nogbad van 50

There you go Col
 
“Implications for creditors
Under the new rules, unsecured creditors must receive a minimum of:
25p in the pound, paid on takeover of the clubs’ assets by the purchaser, or
35p in the pound, paid within three years.
Failure to meet this requirement will result in a further 15-point penalty the following season.
Whilst unsecured creditors will welcome this measure, it may put off would-be purchasers. It is also currently unclear how this minimum repayment rule will relate to the ‘prescribed part’ – the ring fenced fund set aside for unsecured creditors of any company out of the net floating charge realisations.
Creditors will also welcome the abolition of the requirement to exit administration by Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). Instead, the club’s share in The Football League may now pass to the purchaser, subject to certain requirements. This certainty of continuation in the league should reduce the insolvency period and the associated costs. It should also deliver a better overall return for creditors by increasing the number of potential purchasers, rather than a CVA process largely controlled by the club’s previous owners.
The controversial ‘Football Creditors Rule’ remains unchanged, despite running contrary to normal principles of insolvency law, including the pari
passu rule that all unsecured creditors should be paid an equal percentage of their debt. The Football Creditors Rule bypasses the statutory order of priority by requiring full repayment of debts to clubs and players for transfers and wages, before any other unsecured creditors.  The justification for the rule is that it ensures the continuation of business in league football.  Other creditors will, however, take some comfort from the new minimum returns required for unsecured creditors.”

There you go Col
 
“Implications for creditors
Under the new rules, unsecured creditors must receive a minimum of:
25p in the pound, paid on takeover of the clubs’ assets by the purchaser, or
35p in the pound, paid within three years.
Failure to meet this requirement will result in a further 15-point penalty the following season.
Whilst unsecured creditors will welcome this measure, it may put off would-be purchasers. It is also currently unclear how this minimum repayment rule will relate to the ‘prescribed part’ – the ring fenced fund set aside for unsecured creditors of any company out of the net floating charge realisations.
Creditors will also welcome the abolition of the requirement to exit administration by Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). Instead, the club’s share in The Football League may now pass to the purchaser, subject to certain requirements. This certainty of continuation in the league should reduce the insolvency period and the associated costs. It should also deliver a better overall return for creditors by increasing the number of potential purchasers, rather than a CVA process largely controlled by the club’s previous owners.
The controversial ‘Football Creditors Rule’ remains unchanged, despite running contrary to normal principles of insolvency law, including the pari
passu rule that all unsecured creditors should be paid an equal percentage of their debt. The Football Creditors Rule bypasses the statutory order of priority by requiring full repayment of debts to clubs and players for transfers and wages, before any other unsecured creditors.  The justification for the rule is that it ensures the continuation of business in league football.  Other creditors will, however, take some comfort from the new minimum returns required for unsecured creditors.”

Thank god ! The EFL have got our back. I feel better already ?

Who is your preference out of the masses of potential new owners who submitted acceptable bids?? 

Cant see why they have to stick their noses in, he hasnt chopped anybodies heads or hand off has he. At the end of the day dont they get it we could have been liquidated, anybody that can save our club is welcome in my eyes.

Who cares what they say ? ,they’re not Derby fans.

Who cares what they say ? ,they’re not Derby fans.

Who cares what they say ? ,they’re not Derby fans.

Who cares what they say ? ,they’re not Derby fans.

????????

I take it you are being sarcastic. 

You missed the ending of that quote. "Mother, put down that brick."

We need to get behind this guy, we have been waiting for a PB for months, he may not be the 1st choice for all of us, however, if he saves our beloved DCFC we should all give him our support.
Who knows what else will happen in the next few weeks, but this is the first bit of confirmed positive news we have had in months so let's stick together as we have done all season.

None of us know what the deals at Preston were like. Could be as soon as he looked under the kilt it was obviously not for him! I think decisiveness is a positive attribute. If you are making an error the sooner you know and can react.

Ironic Sinclair’s involved after being convicted for racism and urinating in a police car in 2017/18

Have you not considered that maybe he was serious about Preston but after looking at what the'd get for his money, he considered Derby was the better option?
For all their history, Preston will always struggle to attract big crowds due to their location. If he could get them to the PL, they'd need heavy ongoing investment to stay there (in much the same way Wigan did). Conversely, Derby could be self-sustaining as a PL club and provide a far bigger re-sale value if he decides to cash in on his investement in the future....

I genuinely couldn’t care less about being docked more points next season, which league we’re playing in, what CK may have tweeted some 10 years ago, or any of that.
I just want to still have a club to support when all is said and done. Everything else is noise. 

If he did that, I think he would speak very highly of the Rams

Not worried about the names of the food in the concourse. Think beggars can't be choosers comes to mind. 

Mmm.. wise you are in the ways of the EFL

Same here, I used to read The Sun ?

Agree, i have 3 adult children who im sure said and did things they regretted when young, buts thats how you learn through your mistakes. I am immensely proud of how they have grown up. You cant hold things against what was said when young, its now that counts plus what about some of the disgusting songs that some fans sing at matches, no difference to me.

I think his comments from a decade ago don’t necessarily reflect his current values and if  one person’s “acceptable” comments are at variance with someone else’s ,who decides that their moral code is superior or more valid? If he can take this club forward ,invest in contracts for new players and provide the necessary finance to stabilise us then I’ll welcome him with open arms.He can’t be any worse than MM,hopefully, and I’m more interested in his business acumen rather than individuals perception of his psychological outlook.
I judge people by their actions and not their opinions.I don’t see many people jumping up and down about the Saudi takeover of Newcastle yet Mike Ashley was quite happy to take the money from a regime noted for its human rights abuses.
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
We all change over time as “maturity” kicks in.I just find it disturbing 

Folks, please, can we not descend into arguing amongst ourselves? It's counterproductive and isn't going to help anything.

Absolutely agree with you - many a young immature person has made inappropriate comments when younger and then later in life they are nothing like that person back then and regret their stupid comments - I know I did. 
CK is nothing like the young upstart he was back then and he shouldn't be held responsible for those comments posted back then - he has made a fair comment about those posts back then and has clearly stated he is nothing like that person now. For god sake , people need to let it lye and move on ?