Owner Marcus Evans remains ‘committed’ to Ipswich Town as ‘delays in cash flow’ comes to light

Ipswich Town Ipswich Town

Tuesday, December 10, 2013
12:20 PM

Ipswich Town’s managing director Ian Milne insists owner Marcus Evans remains ‘fully committed’ after it emerged that several individuals and businesses are owed money by the football club.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

The EADT and Ipswich Star has seen an e-mail sent by the club’s financial director, Mark Andrews, to a current player’s agent asking for more time to pay an invoice which is already more than three months overdue.

It reads: “We are having to readdress our next six months’ cash flow due to being let down by a debtor and are requesting assistance from you in this regard. Given our circumstances would you be prepared to accept the following revised payment terms for your invoices?”

It’s understood that at least six other agents have received the same correspondence, while some small businesses – including match day caterers – have not been paid on time.

Ipswich Town chose not to comment on the specifics regarding how much money was owed and to who when contacted yesterday, with joint managing director Milne issuing the following statement.

It read: “We endeavour to meet the payment terms of the companies and individuals we work with but at times during the year, just like with any business, there are delays in cash flow. This is income coming into us as well as expenditure going out.

“I’d like to reiterate though that the Football Club is on very sound financial footing with the support of the owner, who remains fully committed to seeing Ipswich Town achieve his and the Club’s goal of reaching the Premier League.”

One agent still waiting on payment, who did not wish to be named, said: “We’ve tried to be reasonable and flexible. In our case, it’s a relatively small sum of money in the scheme of things. It won’t make much difference to us going forwards, but there may be some small businesses this could badly affect.

“It’s disappointing because everyone sees Ipswich Town Football Club as a big brand and assumes they can be relied upon to pay their bills on time.”

He added: “If it carries on then people will stop doing business with them. Football agents will start taking their players elsewhere, while players at the club will want to move on too if they think there are going to be financial difficulties moving forwards.”

Latest Ipswich Town News

81 comments

  • I am making no comment! The reason is that I have now had two comments rejected by this, so called, newspaper both of which were non inflamatory, honest, carefully thought out opinions. More importantly no reason was given for there rejection. The EADT, about 100 years ago, was a very well thought of newspaper that brought the right of burial to all people in the UK. Thank you for that EADT but today, as a newspaper, you are a disgrace.

    Report this comment

    BlueArgyll

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Sorry, before I am corrected I should have said in the team. He has paid out a lot of money on Bad managers and paying up good players contracts but they were his mistakes.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Ray, the name that springs to mind is Connor Wickham. Moved to Sunderland about two and half years ago.

    Report this comment

    MOTT MIKE

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Fascinating that the same fans who don't seem to care about small traders being affected are squealing about having to pay £15 for cup tickets.

    Report this comment

    StalwartBlue

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Tel, if its a crime to believe what you enter I apologise, but are you really saying you could not give a monkey chuff how the town do.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Thursday, December 12, 2013

  • Crikey Tom I have just blinked and re-read (hyphen hopefully correct) your last comment and it not only makes sense it is an accurate assessment of the situation. The only mistake was to call it a gamble... the owners have their initial stake back already and are now in a win win situation using Town as a vehicle to fund themselves.

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Mott Mike you may choose to believe the glib PR coming from Portman Road (via the Cayman Islands) but those who choose to live in the real world do not. The flow of money out of the club now exceeds that coming in ...and has done ever since the attendances collapsed belwo break even levels. All the club is hoping for is that their second attempt to sell Creswell succeeds (note to Cressie's agent, get fees paid up front in cash) and that the recent spurt of wins is reflected in renewed interest at the turnstiles (chances slim to none at this time of year as slim is xmas shopping).

