The Bank of Gypo

Oh well Blazing Saddles might be right today does give some good news of sorts.

Those gloating JB's down the road who think their club is so well run? Well it is not, a mortgage 'charge' at Companies House has just appeared against Swansea City FC 2002.

They have received a considerable loan from a company called OTH Limited 20-22 Beford Row London WC1 R 4JS, which is secured against all future incomes including season tickets.

Welcome to the Championship Gypo's best find yourself a billionaire investor quick

You've lost me!

You've lost me!

Put it simple then. Swansea fans often laugh at us because we have outstanding loans to PMG/Langston and have raised monies by selling season tickets early.

They also claim that their club is run within its means.

However, on the 30/12/2009 they took out a sigificant loan (which appears to be at least £1m) secured against just about everything including next years season tickets. They wouldn't do this unless they were running short of cash and are therefore in a very tight financial position of their own.

Also remember they don't own their ground or land assets should they defualt on the loan

because that is the law

all mortgage charges have to be registered at Companies House and are free to view in the public record.

because that is the law

all mortgage charges have to be registered at Companies House and are free to view in the public record.

Hello Damian,

Welcome on board, Hope your keeping well.

because that is the law

all mortgage charges have to be registered at Companies House and are free to view in the public record.

They are a matter of public record that is correct and cost £1 to view (not free)

According to the other paperwork avaiable the Jacks have also had a share issue which has raised £2m on the same date as the mortgage was issued (30/12/2009) which was over and above the loan.

I have downloaded all the documents, they definately have lent money off both the directors and this OTH Ltd.

because that is the law

all mortgage charges have to be registered at Companies House and are free to view in the public record.

They are a matter of public record that is correct and cost £1 to view (not free)

According to the other paperwork avaiable the Jacks have also had a share issue which has raised £2m on the same date as the mortgage was issued (30/12/2009) which was over and above the loan.

I have downloaded all the documents, they definately have lent money off both the directors and this OTH Ltd.

Someone who doesn't know the meaning of the word lend has no credibility when it comes to finance

because that is the law

all mortgage charges have to be registered at Companies House and are free to view in the public record.

They are a matter of public record that is correct and cost £1 to view (not free)

According to the other paperwork avaiable the Jacks have also had a share issue which has raised £2m on the same date as the mortgage was issued (30/12/2009) which was over and above the loan.

I have downloaded all the documents, they definately have lent money off both the directors and this OTH Ltd.

Someone who doesn't know the meaning of the word lend has no credibility when it comes to finance

Sorry what does that mean and who was it directed at?

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

Easy mistake to make

The word is "borrowed"

Surely a share issue isn't borrowing - it's investment cash for equity, not a loan?

But yeah, there seems to be a loan and the need to raise cash via the share issue.

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

That sounds awfully like snipping which is not what this board is about.

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

Easy mistake to make

The word is "borrowed"

Easy for those who don't understand finance. Whilst I admit it is one of the more common mistakes out there it is not a mistake made by people involved in finance hence the loss of credibility on the subject.

Surely a share issue isn't borrowing - it's investment cash for equity, not a loan?

But yeah, there seems to be a loan and the need to raise cash via the share issue.

OK Swansea have raised £2m via a share issue. But there is also definately a loan from this OTH Ltd.

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

That sounds awfully like snipping which is not what this board is about.

Then I appologise and ask that my posts be deleted by admin.

you wrote "they definately have lent money off both the directors "

Easy mistake to make

The word is "borrowed"

Easy for those who don't understand finance. Whilst I admit it is one of the more common mistakes out there it is not a mistake made by people involved in finance hence the loss of credibility on the subject.

Frankly what an arrogant thing to say, shocking. I have never claimed to have any credibility in finance but I can read a pdf document and the one listed at Companies House clearly states Swansea have loaned or 'borrowed' money form a shareholder.

Hmm, interesting.

http://www.ukdata.com/company-credit-re ... MITED.html

EDIT: More info

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1aee4 ... ompdetails

Last edited by nerd on Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I regret that any reply I might make will be viewed as snipping so it's better to say nothing

Hmm, interesting.

http://www.ukdata.com/company-credit-re ... MITED.html

EDIT: More info

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1aee4 ... ompdetails

Prior to the recent share issue OTH Ltd also owned 22.5% of SCFC 2002 shares

Hmm, interesting.

http://www.ukdata.com/company-credit-re ... MITED.html

EDIT: More info

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1aee4 ... ompdetails

Prior to the recent share issue OTH Ltd also owned 22.5% of SCFC 2002 shares

Suspect it's thus a loan from a company with a director of the Jacks on the board of.

Read this:

http://forum.planetswans.co.uk/viewtopi ... &sk=t&sd=a

read from UndyBluebirds post onwards.

It would seem that this is the correct information regarding SCFC's debts?