Graham Wallace Q&A:

[The Real PapaBear 0]

As it's a facility only, I expect the money will rest wherever Easdale has it stashed away naturally earning interest for him until such time as we need to draw it down.

 

What would have been nice would be if the announcement had spelled out, or KJ had asked, which money would be used first; but then the answer to that is probably obvious.

 

to be fair the money is Easdale's anyway, so it would be earning interest for him if he hadn't made it available - it's not like it was our money he's skimming off.

[BlueMazza 0]

I'm actually really disappointed with this. I genuinely had high hopes for GW. The ready to listen initiative etc made me wonder if we might finally have a good one. Ultimately, I don't believe this is down to him. I think the truth is probably so bad it would worsen our stock exchange standing if the true depth of financial mismanagement came out.

 

So maybe he really can't say. Truly disappointing though as I said, as I now feel as if the ready to listen thing is just a peace keeping exercise or to keep our gaze that way whilst we get done over YET AGAIN

[stewarty 2,085]

In addition to the valid concerns already voiced on this thread, and being the sceptical sort, the bit that peaked my interest was how the use of Daniel Stewart, our Nominated Advisor (NOMAD), somehow validated the reasons for apparently ignoring other sources of finance whe ich may have offered more preferential terms than Laxey. Call me cynical, and I'm sure the NOMAD has some involvement where such decisions require disclosure to investors through the stock exchange, but it just seems like a comment thrown in to add the veneer of respectability to the situation. In the same way Charles Green was fond of throwing in the name of Deloitte when it suited him.

[calscot 0]

to be fair the money is Easdale's anyway, so it would be earning interest for him if he hadn't made it available - it's not like it was our money he's skimming off.

 

Yes but the point is that Wallace is trumpeting this loan and avoiding talking about the Laxey loan. IF the Easdales' loan is used it will obviously be last and for a very short time. The cost to them could be very minimal if it's say used for two weeks before being the first thing to be paid back when enough season ticket money comes in to do so.

 

They can say how benevolent they are when it's actually only cost them a few grand of interest.

 

I have no problem with the actual loan (whatever it may actually be), it's the wool attempted to be pulled over my eyes I'm bothered about.

[calscot 0]

Can I point out the anomally that Wallace is saying this 30% interest is normal for the market, while Lawwell is saying that their 1.5% from the Coop is normal for the market. Which is it guys?

 

My thoughts is that they are both lying. I think between 4 and 10 percent on property secured loans is more like it.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Yes but the point is that Wallace is trumpeting this loan and avoiding talking about the Laxey loan. IF the Easdales' loan is used it will obviously be last and for a very short time. The cost to them could be very minimal if it's say used for two weeks before being the first thing to be paid back when enough season ticket money comes in to do so.

 

They can say how benevolent they are when it's actually only cost them a few grand of interest.

 

I have no problem with the actual loan (whatever it may actually be), it's the wool attempted to be pulled over my eyes I'm bothered about.

 

That may be *a* point but it's not the point that BH was making; which was that Easdale would be getting interest on (his own) money which has been earmarked as a loan to us.

I'm quite happy to get my pitchfork and light up my torch to run Easdale out of town - but let's make sure tat we have grounds for doing so. Him giving us an interest free loan at no charge doesn't seem to be a good enough reason.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

we probably only need 1 million and the easdale money will never leave his account if he even has it.

[forlanssister 3,132]

The Easdale "loan" is PR guff from Toxic Jack, as others have alluded it won't be drawn down as there will £1m advanced by Ashley/Sports Direct.

 

The Wonga comparison earlier on the thread is misleading as the Wonga for Business rate is 0.5% per week.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

The Easdale "loan" is PR guff from Toxic Jack, as others have alluded it won't be drawn down as there will £1m advanced by Ashley/Sports Direct.

 

The Wonga comparison earlier on the thread is misleading as the Wonga for Business rate is 0.5% per week.

 

26% apr though thats not compounded.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

it's also worth noting that given the money will likely be repaid in may laxleys apr is actually much much higher than 30%