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Richard, sit down and work the figures out, he simply has not invested millions. He knew what he was buying and in the end apparently paid very littler. Then he invested around 16million into the club over the first two years thinking he would get into the premiership and get a quick return of around 50 million, since he has invested very little. The club sold Wickham and Walters, and RHODES which knocked the figure down to about to about 4million then it is reported he earns 7% on his loan which quite frankly over 5 years means he is earning, and that will continue as what he can put into the club is restricted and the interest he can take now is also controled. He then probably enjoys tax relief within the group because of the losses he makes at itfc. Beloved owner you must be another relative.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Well what do my friends have to say about their Mesiah now.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • the first and main problem here are the "agents", they need to be removed from the game completely, simply no need for them in this modern era and they suck the money away from clubsfansplayers

    Report this comment

    albert

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Sorry, should read 'without' below, obviously....

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Presumably if there is any truth in this article the next step is the players wages will be delayed. I feel that a statement is due from the club.

    Report this comment

    how'd the town do

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Jason Pilbury: What would happen? Please explain. I'm more than happy to say it to any Ipswich fan.

    Report this comment

    Anglia1

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Richard, if you are capable of taking you head out of the sand and then of opening your eyes let me help you. Imagine three pots, one has a little bit of money in.... let's call it a football club. The second has no money in.... let's call it a ticket touting and conference company that nobody is using at the moment. The third is a vacuum jar offshore where taxes are non-existent. Take the money out of pot a and put in pot b saying that you need the money, nominally to pay the employees who work on pot a mismanagement but are actually employed by pot b, take a bit more to pay for 'services' provided by pot b and call that debt. Then empty all the contents of pot b into pot c for the same reasons or anything else that you can think of...and lo it disappears because there is a vacuum. Repeat year on year until the model becomes unsustainable and then cast around for another cheap pot.

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Not the first time the club have badly treated local businesses. A few years ago when they club went into administration, many businesses suffered by being offered derisory sums, while the under-performing players continued being paid full-whack

    Report this comment

    Public Purson

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Tom - We won't agree on this one....I think you are quite wrong in trashing the EADT... Are you really advocating some form of censorship and the protection of the Evans group from criticism ?? If so why ? Why should Evans be treated any differently to anyone else ?? And I think you are quite wrong that players or anybody else for that matter should be treated like mushrooms i.e. kept in the dark and fed manure....The finances of the club are a concern for fans, investors, players, creditors and anybody else with an interest in ITFC and as such it is only right that the press expose apparent failings....It also seems highly likely to me that the recipient of the e-mail was the source and so it can hardly be classed as obtained without consent !!! For somebody with so little regard for the EADT then I am curious as to why you appear so often on these message boards, more often than not jumping to the defence of our owner and pouring scorn on those that question the financial stability of the club ?

    Report this comment

    bluearmy78

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Alright Cyril, we will have to live within our means, like every club and hope MM is a magician and get us into the Prem with even less resources. We still have the 9th Biggest support base even though our attendances have dropped by 2500 over the last 5 years. It will improve if we stay there and there abouts. As I have said before the hardcore support has always been 15000. Get another 5000 with cheap tickets for the rest the season. It will not offend me if they do it. It will improve atmosphere and bring in £50000 per match.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Anglia1: Say that to a true Ipswich fan and see what happens

