atherstoneram

8 minutes ago, KBB said:

What's being said? I csnt see any of his tweets. Not blocked. Pending showing for a follow. 

Nothing said on EMT,just that we are seeking loans

3 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

I admire someone who uses the word dichotomy more than once in their post.

But you've let yourself down unfortunately by not being able to spell lobster thermidor.

A dichotomy, i thought that was an operation carried out on males.

1 hour ago, CBX1985 said:

Exactly.  

This idea of dichotomy is very good for trying to drive a hard bargain but becomes dreadful when you actually negotiate.  It is also a total nonsense that doesn't pass mustard for a second once you think about it.  

Life is never go to bed or go for a run; cheese on toast or lobster thermadore; Chariots of Fire or Minions.  It involves change and movement.  When it comes down to it, Creditors will not want the dichotomy - zero pounds or surrender.  But, they will want a good deal.  You can then offer new points to the bargain to sweeten it.  All sides will want this - literally everyone.  

At the moment, the admins want what they want (on behalf of Creditors).  But if no one is offering, their bargaining position is zero.  So movement will need to happen to prevent the dichotomy mentioned above.  At that point, and ONLY at that point, new ideas will come to the fore.      

You carry on keep saying they will give in the end, it's not happened up to now so can't see why it will happen any time soon. Football administration is different to other business administrations, they are a stand alone, we are part of an association whose rules we have to abide by, they can expel us from the league and it is no use saying the law of the land won't allow them.

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

Didn't work when EFL Insolvency Policy was questioned.

What people don't get, or forget, is that when a club signs up to become a member of the EFL you sign up and agree to their rules and regulations, if you don't, as per exiting administration  (25%/35% over 2/3 years) they can expel you anyway. 

4 minutes ago, CBX1985 said:

Buyers don't believe it.  The administrators know the creditors want more than they are being offered.  But no one is offering.  If admin can keep this ticking along they will until no more options are available.  They will not accept a penny less.... until they do.  

Creditors get nothing in a no deal outcome. The admins work for Creditors.  The creditors are not going to want nothing on a multi million investment (HMRC might, as they care less about the money and more about what general internal policy is).  

I said numerous times last week that we will see this play out.  Admins saying "your bids are too low, up them or no deal".  The other side will continue ignoring said statement.  This will continue to play out until the day the money actually runs out.  

Admins are forced to liquidate if that is the best outcome for the Creditors.  It won't be, as they will get more in a cheap sale.  EFL is a league.  People are acting as though their "rules" are "statute".  They are not.  If Creditors agree in a deal, they will accept that deal.  

EFL Rules: Made by them; changeable by them; internal policy, not law.

Statute and Common Law: The law of the land.  Fixed, or set by legal precedent.  

 

And you were the one that posted they could come to an arrangement were they could pay over 10 years to creditors, are you sure.

Why have creditors not accepted that deal already then?

2 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

The bidders will all think the club is worth very little (that's reality). The point I'm trying to make is there ARE minimum amounts to meet each of the scenarios that get us out of administration as a going concern - Q know this and could quite easily set these out - that's not not being disingenuous or breaching their commitments to the creditors, it's simply being realistic about the situation the club is in....without it, we will probably find that any/all bids fall well short of the amount needed to avoid liquidation (as you say, what the bidders "think the club is worth") - that helps no-one as it leaves Q to either keep negotiating or for them to pull the plug....

Ultimately Q want a sale because that is best for the creditors AND for the club AND themselves. We won't get a sale if the bidders offers are too low - and if Q simply keep going back and asking for a bit more, it will drag on for months with the actual value of the club getting lower by the day. It needs pragmatism to resolve the situation, not long-winded negotiation....

As i have said, it is not in the administrators remit to divulge what the minimum they would accept is. They can only accept a bid if the criteria is met.

Quantuma won't go back and ask for a bit more,they will just say the bid is not high enough. If the club can't be saved then it can't be saved if the bidders don't offer enough.

