They’ve done what exactly??
I can’t think of one single thing that affects me on match day.
1 Like
The seats are still dusty and faded. Holes in the roof. Toilets remain disgusting. Car parks still awful.
The ‘off field’ is not exactly great either!
I agree with some of that.
In fairness, they do appear to have put some money into the club.
Whatever (I don’t think its been disclosed) they purchased the club for from Pomlett - who I doubt made a loss on the deal, although probably little, if any, profit.
Plus around £2m, the difference between the purchase price of the stadium and the loan (Over £7m, with the loan being £5.1m)*
I appreciate that eventually, with the loan repaid, they will book a large profit from their investment when the time comes to sell the club.
We all want to see investment in the playing side, they may have invested something, we won’t find out until we see the relevant accounts, but whatever it may be, it doesn’t appear to be a large investment!
The “well run club” under Bonsor was always a bit of a myth to me, sure, we showed small profits each year, they were subsidised by directors loans, which from memory, were around £2m at his departure. The loans outstanding to Bonsor were repaid by Pomlett.
*All figures are from memory, I cba to go on Companies House to check, but they are about right.
3 Likes
Oh absolutely, that is undeniable. I just don’t think it has been where it really matters.
That’s what I was saying. They will make money out of that deal too, so as grateful as I am to them for making it possible for us to buy the stadium, it’s doesn’t exactly mean I’ll be overextending that gratitude. They also make money back with every repayment we make, as there is interest.
That would not have come into a profit figure. It would have made a difference to a balance sheet but not profit. That money the club made each year was nothing to do with that. Whatever we want to say about Bonser, it wasn’t a myth on the business side. I stress business side because there is a football side too, which we were f***ing woeful at. And by the way, I was counting Pomlett’s time in charge there too when saying they stepped into a “well run business”.
Where they have undeniably put money in is I’m sure it cost to buy into the club initially (even if that money went to Pomlett rather than the club itself) and they have stated clearly 300K was put into the Saddlers Club as well as improvements around the ground, including things like the floodlights and apparent improvements at the training ground. Problem is I have never seen a floodlight score 20 goals a season.
Said this when they purchased Drog they got the potentital to make a lot more money for them than walsall they could make it a lot sooner and a lot easier than what walsall could
1 Like
The mortgage on the Stadium is not with Trivela so how do they make money out of the interest paid, or have I missed something.
1 Like
They brought the stadium, we pay them back in a “mortgage” agreement until we own it outright. Unless I’ve completely misunderstood the agreement from what Gamble said at the fan focus?
Who are “we” and “they” in that statement? Trivela own the club.
They put up some of the money (not explicitly repayable) the rest was mortgaged in the usual way outside of their organisation.
No - They bought shares in Walsall FC and put in the cash for that and is not repayable. Walsall FC then put that cash towards the freehold and borrowed the balance from a Yank Bank - there is a difference.
2 Likes
Yeah and they are still two separate entities as in any business. We are Walsall Football Club, they are Ben Boycott and anyone else who comes under the Trivela umbrella.
If this is the case, I hold my hands up, I misunderstood the situation based on what Gamble said at the fan forum.
The mortgage is not with Trivela it is with Southern National Bank
Not sure what Gamble said to give you the notion that Trivela were the providers of the Senior Debt as well as the equity.
Trivela will make on their investment through dividends and any increase in value of their equity holding in WFC when or if they sell.
The best way the value of WFC increases is if the club is successful on the pitch and we are promoted
4 Likes
Because no other bank or investment was mentioned at the time other than “Trivela making it possible”, but as I said above, fair enough I didn’t realise that was the case 
With this being the case, it does give me slightly more confidence in Trivela, because that really is a long term investment.
1 Like
Your last point is a key one .I have made similar comments myself but folk don’t seem to get it!!
I doubt they will ever pay any dividends to recover their investment as that would also mean paying dividends to the minority shareholders that they stiffed when they diluted the value of their shares when the put money in via a direct placement rather than a rights issue that would have given the minorities the chance to put money in!
There are other ways to do this - ie management charges from Trivela to Walsall FC.
I agree that the best way for them to generate more value would be for us to get a couple of promotions and sell us on when we are in the championship - Looks unlikely if they aint got the cash to chip in for a half decent striker now!
2 Likes
No venture capital fund is perfect, Trivela Group Fund however does have an altruistic aspect to it and isn’t just about returns , this should give us more confidence. Please read that first article I put up today there are some great quotes from BB and it provides a good insight into the type of people who now have a special interest in WS1
2 Likes
I presume these management charges will appear in the published accounts?
They should but you may not see them specifically. There is a note at the end of the accounts called Related Party Transactions - thats where they disclose the monies the directors have chipped in or taken out or if we’ve used one of the directors to put a few hoardings up for us.
Problem is there is a specific exemption in Company Law from declaring inter company transactions such as management charges if they choose to adopt the exemption.
There is nothing to stop a shareholder asking them the question though - perhaps this is something a shareholder/The Trust should do in the sense of the club being open and honest in its business dealings.
6 Likes
Thanks @OldPenk.
I believe, from previous posts, you are or were an accountant and therefore (unlike myself) know what you are talking about on the subject!
Its good to have your expertise.
4 Likes