    Report this comment

    IpswichTownFC4Ever

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Tom - Please explain to us why this is "grotty, gutter, cheap journalism" ? Surely all of those with an interest in the club (including supporters, investors, creditors etc etc) have a right to know this information ?!? Moving on, I have raised concerns for a number of years about Evans and the finances of the club and this revelation would seem to suggest that those concerns are & were well founded (in spite of being repeatedly told otherwise by the Evans saved us brigade).When the club has to restructure payments described by the creditor themselves as "relatively small" you are left wondering what is happening to larger sums. Ive said it before and i'll say it again - Evans is not and never has been our saviour. He will, in time, be known as the person who gambled with the clubs future and lost. It is my view that he never intended to be a long term investor, he merely bought the club at a time when he thought a small amount of investment would secure him the pot of gold via promotion but that never materialised. For me ITFC was nothing more than a gamble which went spectacularly wrong - for both parties. ITFC is now saddled with Evans and Evans is now saddled with ITFC ! Not a great situation for either. The Evans saved us brigade will have you believe that the club is in safe hands, afterall it is merely part of the Evans group which as we all know has offices all over the world simply overflowing with bundles of cash doesn't it !! No it really does doesn't it ?!? Please tell me it does !!! Its got to because Evans appears in the Times rich list so its got to be true !!!! When I look at ITFC and listen to the tosh spouted about Evans I can't help but recall the case of Oxford United - bought by one of the "richest men in the world" Robert Maxwell in 1983 - He had newspaper empires, owned private yachts, private jets, had business interests all over the world, regularly featured in the Times rich list - the only problem of course was that he wasn't really very rich at all - in fact he had basically borrowed all the money or simply siphoned it from the pension funds of his employees - nice !! In fact after his death the company was wound up with debts of £400m..... Its more than a little ironic that Maxwell's newspaper was eventually bought by Trinity Group Newspapers and guess who tried to by that not so long ago ??...............So in order that we can ALL be better informed I make this plea to the EADT - give us more of your "grotty, gutter, cheap journalism" and shine a light on what the true financial position of the club is as I fear we won't get that far with the Evans group puppets.

    Report this comment

    bluearmy78

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • This isn’t a major concern at this stage. The club looses money, we all know that. It has done since prior to ME buying the club. This year ME is limited as to what he can invest due to FFP rules so a budget will be in place that maintains cash flow at a certain level at any given point based on anticipated income and expenditure. Any additional investment straight from ME will also be included whether as one lump sum or distributed through the year. If income drops substantially or a debtor defaults that will cause similar problems in any business, a short term cash flow issue. There is a direct and immediate impact and a knock on effect that can only be addressed by an injection of cash. This could come from shifting the budget, invest more now and reduce the planned investment for later. However that only delays the problem and may cause even deeper issues down the line. What usually happens is the debtor makes payment late and the business or in the case the club follows suit. These things happen. Now it could be that the debtor is another club that us owes on a transfer, it may be they have the same issue and are just one in a long chain of clubs waiting on payment from another. Either way this does not warrant the scaremongering that will undoubtedly come from some poster on here. Consider this, what if exactly the same situation arose without ME as owner. I would suggest (as I have before) that if ME were not owner any incumbent certainly would not have pockets as deep as his and so this is a situation we would see far more frequently unless the playing budget was considerably reduced. The most likely effect of that would be the selling of far more players than we have seen. Having saved the club from relegation and put tens of millions of pounds into the club ME is hardly likely to allow it to go to the wall. I know some will suggest alleged other interest when he purchased Town but I ask (again) can anyone tell me that they KNOW of anyone else actually submitting an offer, if so I would be curious to know who it was. As for pots running dry it won’t happen, if the situation persists the club will have to sell someone. Not due to asset stripping but due to necessity and the nature of business as I have always said.

    Report this comment

    TrueBlue

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • I feel sorry for those that still cannot see the end of the nose. ITFC cannot make money until they get into the premiership, they have an owner who will not invest which means ongoing losses, which simply cant go on forever. Had ME invested in the first four seasons before the controls came in we would not have been in this mess now. Perhaps it would not be a bad thing to find ourselves in administration once again, the receiver would find a new buy and the club would not be burdened with a debt to an owner who is not interested.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • They talk mostly about Agents having to wait for their money. Good. They suck the life out of football anyway! Feel really sorry for the small suppliers this affects though.