27 minutes ago, Gritstone Tup said:

You can’t compare Derby to Chester. The situation might be similar but I can remember Chester averaging less than 1,000 attendees in the football league in the 70s. Averaging 15,000 which I think we might (stadium permitting) will see us fly up the pyramid quickly imo!

A large crowd doesn't equate to a successful team. 

32 minutes ago, SamUltraRam said:

So if we start next season in administration, we start with nil points deduction ?

Assuming we have a new owner during the season, the EFL apply a points deduction if the new owner doesn't meet the minimum requirements ?

Could be psychologically good if we don't actually start on -15 even if we eventually get it further down the line. Gives us chance to build up some sort of points tally I suppose. It would be so demoralising for the players to be starting out with a deficit

We can't have a new buyer during the season if they don't meet the minimum requirements, that doesn't change just because the season has started.

43 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Yes it adds more debt, but doesn’t it strengthen the club in the short term? I’m aware I often look for the positives in a situation and there are others who maybe look at the opposite with the realistic take probably pitched somewhere in between, but people keep talking about not being able to buy season tickets to support the club financially and drive crowds for the season which in turn generates further revenue through cold pies and boiling hot bovril, I’d say that’s a plus. We’ve only got 5/7/14 (delete as applicable) players, the paper talk is that a short term loan means we can add to the squad, which again strengthens the club off and on the pitch, doesn’t it? 
It means we would start the season in admin, with funding in place to be able to complete the season, a smaller wage bill and the opportunity to generate further revenue through match days, more time with which to agree a deal with a new owner who can then complete a takeover, pay down some debts as part of that process and start to rebuild the club. 

If we start the season in administration the EFL aren't going to relax any of the various embargoes we are currently under.

41 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

Stretford must be wondering what his next move should be after backing Ck. He has been advising Wazza since he was a kid and won’t want the “Rooney Brand” being harmed.Talking of brands , the only thing we have left of value is the DCFC brand , and Mel has made a right job of devaluing that.

Whatever happens i don't think "Brand Rooney" will be impacted

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

Sorry - where has that been said? I'm sure I read noises from the EFL suggesting that it would be in everyone's interests to allow a Phoenix Derby club into L2

 

 

That has to be voted on by the other 71 member clubs.

1 hour ago, Gaspode said:

Something has to be done to focus a few minds on the bigger picture here - seems some of the rich folk are still looking for a cut-price deal.....

Can it really be so hard for Q to set out the minimum amount that needs to be paid to meet each of the scenarios (2 years, 3 years, -15 points) and then set a deadline when the amount the potential buyers need to have submitted their final and best bid - whoever bids the largest amount wins. If no-one meets the lowest price (-15 points), then Q will begin liquidation proceedings. The alternative is that this farce staggers on for many more months with the occassional drip-feed of cash to pay the wages.....

It is not up to Quantuma to inform bidders of the minimum amount needed, it is up to bidders to offer what they think the club is worth, the administrators are not here to work for the buyers however stressful this may seem. Neither the EFL or bidders can force the administrators to lower the minimum amount, they are court appointed officials and have to work within the law.

If nobody bids what is needed then yes liquidation may be a possibility unless as you say the club is drip fed cash but if that was to happen what constraints would we be under from the EFL.

2 hours ago, TheDeadlySaul said:

Can Quantuma do press conference or something please 

What is the point, i wouldn't imagine anything much has changed since their press release.

15 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Let’s say I was a potential buyer. Willing to pay £35 million for a club that can compete for promotion from League one or £25 million for a club that is handicapped by a 15 point penalty and a restrictive business plan. What then? I may not satisfy either options so are Efl going to say right then we will banish you from the league and let creditors say goodbye to £25 million or £35 million? 

The creditors would see none or very little of that by the time football creditors,the administrators and HMRC have had their share

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

I see Nixon is going on about the stadium plus bid again. 

And involving them in paying June's wages as they'd eventually be part of the whole deal.

 

Nixon is exceling himself today in saying lots and saying nothing (trust me on that I'm an expert ? ? )!

Don't know why people keep asking him tbh, he must be basking in the glory.

