Birmingham City fans have no reason to be concerned about the club's future, the club has said.
Blues issued a statement saying they wanted to reassure their loyal supporters after some of them contacted the club expressing concerns.
Acting chairman Peter Pannu said it was still very much business as usual, despite some reports suggesting otherwise.
Club chairman Carson Yeung is currently on bail over money laundering charges.
Mr Pannu said he wanted to make it clear that while the benefactor's legal wrangles did pose some problems, the club had sufficient contingency plans to cater for the "temporary difficulties".
'Not realistic'
"Our bankers have been very supportive and we currently still stand in a positive credit balance with them.
"When we talk about offloading players, we will consider players on Premier League wages as this is not a sustainable scenario for an Npower Championship Club."
He added the club wished to retain its star players, but also that it was not realistic to do so.
"I wish to assure supporters that what we are addressing is no more and no less than what a prudently managed club would do," he said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really?
Dont worry (apparently)
posted on 30/7/11
Blues must be the exception... how many other footy clubs are in the black with the bank???
posted on 30/7/11
Be nice if someone posted something new,instead of old S£it just to have a go .Support your club or f2CK off down tjhe road
posted on 30/7/11
Charming !!! thanks for your input
posted on 30/7/11
If you air on the side of positivity candyman then why didnt you take this article in that way?
Pannu is telling us not to worry and that we have a good relationship with the bank. Perhaps they are cutting him some slack after seeing him bring in several millions and with plenty more to come in Im sure.
Perhaps this is as bad as it gets with blues and now we are generating cash flow with major loans being settled we will start to be run more "prudently" now??
After the whirl wind disaster that has swept through our club since relegation is the ship beginning to settle.??
And by the way I will support my club the way I want to and always have, so Ill decline your invitation to f2ck off down the road. And to think you see yourself as more of a supporter than me with that kind of a remark
Moron
posted on 30/7/11
Candyman
I am one of the most optimistic fans on here.
And i keep telling myself that some of these sales are for the good of the club, but even i am beginning to have my doubts, but to come out with the comments you have made, are quite ridiculous.
What would you have us all do.
Join McJudas and sell our souls and follow HIM down the road.
Lets be honest
There aint much more to talk about, is there???
Maybe you have an interesting topic we can discuss
KRO
posted on 30/7/11
Oh BTW
NO i am not joining our good friend Banjo and justifying them, well not all of them anyway
I just want to believe they are being done for all the right reasons
KRO
posted on 31/7/11
Zulu i am not 100% justifying them, it seems what ever Yeungs plans was, the guy must have known or been naive that he does not have ready cash to back our club, i also dont think they fully prepared for relegation.
They would have seen that in the Prem you make £60M SKY income, we get gates of about 25'000 (potential upto 30K) and they would know they can loan cash of assets ontop of that to make us a Prem Side while doing things to get us over in China.
I dont think they did much homework on the potential of relegation and then having just £20M TV income and potential of 20'000 or lower gates.
Yeung was a dreamer, a bit of a Del Boy, had a plan but that plan hung on us being a Prem Club and investment seem to not be all out of Yeungs own pocket but debts/loans on his assets and thus also BCFC.
Now the biggest problem is that Yeung was the biggest share holder and backer and that no other share holders was investing in us, so with his dodgy past catching up with him, that means the clubs only active share holder/owner can not invest in the club and the club has to run untill next week purely on season ticket income.
SO END OF THE DAY!
1) Yeung never had the funds to run our club, not without debts and not if we lose Prem Income.
2) Yeung never did enough home work on the potential of relegation and thus 1+2 means they guy had bitten off more than he can chew.
3) His past has got him arrested and thats left the club in the brown stuff, and things could get a lot worse.
The KiD
posted on 31/7/11
"Our bankers have been very supportive and we currently still stand in a positive credit balance with them."
That means that the bank does not plan to Lynch them and call in all the debts they owe to the bank.
That means maybe the banks are willing to be patient for the time being and understand that with Yeung arrested his assets are frozen. I beleave after the court case the bank will want answers and will want to see Yeung sell up if he can not afford to bank roll the club and its debts.
WE NEED TO REMEBER!!!!!!
Yeung gettig arrested as thrown a spanner in the works.
Lets assume we was owned by Sully and Gold still and they was at same time as Yeung was, arrested for Money Laundering.
So Sully and Golds assets are frozen....
The club would also then only have cash flow from the club, and untill August 1st that means only Season Tickets.
The club would then still be in same boat as it is now.
Only difference under a S&G VS Yeung if both was arrested and assets frozen would be that the banks would know S&G have more assets that could be sold to pay back cash, this means the banks may fund/loan club money as they know that after a court case S&G have assets than can be sold to pay that back.
With Yeung his assets are £150M and of that £50M in the bank but then again these are figures that are by no means certain, Yeung is a unkown and the banks maybe cant garuntee what kind of assets he has and so he would be more of a credit risk.
So that means while now the banks are not pulling the plug, they will not lend him any more cash, and so the club has to sell of its player assets.
The KiD
posted on 31/7/11
On another point as far as not having relegation clauses well yes thats a big mistake.
But sometimes thats what gets players over the line.
Take Mido... had we not wanted to add relegation clauses he would have agreed to have signed.
sometimes its what gets a player over the line.
A promoted side or side like Wolves/WBA who could get involved in a relegation scrap could offer a player £25K a week but miss out on the player because they would want a 50% relegation clause and then see player go to other club for maybe £20K who have no clause.
Same goes with how Sully did busniess like with Michel and that was to offer 4X £750K installments which the selling club would not accept.
Yeung paid £3M cash which means more lay out and more debt but also gets players over the line.
The problem is that while it gets more players, it does not have the security of how Sully did business if we was relegated.
SULLY AND GOLD spent near nothing on us, they ran us on income, that meant we had X income and compared that to X out goings and fitted players within that budget. They would have spent over sometimes but they would rake it back when they could.
Bottom line it never made us a competitive Prem side but it sure as hell was a sound model to run a club with little debts.
If every club was ran like Sully and Gold did the Prem would be different and clubs would not have debts, then again some clubs like Fulham would not be a Prem club
The KiD
posted on 31/7/11
Jesus, give it a rest with the re-hashing of old news, the 'ifs' and 'buts', looking at every possible permutation only to then repeat it again in another comment below your own or in another topic. You've got some good comments and views banjo, just wish you'd be a bit more concise.