    Report this comment

    Footyfan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • It always makes me wonder why clubs pay agents. Dont they act on behalf of the players and do these players pay anything to their agents. It seems a one way street if they dont. Every business have issues with cash flow problems at some stage or other. The real problem comes when a debtor cannot pay even after delaying payment. Most probably will be some add ons from a player sold 3 years ago.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • It states in the article above that ITFC have been let down by a debtor.(we don't know have much that amount is ).Many businesses at some time must have a cash flow problem depending on the circumstances,so to me this seems to be the problem.I think a certain few of you posters are jumping the gun.None of us know's the real reason for this so we can only surmise although some seem to be a fly on the wall in the board room and seem to have all the answers.Best left to the club to sort this out and for us to stop jumping the gun.The players and manager are doing a good job so lets get behind them .

    Report this comment

    brisie58

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Tom, its no good getting upset with the eadt, if anything they have not done enough to draw the attenion of the supporters to what has gone on at PR. There is nothing cheap or gutter press about the truth and obviously if these e-mails have gone out it is fact. The trouble is this will do itfc no good whatsoever and clearly shows ME has said enough is enough and the debt can only grown, what do you think that means.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Tom - Firstly it's clear that one party was happy to disclose the content on the e-mail thereby rendering it non-confidential. Secondly are you really suggesting that Marcus Evans should be immune from the press asking questions as to his or the clubs finances ? If so why ? I don't believe in censorship of the press and firmly believe in the right of the press to publish stories of this type especially given the fact that it has wider implications for local businesses and not just well paid footballers and agents. You pour scorn on anybody who questions the financial position of the club and are one of this regimes biggest defenders which makes me wonder why ? And as somebody who professes to have such little regard for the EADT and Archant I am bemused as to why you use their message boards so often !!! Seems just ever so slightly hypocritical to me !! We will never agree on Evans but even you must have concerns now about the financial mess the club appears to be in. Cancelling of players contracts, getting donations from outside to progress the academy, disputes with the council over rent, failing to pay local businesses and agents fee's on time..... oh and the small matter of £10m worth of losses and an overall debt of £85m.....Trot out the mantra that none of it matters because we won't repay it till we get promoted all you like but stop and ask yourself what will happen if we continue not to get promoted and the debts keep spiralling out of control ? What then ? Whats your big solution ?

    Report this comment

    bluearmy78

    Friday, December 13, 2013

  • Tom, strange to call yourself a moron. It is interesting how you keep talking to a man (Steroo) whenj you have not evidence who it is. In the same way you have no evidence of the intended confidentiallity of this e-mail.It is my opinion that the eadt protects ME too much.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Saturday, December 14, 2013

  • One commenter here often goes on about how he's entitled to his opinion. Quite right. Just as I am entitled to be sick of your constant whingeing Cyril. At least we all know that Bidwolf and his imaginary friends are idiots and can dismiss their comments as such.

    Report this comment

    Robotix

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • For god’s sake – to all this bleating about “ooohhh the club don’t care about local businesses, they didn’t pay them properly when we were in administration”: it’s not the club (or business or individual) that decides, it’s the administrator who has to follow the law and fa rules. That’s what happens in any administration whether in football or otherwise. IT’s THE LAW. All we’re missing is the usual Norwich idiots with their crocodile tears over “oooohhh they didn’t pay chawities! Ooooh boo hoo they didn’t pay chawities” garbage about the administrators allocation to the At Johns Ambulance.

    Report this comment

    Pete James

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Bristan, thanks for at least responding but I really wanted serious suggestions and what you suggest will not cover 1 yrs losses. I wish you were right

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • If ITFC cannot pay it's bills does it mean it is insolvent and should stop trading? Perhaps they are just trying to stitch up the small local traders and businesses, as they did last time.

    Report this comment

    Star Watch

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Cyril. I have not said in any of my rare postings on this site that I am a supporter of ME. I am purely putting forward a view that this type of problem occurs in business from time to time. Also, the article says that the club have been let down by a debtor so why are you saying that there may or not be a debtor? I don't understand why you talk of ME placing the club into administration as he must be comfortable with the financial position it is in as its of his making.

