Jump to content

Kenny McLean


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, div said:

There is an accelerated payment clause in the deal that was constructed last summer.

SMiSA could not come up with all the money up front as their part of the deal, and to save them having to go and borrow that money the selling consortium agreed to take the payments in phases over a period of time as money is saved up from members contributions.

One clause to that was that if the club was to enjoy a large income from transfer fees that a portion of that money would be lent by the club to SMiSA who would then pay it on to the selling consortium (thus accelerating their time to receive full payment). That accelerated payment clause was waived in the case of Kyle McAllister but it will kick in on the Mallan transfer I believe.

The club don't lose out on any income but it just means SMiSA will owe money to the club rather than to the selling consortium.

That's how I understand it anyway, sure the SMiSA people will be able to correct any errors in the above.

I have asked the SMiSA board by email for the amounts involved in the Stevie Mallan transfer - asking for the amount we need to pay and if we need to borrow to pay it. It's not  certain that we have to borrow as we may have enough money in the bank to cover it, and as stated previously, the club do not lose money from any transfer and SMiSA do not have to pay any more than agreed, just need to pay it quicker if players are sold.

The clause in the contract has saved us from having to get a loan, which of course would have been subject to high interest, the deal was struck in such a way that we would only need to borrow from and pay back to the club and i'll check but i don't remember it being subject to interest, but may legally need to be a token amount of interest payable in the same way that the club are paying token interest on the USH loan from SMiSA i.e. SMiSA are only charging any interest that would have been paid if the money was still in the bank.

Edited by buddiecat
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Kenny McLean is one of the finest midfielders in Scottish football.

When he was 17 I predicted he would be.

As I said several years back, just like Billy Stark, we would not realise what we had till he was gone.

McGinn and Mallan also got it in the neck...

any chance we could support Kyle Magennis for the WHOLE season to come... Even if he has a poor patch. Hell... ESPECIALLY if he has a bad patch.

Look at the transformation in Mallan for reasons why!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, div said:

I don't think all the transfer money is applicable, but I've no idea how much.

You are right of course that there would (if I have the whole thing right) be a delay in the club receiving all of the money.

I might be incorrect in my understanding of how it all works, I'm not 100% sure on this one.

If for talkings sake the fee received for Stevie is £200k then roughly £100k would be the accelarated payment due, which can be covered by existing funds, given that there was a £150k surplus on 30/11/2016 and roughly £75k would have been paid in by members since then.

If Kenny McLean is sold for £1m then assuming we get 10% of that which of course is £100k, the accelarated payment on that would be £30k, then that would mean £130k payable from approximately £225k which we have in the bank, so again it's covered.

This is my own calculation of the amounts and in no way represents what individual people will actually get paid and is based on the guesstimates of the actual transfer fee and sell on fee. So it might be completely wrang :-)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, buddiecat said:

If for talkings sake the fee received for Stevie is £200k then roughly £100k would be the accelarated payment due, which can be covered by existing funds, given that there was a £150k surplus on 30/11/2016 and roughly £75k would have been paid in by members since then.

If Kenny McLean is sold for £1m then assuming we get 10% of that which of course is £100k, the accelarated payment on that would be £30k, then that would mean £130k payable from approximately £225k which we have in the bank, so again it's covered.

This is my own calculation of the amounts and in no way represents what individual people will actually get paid and is based on the guesstimates of the actual transfer fee and sell on fee. So it might be completely wrang :-)

 

I think there could be a financial issue in the offing as Smisa have lent the club £15k since those accounts, and were in the throws of giving them another £50k. As well as any accelerated payment I am sure Smisa were due to make a hefty payment to the sellers in July anyway. So it could be the fantastic deal struck with the sellers means Smisa has to clear the lot in tne next month or so!

perhaps we should asking for a clear pictiure, (i.e. Actual figures) on this. When I asked for an update on what Smisa's accounts looked like and its potential commitments in this scenario at the AGM all i got was "its ok".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Pityme said:

I think there could be a financial issue in the offing as Smisa have lent the club £15k since those accounts, and were in the throws of giving them another £50k. As well as any accelerated payment I am sure Smisa were due to make a hefty payment to the sellers in July anyway. So it could be the fantastic deal struck with the sellers means Smisa has to clear the lot in tne next month or so!

perhaps we should asking for a clear pictiure, (i.e. Actual figures) on this. When I asked for an update on what Smisa's accounts looked like and its potential commitments in this scenario at the AGM all i got was "its ok".

I have asked and had a reply from the SMiSA finance team, the main man is on holiday at the moment and has replied whilst abroad, he will look at all the figures and computations and get back to me. I do know that the figure due in July is £20k (it's in the accounts) that takes my total to £150k. If the club take the £50k facility (or have already taken it) that takes it to £200k plus whatever is still due from the £15k loan, say it's £10k, we are then almost breaking even. So yes you're correct, if anything else crops up e.g. John McGinn being sold, then we probably will need to pay the lot,or re-negotiate with the consortium.

So we wait and find out if my figures are wrong, shouldn't be too far wrong though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuxake, how much money have a the old board taken from our club, thank f**k we are well shot of them, did they really want to save the club or just saw an opportunity to make a lot of money?


In essence, it's not from the club. In theory they still get paid by SMISA just as anyone taking over would have paid them the same money.

But, the actual process around the accelerated payment is convoluted and very difficult to understand or explain in full. Luckily, that's what David Nicol is there for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TsuMirren said:

 


In essence, it's not from the club. In theory they still get paid by SMISA just as anyone taking over would have paid them the same money.

But, the actual process around the accelerated payment is convoluted and very difficult to understand or explain in full. Luckily, that's what David Nicol is there for.

It's not that difficult to understand Kenny, FFS i understand it :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Luther G. Presley said:

Fuxake, how much money have a the old board taken from our club, thank f**k we are well shot of them, did they really want to save the club or just saw an opportunity to make a lot of money?

The old board haven't actually taken any money from the club, GLS and SMiSA are buying the shares of some of the previous board members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Luther G. Presley said:

Fuxake, how much money have a the old board taken from our club, thank f**k we are well shot of them, did they really want to save the club or just saw an opportunity to make a lot of money?

What money did they take from club, besides what they put into it.

Wouldn't it be fraud if they did.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 3:00 PM, pod said:

What money did they take from club, besides what they put into it.

Wouldn't it be fraud if they did.

 

Not a fraud in any sense.

Perhaps they did less well than they had hoped but better than they might in the sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, St.Ricky said:

Pretty good show from Kenny in the cup final...particularly in the first half. He continues to develop both physically and as a player.  A credit to St Mirren, Aberdeen and I hope soon to Scotland as well.

He was their best player on the day, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mid Calder Saint said:

That horrible little man who is meant to be Scotland manager has now dropped him from the squad.

Aye, just heard that. Mcginn too, seemingly. 

He's a wee fud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...