'This is not Monopoly, it's real life': Sunderland fans react as Stewart Donald clarifies how he funded takeover

Sunderland fans have reacted to Stewart Donald's update
Sunderland fans have reacted to Stewart Donald's update
0
Have your say

Sunderland owner Stewart Donald has clarified how he funded the takeover of the club following national reports - and supporters have reacted.

The Daily Mail yesterday questioned elements of the deal that saw him acquire the club last year - specifically, the use of parachute payments from the Premier League to fund the purchase.

Charlie Methven confirmed that in programme notes for the club last September, but the Mail claims that the fee used was higher than previously believed.

They claim that only £5million of Donald's own money was used to fund the takeover with parachute payment money providing the rest of the finance that saw Donald and Methven assume control of the club from Ellis Short.

And the Mail go on to state that the pair would be in line for a significant return on their investment if a rumoured takeover or fresh investment materialises.

READ: The full story as Donald defends his Sunderland ownership after takeover and parachute payment claims

But in a tweet, Donald said: "Wud just say 1) Staying not selling 2) £25M parachute monies ring fenced and secured for early payment as previously mentioned. 3) Madrox (the company set-up by Donald and Methven to acquire Sunderland) replaces these funds over time 4) Charlie doesn't know how much I am worth"

And fans have been quick to react to their owner's update - here's what they have been saying on social media:

@killermill3r said: "So for the price of £30 million we got: - Rid of £150 million of debt - Rid of a clueless owner - Rid of the negativity surrounding the club - Owners, who's motives can be questioned, but with the ability to run a football club competently Sounds like a fair deal to me"

@kristianwall92 added: "Remember #safc fans, we pay to watch football. The clubs money isn't our own. All we can judge on is: Are the players putting effort in? Is the club engaging with the community? Is the club trying to progress, achieve promotion and in future improve the quality of football? Yes."

Former striker Stephen Elliott said: "As owner of club, it was in his right to do whatever he wanted with these payments. If he sells club for a profit for it to go next level than so what. He’ll have walked away a success & giving fans a club to be proud of again. He’ll also have a new found affinity for #safc"

@christoph_21 commented: "Awful timing for this which I sense, combined with the personal digs, will mean people don’t view (or refuse to view) it with the seriousness it deserves. But that’s £32m of #SAFC’s money which has been used to facilitate purchasing the club rather than funding it."

LIVE: The latest from the Stadium of Light throughout the day in our blog

@kevsol posted: "So what if they want to make a few bob on the side. If they have added value to the club and improved our league and financial position why shouldn't they sell for profit? This is not monopoly, it's real life"

@MichaelPottsRT tweeted: "The club is in a far healthier, more sustainable, sensible financial position - regardless of the means to get there - and whether their own passion is genuine or not, they’ve injected life back into the whole club."

@Paul_Debonair added: "So they restructured the club, got rid of the debt, reunited the fan base, have the club on the brink of promotion AND dare to make some money out of it? So what?"

@adamguest posted: "Always thought something didn’t quite add up with Ellis making us debt free but us still being so strapped for cash despite a huge parachute payment."

@artlowy asked: "This is clever business men making which they are allowed to do, while also running the club properly AND giving the fans a lot to be happy about. Wheres the real problem here?"