    Report this comment

    Alan Chaplin

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Alan, if I missunderstood your point I apologise, but then I did not say ME would place itfc into administration, he will have to option if the club cannot meet its debts as ME cannot cover them as he is restricted to the amount he can invest under the ffp rules. I have said I may not be right about my views on the state of the finances but I would love to see just one alternative which are not forthcoming.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • lets just hope this latest disclosure (if correct) won't affect the playing side of the club.Cyril,I have know idea what a logical sollution is.what would you do if you were M.E. ? Would selling the club the club be a good idea.(open for debate.)Whatever the out come lets get behind MM and the team.

    Report this comment

    Daniel James

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Just why are we talking about Administration and an escape from this situation.The article is only about the club being owed money and us not paying a few agents.It's just plain daft to even talk about Administration.

    Report this comment

    brisie58

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Sorry 'their rejection'!

    Report this comment

    BlueArgyll

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • The EADT knows it will do harm to the club. That's why they have issued this story.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Cyril, you have become obsessed with ME. One obsessed (self) person is enough on this site, Very few people will give a monkeys chuff if the team do well.

    Report this comment

    tel

    Thursday, December 12, 2013

  • Alan, there may or may not be a debtor, but I do not think that is the problem. It is simply common sence our club has lost 40million in just over 4 seasons, how long do you supporters of ME think that can continue before the pot runs out. In my view the only way our club can stop going into administration is if the FA remove the fair play rules so that ME can invest more money but that is not going to happen so the next alternative is sell our best players i.e. Cresswell, but that will result in even lower gates and then increased debt. I do not wish to argue with anyone over this and I would welcome the view of any contributor with a alternative escape.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • In this current economic climate ME's business is not the sort that would prosper I would have thought. Of all those millions of pounds he is presumed to have behind him surely a relatively small amount would be accessible for paying off debtors. I am very worried about our club and the effect this news will have on the players.

    Report this comment

    JOHN BURLS

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Fascinating that the same fans who don't seem to care about small traders being affected are squealing about having to pay £15 for cup tickets.

    Report this comment

    StalwartBlue

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Sorry to bore people with this but some wont believe what they can check themselves on "League Transfers" website. The figures I have used are not mine but from this website. Is this clear enough for you Tom.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • anyone see a points deduction on the horizon?

    Report this comment

    clever canary

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • You know what I get sick & tired of the whining comments made by idealogically motivated misfits about our beloved owner, Marcus E. I fail to see how the ongoing large losses made by him at ITFC benefit him in the long run. I accept that having an owner like Delia S would have been a better fit for a club like ours than the corporate route we took but what's done is done and is unlikely to change any time soon. In fairness to Evans, he does at least come from our county and I for one would prefer a UK owner (even if he is tainted in some quarters by being a half billionaire) rather than an East European oligarch or oil sheik etc

    Report this comment

    Richard Gardiner

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Although I understand how crucial this matter is to ITFC supporters, in the scale of matters affecting this region it is relatively insignificant. So why 55 comments (at the last count)? Two reasons (1) Football supporters have a passion (if they did not then many clubs would be out of business by now and players would be on £300 a week!) (2) The comments WERE published. And it is this matter which interests me because some of the various very important local issues have no comments, either because our MONOPOLY papers refuse to provide a comment box or they refuse to publish some or ALL of the comments. I tried to make comments about our local papers which were far less harsh than some printed here, but they were rejected. So I wonder why any item on football seemed to have an 'immunity against rejection' attached? So, assuming I can make comments as others have done, can I support Tom (".... EADT. Grotty, gutter, cheap journalism....... a non-entity paper ..... I don't buy the EADT anymore and never will. It is trashy gutter tabloid rubbish.") and BlueArgyll (".... this, so called, newspaper ..... The EADT, about 100 years ago, was a very well thought of newspaper ........ but today, as a newspaper, you are a disgrace"). I will make my own comments separately or else they will most certainly reject the whole of this comment.

