Many supporters are still scratching their heads over why West Ham have spent so little this summer. And while debts and loss of revenue through relegation are always part of the picture, there is one loan in particular that needs urgent attention, a loan that will almost certainly remain unresolved until the boardroom ownership battle is finally settled.
Even then it’s unlikely, as the club would need to weigh the cost of early repayment, the cost of staying in the loan and the cash flow impact.
West Ham’s latest accounts confirmed a £124m RMF loan in August 2025, set over five years, with £89m taken immediately. Given the club’s financial position, it’s highly likely the entire facility has now been exhausted.
Dire straits – West Ham’s finances post BS era are a mess
As things stand, as it is a five year loan, it is unsure if it contains break fees or make-whole penalties. Usually such loans include hefty early-repayment penalties. There is no public evidence that this loan has been repaid. Every available filing and report indicates the RMF debt remains outstanding.
If the club had cleared the RMF loan, Companies House would show a “Satisfaction of Charge” for RMF. It doesn’t.
What Companies House does show, however, is that other debts have been settled. West Ham recently filed documents confirming the repayment of four Barclays loans. This had to happen after the accounts revealed a £104m loss, a number only deepened by the financial punch in the gut that came with relegation.
The accounts also reveal the most alarming number of all, cash reserves sitting at just £457,000, down from £33m the previous year. That’s the financial equivalent of driving with the fuel light permanently glowing.
Thus the RMF loan was required as it seems the club relied on borrowing . Loans like these are typically secured against future Premier League broadcast revenue (which West Ham no longer receive), the club’s training grounds at Rush Green and Chadwell Heath, Championship TV income, and transfer instalments.
Yet this loan acts as a financial handbrake on the club. Because RMF is paid before transfers happen, a portion of every pound West Ham earn is already committed. Before Nils Koppen can spend anything, RMF takes its slice.
Relegation has only tightened the squeeze. Championship revenue is smaller, and RMF repayments eat further into what remains. RMF sits at the front of the repayment queue, and typically carry 8–12% interest, far higher than standard bank rates, meaning even less money is available.
If the RMF loan sits at roughly 10% interest this is effectively the cost of a squad player or backup striker, gone before the window even opens. The main interest though would be on the monies drawn down.
This is why supporters have seen:
• Smaller net spend
• Loan‑to‑buy deals
• Delayed payments
• Cheaper targets
• Late walk‑aways from deals
So, when West Ham sell a player, the instalments often go straight to RMF, not into the transfer budget.
This is the underlying reason West Ham’s spending looks so small compared to headline sales, and why bids have been delayed, why the club must sell before buying, why targets are lost to quicker rivals, and why loans, frees, and heavily structured deals have become the norm.
The club did issue a letter of support in the last report and accounts committing the board to provide a level of financial support if player sales did not generate enough liquidity. This could be by direct equity injections or additional loans. Kretinsky’s willingness to fund this was clearly around gaining increased control and it was led to believe that he would have loaned the club £90m before the Gold/Staveley debacle overtook proceedings.
This loan would still need to attract interest, yet arguably at a lower rate. The RMF debt is a financial time bomb for the next four years and resolving it is essential if West Ham are to move forward.
Computer says no !
Where’s the secret accounts 🤷
Sam the cost of relegation is around £120m after parachte payments are factored in. They have reduced their wage bill by £40m, leaving an additional £80m to add the previous debt of £300m. The club had no choice but to sell having spent years over spending. To make it worse they bought a lot of mediocre players with the money.
The figures reflect a position a year ago. So talking about the cash reserves is looking in a rear view mirror. Ignoring the current transfer windows remember that since the last accounts we also have sold
Winter Window (January 2026) Permanent Sales
Lucas Paquetá – Flamengo / Abroad (€42,000,000 / ~£35m)
Luís Guilherme – (€14,000,000 / ~£11.8m)
Andrew Irving – (€1,500,000 / ~£1.3m)
Late Summer 2025 Sales (August 31, 2025 Onward)
Nayef Aguerd – (€23,000,000 / ~£19.5m)
Emerson Palmieri – (€700,000 / ~£600k)
Of course there hve been incoming moves
Winter Window (January/February 2026) Incoming Transfers
Taty Castellanos (from Lazio) – ~£24,500,000 (€29,000,000)
Pablo Felipe (from Famalicão) – ~£19,500,000 (€23,000,000)
Adama Traoré (Free agent signing, January 2026) – Nominal fee / free
Axel Disasi (from Chelsea, February 2026) – Loan (with ~€2.0m loan fee)
Late Summer 2025 Incoming Transfers (September 1, 2025 Onward)
Igor Julio (from Brighton & Hove Albion) – Season Loan
Diego Colau – Permanent transfer (undisclosed fee)
But it’s a much smaller number.
And yet a certain Billionaire insisted on keeping Nuno and giving him a £5 million contract for two years….i just wonder how these people ever make money in the first place with the decisions they make.
What a load of bullocks, billionaire owners, parachute payments, 200m in sales, 50% reduction in players wages plus at least 4 players off the payroll completely as Loan deals finished and traore and Wilson left.
If this board created this mess they have the finances to fix it. Kresnsky is a business man not a west ham fan sooner people understand that the better
Do you like to pretend Sullivan didn’t royally stitch the club up financially leveraging loans against any asset left post sale of UP, including future ST sales. Consistently kicking transfer purchases down the road which has resulted in us still owing several hundred million to clubs in this country and overseas?
Clean the sleep out of your eyes. This would’ve all ticked along had it not been for relegation. Now it’s time to pay the piper.
I’m not pro or anti Kretinsky but to pin this on him when he doesn’t officially hold the majority is utter madness. Judge the man if and when he does.
Sam the cost of relegation is around £120m after parachte payments are factored in. They have reduced their wage bill by £40m, leaving an additional £80m to add the previous debt of £300m. The club had no choice but to sell having spent years over spending. To make it worse they bought a lot of mediocre players with the money.
Why did Ketinsky make promise no players would be sold due to finances?
Bang on Sam, and that the clown Kretinsky put in the £90m he said he would, we would be debt free and still not buying players. Smoke and mirrors.
That still doesn’t explain where the 200 million + is gone.
Hi Matt, championship clubs owners are allowed to give their clubs an interest free loan as long as specific terms are met. It’s only premier league clubs that have to have a loan charge levied on them. Cheers
The author of this article, Matt Kemp, tells us he’s been a West Ham supporter for more than 35 years yet he doesn’t wear Claret and Blue whilst making that claim. I wonder where he bought his blue and white striped Jersey???
West Ham away kit 2021/22 – picture c/o Canning Town Len 😊
The author of this article, Matt Kemp, tells us he’s been a West Ham supporter for more than 35 years yet he doesn’t wear Claret and Blue whilst making that claim. I wonder where his blue and white striped Jersey came from???
oh dear. you’ve just made yourself look a bit silly.