I am missing something here because if we are selling players and replacing those players then in theory the players sold will be larger than the players brought in. If so then we will have more money then why do we have to borrow more money??

Enjoying getting up later and not having someone who knows better than me (apart from the missus of course).

Perhaps its for a sort of 'Invoice Discounting' type arrangement, whereby we get paid in instalments by the buying club, but the loan means we can use the full amount from day one. Potentially that may mean we end up getting a higher price than holding out for the full amount at point of sale.

hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

We really need a much more stream lined and clearer ownership structure if we're ever going to get anywhere. We have over 100 mil in loans to service now.
I presume they're somehow linked to our US owners/ shareholders but it's hard to know. I wonder if we paid off Lloyds yet.
It's hard to know anything with our ownership and I suspect it's what puts off take-overs. That along with inflated asking prices.
How this affects the new main stand - which doesn't even seem worth mentioning at this stage frankly - is anybody's guess. Did Guadi finish that cathedral yet?

Red and Blue Army!

It will always cost more to buy in instalments as no doubt we have found in our own buying experiences. Therefore:
1. agreeing to an instalment plan with a club wanting to buy one of our gems should result in a bigger sale price and
2. If the loan enables us to buy players up front at a discounted fee then we can benefit on both fronts, assuming the loan costs are less than the savings we make on the two fronts.

Hope that makes sense.

I don't think that's the case as we have done that before when we sold Aaron Wan-Bissaka as payment was supposed to be 50% with the balance after 12 months so we borrowed the final instalment from McQuarrie Bank.

I can't see why we would have to take out a loan now to fund future trading and it's more likely that we have borrowed to cover losses and January purchases and repayment will be against future player sales

I am VERY concerned if this is true. This is club financing a la Simon Jordan.

Borrowing money based on player values is like a glorified gambling. When we buy a player it comes with risks

Player might turn out to be rubbish and have little or no re sale value

Player might run down contract and be worthless

Player profit might not cover interest and or capital costs

Rate of interest on such a speculative loan will be costly.

This smacks of their being an issue with our finances.