    Report this comment

    Johnthebap

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • I am pleased as a devout fan as it seems to me that the whole business is being exceptionally well run. The losses reported to the British Tax man and the allocation of money between subsidiary companies in different countries (like shirts sponsorship and interest payments on debt) are clearly an efficient way for a multinational business to operate as so many of them work like this. I applaud the management for taking such a prudent approach

    Report this comment

    Chris Watson

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • you need people to run a club like us... hence why we're in the premier league and have balanced books

    Report this comment

    clever budgie

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • How come everyones comment gets printed except mine

    Report this comment

    TrueBlue

    Thursday, December 12, 2013

  • Well done EADT. Grotty, gutter, cheap journalism. Disclosing a private and confidential email that will only harm the club. Why? Just to sell a few more papers. How sad it is that you regional hacks ended up on a non-entity paper when serious journalists right now are delivering intelligent analysis on Mandela, the economy, and foreign affairs. Shame on you. I don't buy the EADT anymore and never will. It is trashy gutter tabloid rubbish.

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • BlueArgyll.....I couldn't agree more, you'd think it was run by Kim Jong-Un in North Korea

    Report this comment

    Deep Throat

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Mr BidwolfSteroo why do yo chose to believe only one part of the article ie the bit that the club owes but not the bit that it is owed? Or do we know the answer to that one.

    Report this comment

    threenewknees

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • This is not a comment directed at ITFC (about which I care very little) but about our local papers: Totalitarianism refers to a situation in which a group will attempt to control ideas within a population. The manner in which total power is achieved is via control of media and other ideological agencies. They are intolerant of activities by individuals or groups whose ideas are opposed to their ideas and they regulate and control free discussion and criticism. Examples of a totalitarian regimes include: Benito Mussolini, Hitler and North Korea. Although often thought of in political terms, it may be worthwhile to consider any organisation which controls free discussion and criticism as totalitarian.

    Report this comment

    Johnthebap

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • I will come up with an alternative. Taylor, Wordsworth and possibly Cresswell will be sold in the January window. The first 2 are obviously surplus to Mick's requirements so sell them and keep Cressy would be my preference. However I will expect someone coming in big for Luke Shaw of Southampton and plenty of money to boost the price of Cresswell to Southampton. Mings will step up to the plate and be worth just as much in 2 years time. There you are problem solved with a 2 year plan. You read it here first.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Well isnt that strange Tom, you cant find it I did, and have. Rather convenient dont you think.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • Please read and re-read the e mail from Mark Andrews. What it states is that the club have been let down by a debtor and this will have an effect on cash flow for the next six months. There is no suggestion that creditors will not get paid in full. It has nothing to do with not caring about the local community, fans, businesses etc, but sometimes in business when you are let down the cupboard is, for a while at least bare. The really interesting snippet would be for the EADT to ascertain who has let the club down.

    Report this comment

    MOTT MIKE

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Key words here are "let down by a debtor". It has to be a large debtor for a six month cash flow restructure to take place so I wonder who it is. Businesses often have to cope with this but it appears that a restructure will solve the problem in time. Probably means that money to spend on the team may be restricted but we don't know do we and its pointless to blame ME for something which appears to be outside his control. The usual blame ME for everything posters on this site are having a field day, some without thinking it through of course.

    Report this comment

    Alan Chaplin

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Here we go again… It's always the small businessman who suffers. Its not so long ago that fans were chanting about being 'loaded'. Looks like the hens are coming home to roost again and that this will give the owner little choice but to withdraw some or all of his funding.

    Report this comment

    StalwartBlue

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • So, the club is on a 'very sound financial footing', please explain ?.

    Report this comment

    oldwhinger

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • What ever happend to the Ipswich fans waving their £10 notes at Carrow Road (Only 5 seasons ago) Remember the old proverb ' He who laughs last'

    Report this comment

    Stuart Watts

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Mott Mike... think again that fee was cash upfront and hoovered offshore before the ink was dry on the contract 'to finance the club for years to come' ho ho.... and if you also recall Walters was traded in for Scotland.... not exactly a sign of encouraging investment either. It is farcical to even think that anybody could owe Town a significant sum.... the problem is caused by taking money out of the club and gates falling.

