The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, MrPB said: It’ has an ability to pay very big dividends (it has for previous owners) which I’m sure will help Treasury meet pension liabilities. The money we’ve pumped in is paper money in the form of debt to treasury we’ll get it back out of the sale proceeds if the SPC is ever sold but in the SPC it’s going to yield probably 8-10%. The former owners loaded it with debt to repay themselves and government will be no different. The purchase has clearly been made for its potential high yield compared to the 0.85% they’re probably been getting on deposit with the same money. As for the ships I thought they’d secured long term debt as 2.5% which if they have they’re going to get nice arbitrage on that too. Paper money? How does that work then? Treasury dont print money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 30 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: On the whole the Steam Packet is a really well run business. Have you travelled abroad to motor sport events? I have quite few times. Travel and hotel for 4 day trip has been about a grand every time. Before ticket. Which was expensive too. I'm a fan and I go because I enjoy it. I'm also not surprised when I rock up to Silverstone or somewhere abroad and find the hotels are expensive. One of the most expensive parts of any travel in my experience is getting off the Island. Certainly relative to travel costs elsewhere. Are you Mark Woodward's wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: One of the most expensive parts of any travel in my experience is getting off the Island. Certainly relative to travel costs elsewhere. Are you Steve Woodward's wife? Mark even Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 Looks like Rog is going to lose his title of 'Most wrong about absolutely everything' on MF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 3 minutes ago, MrPB said: All debt is paper money. Loan notes (ie, paper) backed by the companies promise to pay a fixed coupon to the loan holder. I don't think that is correct. As I understand it Treasury doesn't issue debt. It handed over a total of 124m of tax payers money to purchase the entire operation. It then effectively has 76m of that accounted for as a loan to the iomspc Ltd on which it will pay interest to the Treasury and repayments one would assume. Treasury itself does not issue Gilts so I dont understand your point. The purchase took 124m out of the tax payers coffers. Not paper. Actual reserves of Treasury cash. The profits of the company will help service and repay the debt. And service the debt attached to new ships. They may finance the new ships via third party lender secured against those ships but that debt will need servicing and or reducing. So I dont see how your pension comment actually works in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 4 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Looks like Rog is going to lose his title of 'Most wrong about absolutely everything' on MF. To you I assume? Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 4 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: As I understand it Treasury doesn't issue debt. ... It then effectively has 76m of that accounted for as a loan to the iomspc Ltd on which it will pay interest to the Treasury and repayments one would assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 12 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: One of the most expensive parts of any travel in my experience is getting off the Island. Certainly relative to travel costs elsewhere. Are you Steve Woodward's wife? Course I am. You clearly dont travel far. If you did you would know the costs. It can be expensive at times of course. But so is going to Spain in August with your kids. Who would expect that eh? Travel companies charging when demand is highest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 Just now, MrPB said: No it is correct. I was not talking about Treasury issuing debt. In exchange for investing £124M Treasury received a mixture of SPC loan notes and equity in the SPC. The loan notes and the equity will sit on the government balance sheet. You don’t seem to understand how corporate debt works. I understand that. The point being that the government still had to hand over 124m to the seller. That was the purchase price. Are you trying to say that the seller never got 124m? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 4 minutes ago, MrPB said: No government swaps £124M in cash for equity and loan notes to the value of £124M. The balance sheet stays the same is what I said not that money wasn’t paid. It exchanges cash for a mixture of SPC loan notes and equity with a face value on the day of £124M. That is clearly what I said as it’s how every corporate transaction works. No. Let's go back to the beginning. You said the iomspc would be used to pay pensions (by which you mean public sector and civil service I assume) I said that it unlikely because they (a) have debt obligations to service and repay to the taxpayer and (b) will have future obligations in relation to the purchase of new vessels which of course are unlikely to be 100% financed either. It wasnt a free purchase. We handed over 124m of cash. The balance sheet may have moved 124m of cash to 48m of an asset purchase (the company and business) and 76m of that to a creditor position but that doesn't alter the fact that the company has a debt to the tax payer via Treasury to service and reduce. The seller walked of with 124m. The 48m of equity value is debatable anyway because basically the only way that has future value is if the government create value via a massive new user agreement then sell it back into private hands. At which point we would be exactly where we were before they bought it which was the problem in the first place. Anyway I'm still keen for you to explain how it pays pensions given the obligations now and in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 It wasn't worth £124m to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 3 minutes ago, MrPB said: No let’s not as it’s a waste of my time. Where have I said we didn’t pay in any of the statements above? I said treasury’s balance sheet remains the same as it paid £124M to the SPC and in return received the rights to SPC loan notes and equity to the value of £124M. That’s a commercial transaction. The returns on that will go back to treasury as investor which should then have considerably more to pay public sector pension with than the 0.85% the £124M was probably yielding in cash. You seem to delight in creating pointless arguments. The above is crystal clear to everyone else I’m sure so I will now move on to another thread. You seem to delight is trying to change the story to suit and then get a bit upset when challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 7 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: It wasn't worth £124m to start with. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 2 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: What's wrong with that pricing? £300 for a passenger and a bike Return at the busiest time of the year for the company? Seems reasonable. The difference is that we don't have the luxury of a huge influx of people on a regular basis anymore. I'm not particularly concerned solely with TT pricing, although it does put people off, the SPCo capacity is as much of an issue as pricing at that point. It's the year round, and particularly spring and summer, where the island is perceived to be an expensive and difficult place to visit. MotoGP or F1 doesn't depend on people flying or sailing in from the UK for its survival whereas the TT depends on people getting here by sea and air for its survival!.If the SPCo don't play ball, any events which are organised just wither away as has been seen with Rallying etc and falling TT numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 41 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: Course I am. You clearly dont travel far. If you did you would know the costs. It can be expensive at times of course. But so is going to Spain in August with your kids. Who would expect that eh? Travel companies charging when demand is highest. Then pray tell how do all these seasoned European travellers, so used to the expensive travel that you cite, find the SPCo's pricing and service so objectionable? To the extent that they write about it in their local press? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.