1 hour ago, Sparkle said:

That’s the reality RoyMac5 as there are three big potential bidders in the business world who are not offering what is being asked but are willing to buy us.

But they are not willing to buy us at the price required so it seems, the only way they can buy us for a low cost i imagine is if the club is liquidated and they start a phoenix club. The idea of "let them buy us at any price" is not an option as the administrators have insolvency rules to follow, doubt it's Quantuma's fault that the debt is too high and bidders willing to accept it. Everything is about the money and not sentiment or history.

1 hour ago, Boycie said:

There’s no chance that Derby are going under, chillax.

I’ll streak across the City Ground pitch with a Forest tattoo on my arse if we do.

But it will be no use telling us after the event, we will want to know beforehand.

2 hours ago, Gritstone Tup said:

So why didn’t he carry on with the purchase?

if he got it for £23 million then he’d probably make a profit out of flattening it and building on it, so no risk!

it’s all lies and damn lies, MM wanted to raise us to the ground and he’s succeeded.

Why? I don’t know!

Because he was only going to act as an intermediary as CK wouldn't deal with MM (or it might be the other way round). CK drops out so no need for Clowes to buy the club.

10 hours ago, Dave Mackay Ate My Hamster said:

I'd be surprised if there's that much left in assets Gee Screamer. Not arguing with you. Players can't be forced to be sold. If we liquidate they're free agents, ergo any interested club won't have to pay a transfer fee. Their agents would factor in the absence of a transfer fee to bump up their remuneration package with any prospective new club. Surely?

In the event of liquidation the players are still legally under contract and any monies raised by the EFL goes towards paying football creditors and the admin.

1 minute ago, Dave Mackay Ate My Hamster said:

No, what have I missed?

3 or 4 pages back.

2 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Of course, many golfists will fall under those other categories you mentioned. This might sound rough but it drives me a fairway round the twist that all these wealthy folk stroll around playing golf all day, makes me green with envy.

People are getting right teed off with these puns

2 minutes ago, curb said:

…..and, TL isn’t going to play for us again, so who cares?

Some do obviously.

16 minutes ago, Dave Mackay Ate My Hamster said:

On a quiet weekend - lawyers don't work at weekends, no matter how urgent we see our situation -this is how I see it, for what it's worth.

Positives.

1. We have at least 3 serious interested parties. Appleby's consortium, Mike Ashley and Steve Morgan.

2. The new lowest figure to take us over with the ground has risen to £40m and at least Appleby's consortium are prepared to pay that. Whether either of the other parties are prepared to pay more is debatable, but in the absence of higher bids, that may become the " take it or leave it " price.

3. Mike Ashley hasn't gone away even knowing this bid.

Negatives.

1. Big Mike is peeved at his perceived ostracism from the process, after his initial low-ball offer, and has initiated legal challenges. This will get messy and delay us even further.

2. Quantuma's slow expedition of the process is incurring disproportionate costs and they're increasing day by day. You can't blame MA for challenging those costs.

3. The EFL have started to stick their oar in, demanding consultation that they're  not legally entitled to.

I think a deal will be struck. When there are no bidders that's the time to be worried, but the s*** show that Mel has sown is costing us legal and administrative fees unwrangling it.

MA is unprepared to pay those costs in full, understandably, I just hope that those costs don't escalate to a point where they actually scupper any rescue plan.

Worrying times, but liquidation suits nobody, particularly Quantuma, who need a buyer to pay their fees. I'm not sure they'll get all of them though, as they're growing to disproportionate amounts compared to the value of the club.

While there's still 3 interested parties, we will get it over the line. But how, and what condition we end up in after the process is anyone's guess... ?

Have you not read Quantuma's press release?

23 minutes ago, Rammy03 said:

No I really don't think this would be the case. Tom has rebuilt his relationship with the fans. I think the most probable explanation is that he just didn't think about the whole CK takeover situation when he posted it. That or CK is not done with us yet.

It was probably arranged weeks ago before everything went belly up, Tom's not going to cancel because of that,they do have a private life.

26 minutes ago, Mick Brolly said:

That's a bit boring make something up 

Tom going to play in the MLS.