atherstoneram

Well if it’s a game of poker then it isn’t a regulation is it. Q will and are talking with the EFL, the bidders know they will have to deal with the EFL. The only thing Q have said is that we are legally obliged to keep the details of our bidders commercially private. The Bidders will doubtless make contact with you at the appropriate time. The parameters for retaining our golden share and payment of football creditors are laid out clearly. Other than the fit and proper persons test and the need to make a fixture list there isn’t anything else that is the EFL’s business. The ELF make the rules of the football league but they don’t make the rules on commercial and company law. Now the EFL could decide to turn nasty, vindictive, invent or reinterpret rules … but that isn’t Q’s fault or Derby’s fault. 
 
The EFL should be saying nothing more than : “we await a formal approach from the winning bidder and look forward to working with them as soon as possible.”  Or “we await Q’s confirmation that DCFC intend to start next season in administration (with suitable a suitable funding model) while the proposed takeover negotiations  progress. We stand ready to respond promptly and reasonably to their proposals” 

The previous company went into liquidation not the company that bought the club.

Some rubbish being posted on hear today it seems - TUPE allows an individual to be transferred to a new owner but the new owner cannot make that person accept terms that are of lower value if they don’t want to. They can offer lots of different packages but the individual doesn’t have to accept them if they don’t want to.

So what’s your point?  Wimbledon were bought and changed their name.
Wimbledon ceased to exist as a name and someone restarted a club in the lower tier of the pyramid.

I have just emailed Rick Parry, who has confirmed that the EFL will be keen for us to play ideally with as little as 7 players. If we remain competitive though the EFL has the right to enforce a League rule change whereby games can be played against Derby as long as we have no fewer than 5 players on the pitch. They already have 71 member votes held in support of the motion.

Marriot's was cancelled due to embargo, months before we went into admin.

Let's be honest. Can anyone blame them?
Loyalty in football is dead. They aren't Derby fans. They are employees.
Why would they want to be here when they know that next season is going to be hideous?
They will all have better offers elsewhere. Cannot blame them for wanting out.

Not at all, EFL can withdraw membership if they feel DCFC is unable to fulfil fixtures or pay staff later on in the season.

More like running out of security for loans.
Currently no income stream, and a negative credit score. I would imagine it's a huge challenge.

Because they'd be foolish not to while there is still a good chance that there will be no deal....

Until I hear from Q I doubt everything, have you forgotten Kirchner?

Not alone in that regard, are they Kev? 

 

The EFL were simply trying to distance themselves from the blame that would ensued if we had gone into liquidation.
 

Where is this information that Q have refused to allow EFL involvement? I’ve clearly missed something here. What involvement should the EFL have? Once there is an actual bid on the table they will be given the info to do their fit and proper checks, they’ll check the source of the money… all of which they did with CK and that didn’t work out. 
It still comes back to the point that the parties allegedly engaging with Quantuma have denied the EFL consent, NOT Quantuma themselves, Trevor Birch has said this himself. Where is the further evidence and info that confirms Q are obstructing the process with the EFL? 

So did CK ?

Come on 
Look he offered to pay the wages I am sure it will be done soon.☺️

I could offer to pay the wages, doesn’t mean I will.

It seems like you've come up with a solution and convinced yourself that it's guaranteed to produce the result you want, with no thought to the consequences if it doesn't go to plan. 
You're quite dangerously deciding that anyone not willing to comply with the request is not a serious bidder, as if it's black and white.
There probably aren't enough serious bidders at the table to risk laying down the law. If Q did as you suggest and ALL of them responded with a resounding "I'm out" we'd risk being liquidated within the week! 
(and no doubt there would a queue of people calling out what an awful decision it was, and how stupid the administrators must be to have done it) 

You dont know that mate so dont say these sort of thing.

....or both?

I don’t want to interrupt B4 but when you are finished looks like there may be some good news in the offing. 

I'm about in my own final strokes now.
Ooh Andy Babyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?

If you think the EFL could make the administrators come to a quicker outcome you live in a dream world.

What does that even achieve though?  The MSD loan will still be secured against it, so the buyer will still be scrabbling around for an extra £20m+ somewhere.  All it does is remove the option of someone strong-arming Morris into forking something out for it.
And if you're talking about taking the stadium, but still leaving the MSD loan in Morris's hands, there's no way MSD will allow that as they have a security charge against it.