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Lots of comments about future sale of Cresswell, Seems strange then that he has signed a contract extension to 1017!!!

    Report this comment

    Footyfan

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • As always the EADT appears to have the wrong end of the stick. It is the cash flow OUT of the club that is and always has been the issue. Which of course means that a tiny business that is relentlessly asset stripped is somewhat short of cash on a day to day basis.

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • I like trifle.

    Report this comment

    Staidtastic

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Bristan, smell the coffee. our club are in a very serious situation. You will probably make an excuse for the manner in which creditors were advises by e-mail, they never even had the guts to call them in and tell them face to face or was there to many.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • PS Cyril, why do I have to smell any coffee? I said the pot was empty because of wasted money over 4 years. The club will sell assets (ie players) if necessary as has been the case for ad infinitum. We had to sell players to finance the stadium reconstucture over the years.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Totally agree with Public Purson. The club couldn't care less about the local businesses as was proved when the club was last in administration. Come to think of it the club couldn't care less about there fans either. Don't blame people for turning there back on the club, there are a disgrace.

    Report this comment

    Anglia1

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • You wouldn't expect anything else other than the three musketeers to come charging straight in after the setbacks they have had just lately. All they need now, is for father Christmas to buy out the club, install Bobby Charlton as manager, who then signs the entire Barcelona team. Two of them would be happy for at least a week, and of course the third would still know better.

    Report this comment

    tel

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Mott Mike I am saying that there is a world of difference between PR and reality and in seeing the truth behind PR, if there is any, you have to read between the lines. It is blindingly obvious that Town are in serious financial straits - the club made a business decision to actually employ some players this season, and at present only have two loanees they are being paid to play..... and the players they have loaned out are not exactly huge earners, so the drop in income from low gates is catastrophic....as was the unforeseen non-sale of Cresswell, and I suspect not unloading the manager to Ireland and trousering a pay-off. Who do you think Town have sold recently where the cash instalment is so vast that they apparently cannot now pay the milk bill?

    Report this comment

    Ray Bidwolf

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Blue army I can answer your questions quickly - first, no, plainly if the party sending the email wanted it to remain confidential, then confidentiality was obviously not waived. Second, the point is not whether Evans should answer questions about the club's finances (he should) it is whether as a point if principle this paper should disclose a private and confidential emai in order to sell papers; third, the notion that comments are only ever made in either a paper, journal or blog that endorse the host has no conceptual merit at all. If it did, then no one would ever direct a complaint at the party in the wrong. In short, there is no story here at all - if you read past the tabloid gutter headline, you see the real issue is that the club were let down by a debtor. But attention to detail is not a strong point for the morons who read this paper.

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Friday, December 13, 2013

  • Good point Ray,but are you suggesting the Finance Director is lying to creditors? This is a very serious allegation. The exact geography of the sender is of no relevance to our discussion. For example, have you the remotest idea where I am in the world at the moment? But the real truth of the story lies with the naming of the debtor. So who owes the club substantial amounts of money? Most transfer fees receivable are paid in installments by the club concerned. So, who could that be?

    Report this comment

    MOTT MIKE

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Brisie58, then tell me how you see this being avoided, or do you believe we can continue for ever with a loss of average 10million per annum. I am not saying I am right but I am aking for an alternative. I notice none of the disciples of the mesiah has any suggestions.

    Report this comment

    Cyril Baker

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Alright Peter James, Chill out! No need to throw you toys out of your pram! The bottom line is the club couldn't care less about fans, local businesses or anyone, as long as they are getting there money then everything is fine. This is how the club has been for years now. But there seems to be some people that won't hear a bad word about ITFC.

    Report this comment

    Anglia1

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • tel, I think you mean the 3 wise men.

