Whispers

West Ham’s Silence Sparks Panic as Deadlines Pass Without Action

Image for West Ham’s Silence Sparks Panic as Deadlines Pass Without Action

I previously highlighted 31st May as a critical deadline for West Ham’s directors to inject £90 million into the club  a move that would have eased PSR pressure and reduced the club’s spiralling debt.

Because the date fell on a Sunday, any electronic filing made over that weekend should have appeared on Companies House by Monday or Tuesday.

A genuine rights issue would have triggered an SH01 filing, detailing:

  • the new shares issued,
  • the price paid,
  • and who subscribed.

Electronic SH01s appear almost instantly once accepted. Paper filings take longer, roughly a week, but the club must still file within one month of issuing the shares.

The absence of any filing is conspicuous.

Equally surprising is the lack of an AA01 form to extend the accounting year end from 31st May to 30th June. A PSR player‑sale deadline is the club’s own accounting year‑end date.

That simple change would have bought the club an extra 15 days to complete player sales and ease PSR pressure. An electronic AA01 would show up immediately, yet the accounting date on Companies House still reads 31st May 2026, with accounts due by 28th February 2027.

All of this feeds into a far more worrying picture , one already flagged by finance expert Kieran Maguire, who has described West Ham’s debt position as severe, unusual, and increasingly risky. The club’s £124m Rights & Media Funding loan suggests mainstream banks were unwilling to lend to the club. The £104m loss is the worst in the club’s history. And with over £100m borrowed against future transfer income, West Ham’s cash flow is dangerously thin.

A number of news outlets are maintaining that West Ham must raise £150m from player sales.

There has been no updates from the club, except a statement on the 27th May which included the following “The Board must now review every aspect of the clubs operation to ensure that when we return to the Premier League we are a better West Ham in every way.”

However, despite this rallying cry, supporters, myself included are becoming increasingly anxious about the immediate future of “our” club which has been around now for 131 years!

Whether a “Plan B” I previously referenced has been activated remains unclear?

There is a glimmer of hope. For last summers and January’s player purchases it should be noted that for PSR purposes the club don’t take the hit in one year, it’s spread out over the time of the players contracts which usually are five years.

The sale of Mohammed Kudus to Spurs would have banked the club the full profit on the transfer in year one. While Lucas Paqueta made the club a small profit when he joined Flamengo, as they no longer had the amortisation charge and in addition a saving of around £7.8m a year on wages.

Sale of Lucas Paquetá released a small profit and big wage savings

West Ham should have the biggest revenue in the Championship which will help with SCR in the new season, they also have the parachute payments from the Premier League.

The Board can also action a rights issue whenever, which would effectively reduce the debt, yet for PSR purposes would now surely be irrelevant?

However, what should have been the two simplest steps to calm the situation and provide clarity look like they haven’t taken place!

Share this article

I have been a season ticket holder since the late eighties, so experienced the highs and lows of being a West Ham supporter. I previously wrote for OLAS and have contributed to a number of football publications in the past.

3 comments

  • M Waite says:

    Perhaps Kretinsky is a rather better businessman and investor than the comments here might suggest. At least one possibility still open and not mentioned.

  • Dudley Tyler says:

    Do they have to be filed electronically? Listen to Kevin Maguire and he’s often mentioned how the bigger clubs file by paper stretching things out by a few more days.

  • Steve1 says:

    “Anxious about the immediate future of our club, which has been around for 131 years” is a bit dramatic, isn’t it? Are you suggesting we are in imminent danger of going under?

    Sullivan is incompetent in most things football related but is not a complete buffoon as a general businessman and Kretinsky would categorically not put his investment in jeopardy unnecessarily. No doubt we are in a mess, and our wings have been clipped when it comes to transfers, but if an injection of capital was essential before the end of May then I’m sure it would have happened.

Comments are closed.