According to Nige

[Old_pie]

Correct and they did say we can only spend what we earn from day one and we need to be sustainable for the long term future of the club.

Did they? Sustainable does not necessarily mean profitable, it does mean affordable. You're not making money on the beer you drink but you still buy it.

I think Old Pie is correct it?s not technically a debt as I believe Ray Trew who was an accountant by trade used similar language on here and the media.

That's not what I said. I said it's not a debt that has to be serviced. The club owes the Bros. The concept is easier to understand if you treat the club as an entitiy in its own right, which as a limited company, it is. The Bros cannot call in the debt from the club as for instance a bank could, or some third party lender. From everything they have so far done they are not desperate to reduce it but they will not be held to ransom and they will take profit where there is good value in so doing.

Back on topic though we got a good deal for a player who had 6 months left and wanted to go the only losers so far are MK Dons as they haven?t won a game since he joined !

Absolutely. They are neither daft nor desperate. A great position to be when carrying out dealings.

[legs77]

Did they? Sustainable does not necessarily mean profitable, it does mean affordable. You're not making money on the beer you drink but you still buy it.



That's not what I said. I said it's not a debt that has to be serviced. The club owes the Bros. The concept is easier to understand if you treat the club as an entitiy in its own right, which as a limited company, it is. The Bros cannot call in the debt from the club as for instance a bank could, or some third party lender. From everything they have so far done they are not desperate to reduce it but they will not be held to ransom and they will take profit where there is good value in so doing.



Absolutely. They are neither daft nor desperate. A great position to be when carrying out dealings.

I never said profitable I said they aim to reduce costs as like you say they aren?t daft but they had to put their own money in first obviously but like all business people you want some return off it.

I know it?s the club on its own entity and the bank ?could? call it in and not the brothers same with Trew/Hardy couldn?t but it?s like a mortgage if you can pay it then you are good if not we have a problem.

As things stand though we seem to be in very safe hands and that?s all I care about.

[Elite_Pie]

Interesting that Nige decided to start with Lucas Akins last night hours after he admitted causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving at a hearing earlier that morning.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj6715jpkw8o

[Lullapie]

Did they? Sustainable does not necessarily mean profitable, it does mean affordable. You're not making money on the beer you drink but you still buy it.



That's not what I said. I said it's not a debt that has to be serviced. The club owes the Bros. The concept is easier to understand if you treat the club as an entitiy in its own right, which as a limited company, it is. The Bros cannot call in the debt from the club as for instance a bank could, or some third party lender. From everything they have so far done they are not desperate to reduce it but they will not be held to ransom and they will take profit where there is good value in so doing.



Absolutely. They are neither daft nor desperate. A great position to be when carrying out dealings.

Yes, the loan sits on the Balance Sheet possibly as a security to show any prospective buyers what is owed by the club.

The brothers will ensure that every penny they put in is recorded this way in case they sell the club (and they can feasibly ask to be repaid this loan from the new buyers) or if the club goes through, then they will not be unsecured creditors, but instead, have a security on the loan for any pay out from remaining assets, but behind the bank in the queue of course.