way." Well how much bullsh!t is that? They are totally different to almost every other type of business. How many league clubs actually turn in break-even or better? Even AH in his earlier days states that the club will lose £1m-£1.5m/year. Or put another way, owners of football clubs have the most expensive season ticket.
The club is funded by loans made by Paragon. We are not in a position to know what the terms of these loans are but offsetting losses from one entity (here NCFC) by loans from a profitable entity (Paragon) just makes business sense. It reduces Paragon's corporation tax liability for a start. Those that would have AH pay the money in directly do not appreciate that if AH took that extra money out of Paragon in the form of salary there would be National Insurance and Tax to pay, and also Dividend tax if he took the money out that way. It makes business sense to do it the way he is. It doesn't make business sense to donate money (usually in the form of increasing shareholding) beyond the minimum required to meet any FFP rules etc. Should Notts ever start trading at a profit then those tax from those profits would immediately be offset by the losses. And if the club is sold (ah ah) the negotiations would be about the amount of that debt, if any, that would be paid off or written off. Otherwise the money and the interest will never be expected to be paid off by NCFC - that is not the purpose loaning the money.
I don't know the situation regarding shareholders at Paragon except that the company is generally accepted as being AH's so he is the major shareholder. If he owns more than 50% then what he says goes. If Paragon were to call in the debt then Notts would be back to square one as occurred when RT declined to fund it any further. Paragon would get nothing if the club went into administration because anything tangible would be swallowed up by HMRC and the Administrators, there would be nothing left.
Regarding an earlier comment about AH not being able to afford the Ladies that was not the case. The situation was quite clear at the time - he bought NCFC as a job lot which included the Ladies. He had hoped that other funds would be available in the form of grants etc to help keep the team going and that didn't happen. He was not prepared to afford the Ladies. They were RT's vanity venture and with all that was needed at NCFC they were an expensive distraction.
Clearly AH is a successful businessman but like RT he stumbled on that success. That is a very different animal to trying to become a success with an existing venture. AH clearly loves grass roots football and also the idea of being a football owner. Often said on here is that he was a Notts County supporter but I don't believe that to be the case other than being a supporter of local clubs. I know when he changed the Lifeline rules he said he hadn't known of its existence beforehand. Most supporters surely know of Lifeline.
He has shown little acumen in running club successfully. Obviously he's improved things he has control over but one of the biggest downfalls is over ambition. I've made my views clear on the dangers of "5 year plans" and that he should never have had the Championship aim. It leads to premature disappointment and panic as it did with RT. No owner has control over what the competing clubs are up to. All he can do is set the foundations with sensible management recruitment and player recruitment decisions and try to build (not rebuild every year) a squad that can perform. Why we have to have the next Eddie Howe is unrealistic. Maybe we can bring an assistant manager through the ranks but all that is needed is plain boring and steady.
It is madly and sadly disappointing that we've got to where we've got to and you have to pray (and we shouldn't be in that position) that an unproven Australian is going to be the answer.
Maybe the DOF will make a difference but I tell you what worries me and that is AH's statement that he's looking forward to learning from Paul Hart. Is that a sign that AH is prepared to interfere in footballing matters. He needs to take a step back.
So we are in a position where we need AH and he appears to be committed. He can afford it providing he stops making mistakes and re-evaluates his ambitions to a more realistic level. Success will come when it comes but steady progress comes from getting things right and base level and not aiming blindly for the stars. If he tries the latter he'll end up, as are signs already, disillusioned, and we'll have another managerial merry-go-round and a disinterested owner. At this stage there are more similarities than differences between RT and AH.
For me he needs to step back, stop being star-struck and be more hard-nosed and calculating like a real businessman before his passion burns out with disappointment.
E&EO, apologies for any typos. COYP.
Last edited by Old_pie; 10-09-2018 at 05:23 PM. Reason: Remove double "quote"
I'll tell Alan Hardy and Harry Kewell something now, if the glaring inadequacies in defence are not addressed IMMEDIATELY - and I don't mean shuffling the pack - they can expect a considerable drop in attendancies from non-season ticket holders. Few regulars will put up with the absolute and incompetent rubbish they have witnessed so far.