    Report this comment

    how'd the town do

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Cyril, I think there was investment early on. The problem is it was all wasted on rubbish players and rubbish managers. Hence the pot is empty and has been for some time. That makes MM's management in getting the team where it is now even more miraculous. Perhaps the add ons from Wickham sale have not been evident because he hasn't exactly fulfilled his large fee.

    Report this comment

    bristan

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • All this wiffle-waffle amuses me. Is it not faairly certain that the Debtor is the Marcus Evans Group failing to pay Town the promised money for putting Marcus Evans on their shirts?

    Report this comment

    BlueArgyll

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Cyril, first you say 'he has not invested millions' then you say 'he invested about 16 million'. Not sure that makes sense at all. In any event, your estimate on his cash investment is far too low. He gave Magilton £12m alone as was widely publicised at the time. Keane bought numerous players including priskin, Martin, lead bitter., Edwards etc for over £10m plus wages not including his own over two years. Jewell again spent significant money on wages - Bullard, bowyer etc plus the prem loanees. We have bought something like fifty new players since Evans took over. Plus on top of that, year on year, he has underwritten the club's operating losses which in 2010-11 were £6 million alone. So your estimate of capital expenditure of just 16 million is woefully low. In addition, he cannot realise the interest on the debt until promotion so in effect it is locked up and of little value, certainly if the club were to be sold to a third party, because the club is nowhere near getting promoted. He has sold some players but only wickham went for serious money and that looks a good deal given he has hardly done well since he left. If you are going to quote figures Cyril, better think them through a little bit more thoroughly.

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • "the Football Club is on very sound financial footing with the support of the owner"...If this is true why are creditors payments being rescheduled, surely you would just utilise the business cash reserves to bridge the 'temporary' shortfall...unless of course you didn't have any, ..creditors form an orderly que at the Financial Directors door please! This kind of mismanagement gives the club a bad name I think Mr Andrews position is untenable and he should resign.

    Report this comment

    Iamabluetoo

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Bluearmy, it is cheap journalism because the email was confidential and it was disclosed with the permission of those involved. It is cheap journalism because the reason it was disclosed was to create cheap headlines to sell more papers. The reason it is gutter journalism is because it will harm the club if the players think that there are financial problems and it will damage the reputation of the club anyway. As usual, this paper simply creates a glib headline - in fact, like all clubs, cash-flow is managed and if a debtor has defaulted, then it is actually more a case of money not coming into the club rather than money not going out. It is a non-story - that is common to EVERY business at some point in time - and yet it is packaged to appeal to morons who buy the paper who cannot reason, cannot tell truth from tripe and cannot see that this paper is the pits.

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

  • I'd be more interested in a feature discussing the future the club has. £80m+ "in debt" to Evans, so basically we are his play-thing until he gets bored or makes a fortune from the debt he purchased post administration. A season in the Premiership virtually covers that, but how realistic is that? Even if we get up, at best we're financially at break even - there's no money to be taken out without leaving more debt. Over his tenure as owner, he has asset-stripped the club, ruined the philosophy that has been built on a true and unique history and marginalised the fans. You may say he saved the club. You may say what we're left with is much worse than another administration. Either way, we'll be crippled with debt for many years yet, with no realistic alternative.

    Report this comment

    georgep

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • clever budgie, we all wish you were unbalanced enough to fall off your perch !!!

    Report this comment

    Brian Betts

    Tuesday, December 10, 2013

  • Cyril, I have just checked that webiste you refer to and it is a nonsense. The figures are incomplete. For Priskin, for instance, there is no transfer fee figure, just 'signed' next to him. In fact, Keane paid £1.6m for him. The same applies to others. It also does NOT include wages - a huge investment by Evans, particularly e.g. if lead bitter, bullard etc were on 15 to 20,000 a week over three years that's another few million.

    Report this comment

    Tom

    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

1980-81 The greatest season in Ipswich Town's history. Pre-order your copy here - only £19.81

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT