bocadillo
Water Gypsy
I don't agree with this Boc. All the FT was saying is that Feriol was rightly comparing apples with apples (The current Shareholders invested £21m if MM will invest £25M), rather than apples with oranges, which is what the Mockery are doing. If MM taking on the Teachers debt (or refinancing it) can be included in the £25m figure then it should also be included in the shareholders figure (well the £15-16M for the stadium) as the shareholders also took on this debt.
It would suggest that MM is actually increasing the investment in the club by something like £9m (which may be presonal cash reserves or debt secured against the clubs assets), some of which would have to be given to the shareholders in the first instance (but not the full £6.5M).
I'd be quite happy for you to include the cost of the stadium in the list of responsibilities taken on by the present shareholders - but it wasn't part of the purchase price of their shares. Anybody who thinks that MM will be handing over £25M just hasn't been bothering to read and comprehend what has been written either in the Mercury or anywhere else.
I entirely agree with the summation in your final paragraph - although clearly the actual figures are still to be seen.