atherstoneram

Maybe just me then, but I thought Millwall looked decent, very solid at the back with a lively top three. It is a very Gary Rowett team - not bothered about possession, doesn't really press until in their own half. They had our number last night and missed two other sitters in the first half, overloading through the middle and finding space behind the advanced full backs.
Second half they did what most teams do at 2-0 away, just sat and saw what we had, which was very little regards actually goal threat. Don't think their time wasting was anything worse than anyone else. Ref should have played for another three mins at the end, which was frustrating but shows we can't keep relying on doing something post-90 mins.
I don't think we have a squad capable of playing Sat-midweek. We looked knackered from the outset. No complaints from me, Millwall deserved their win.
Good to see CKR back, surprised Stearman wasn't used. Lawrence was missed. 

Played well second half but overall lack of attacking threat. Poor final balls (apart from last few minutes). Millwall looked organised and sharp. Deserved their win. Damage done first half. 

They weren't poor at all. They defended really well. Were we watching the same match?

Capable of scoring spectacular goals but gives the ball away an awful lot. He'd probably look better in a more dominant team but he's quite a luxury/risk for a team like us

Yes , seeing as we paid him for doing duck all for 10 years.

I hope you aren't implying he will find his vest in her pantry and her pants in his vestry.

You shoot from the hip. This is a hugely complex process with multiple parties involved. The Admins are not double glazing salesmen. 
 
The bidders will all know the basic financial status - what is owed to creditors, what the EFL will require to avoid a further penalty (or not) What the Admins will have negotiated - as a minimum that HMRC will accept - and where this figure impacts (or not ) the future points deduction. There will be indicative figures on MSD and their intentions, there will be details of what Mel wants, either for the stadium or the use of it. There will be the caveats in bids depending on likely league status, HMRC may have named a figure but is it instant or staged …. It isn’t open, shut or super clear. 
 
You buy a car, so simple yes ? is it a lease, is it HP, is it cash, is servicing included, what warranty, what delivery, alloys A/C ? And then you move into modern times .. are you paying the annual subscription for software updates ? Road tax included, back price ?
Are creditors, who will get a certain % in the pound ready to supply you on normal terms or do they want cash up front ? Are the bidders seeking clarity from the EFL over myriad issues such as issuing contracts to existing  and new players, all of which will be part of a bid so need to be examined by all parties. 
 
Railing at the Admins who have a task regulated by Law and with specific duties isn’t constructive or thoughtful. 

I have a feeling the club debts are a bridge too far hence there being no formal bids. 
Liquidation has been haunting us since that Ghoul Collymore tweeted we was going the same way as Bury. Expect the can to be firmly kicked down the road whilst all lines of credit are used up.

Is that true? I accept that there seems to have been long periods where nothing seems to have happened, but the issue with Boro seems to have gone away (maybe not down to the administrators, but progress all the same), they’ve got to the stage where they’ve asked for formal bids - that seems like progress too. One assumes they couldn’t have got to that point without them sorting out a myriad of issues behind the scenes that I don’t understand - that seems like progress.  
I understand the impatience, but nothing is gained by inaccuracy, hyperbole or exaggeration. 

But if nobody will offer what the administrators want to satisfy the creditors then you don't get a preferred bidder, it is not a case of sell at any price.

Give them a call and offer your assistance,for free of course,we don't want any more debt.

Give them a call and offer your assistance,for free of course,we don't want any more debt.

The simple answer is, if nobody is willing to pay the asking price then the club goes into liquidation. The ball (excuse the pun) is in the bidders hands,take it or leave it.

How can they name a preferred bidder in the way you put it, First off they have to work out the amount of debt and who it is owed to. The administrators job is to sort out financial status of the club and try if possible to get the clubs finances in balance, while they are doing that they are not interested in a preferred bidder, there may be no club to bid on if it can't be saved.

We all want that, including believe it or not, the Administrators.
There's a lot of debt and baggage with the Club, it was never going to be easy to sell.

I would imagine there has been a huge amount of progress made since the administrators walked through the door into a financial minefield. Why would the preferred bidder status be the easiest bit,it is not just a case of selling to the highest bidder. If the bidders don't meet the criteria for taking over the club i.e don't offer enough to buy the club or don't meet the terms for satisfying the creditors then their offer will be turned down.

The simple answer is, if nobody is willing to pay the asking price then the club goes into liquidation. The ball (excuse the pun) is in the bidders hands,take it or leave it.

That's not, and never has been, their brief. It's purely and simply to maximise the benefits to creditors.

Do we think Ashley would be told the amount and details of the other bids .
IMO the answer is no .
So waiting to see if you could get a Harold Steptoe deal is ridiculous 

i tell you something i may have made attempts to make it a more attractive club to buy
 
on the face of it they have done nothing to make us a better club to buy. there is zero clarity about anything and i would bet the admins are making a pretty penny out of this 

It seemed fairly clear to me from various reports in the media that more than one interested party wanted the Boro and Wycombe claims settled before they'd put in a formal offer - I've even seen it suggested that the Binnie bid specifically excluded responsibility for settling those claims. Naming a PB should only be done when any obvious provisos that they've referred to have been removed, otherwise we'll be naming PBs until the cows come home and doing so prematurely might also scare off interested parties who then take their interest elsewhere.
I know patience is a difficult virtue to master, but IME it beats impatience for results every time.

He still has to meet the requirements of the creditors,he may be hopeful of a bargain but there is a set amount to be paid so he won't get the club on the cheap,it's not like buying a high street chain who are in trouble.

Excuse my ignorance of financial law/practice but naming a PB doesn’t guarantee they will end up buying? Wigan had several before they were eventually sold, being named PB just gives the bidder a chance to scrutinise the books properly and to try and negotiate with the creditors, if say HMRC stay firm the PB can just walk away.

then we wait patiently until we do hear something?

Panic