For me the questions must still be at the commercial side. Odd that the increase in sponsorship was “less than significant” despite Virgin & Under Amrour coming on board.
Also interesting that Kat has shares in a new Hong Kong based company. That then ties in with the “offshore bank loans” angle of how Gao leveraged money OR was able to (get round) (work within) the Chinese Rule changes on overseas investments in Football.
No immediate issue with a HK bank account. It is perfectly possible for the club to have a main, or one of a number of, bank account(s) wherever suits. Given the ownership, to have an account in HK is not surprising but it may still be in the club’s name.
The key fact is that the Creditsafe searches people have done have shown that a Bank in HK has a Lien on all TV Revenues.
Different sides are then seeing what they want.
Fact is that the money goes to someone else BEFORE the club and somewhere there is debt loaded against the club.
The missing piece as I can see is what length of term the debt is over. Some assume it is eg 172mil from EPL and everything goes to pay back the loan & interest. Not sure anyone woud have signed up to that. IF it is over say 10 years is it a capital repayment (ie old fashioned mortgage) or a Bond?
I see it as a leveraged buy out similar to Glazers & Man Utd where the value of the club made up the bulk of the collateral for a loan.
Which is what most tyre kickers tried to do back in the day and what SISU tried.
Not saying I’m right, just saying I am not losing sleep over it BUT would like some clarity.
Equally. IF we get relegated and that TV money doesn’t come in, THEN I think we may need to start buying rubber bed sheets