kevinhectoring

Q have reduced us to a ramshackle club 

Q are having daily calls with EFL so hardly excluding them, and it is up to the bidders not to Q to decide at this stage what they want to share with EFL. FWIW I believe that our best hope now is local benefactors who are Rams fans. They are also the least likely to trust the EFL (as Rams fans , most of them anyway have seen how useless EFL are)  and I do not blame any such bidders (if they exist) in not wishing to share stuff with EFL.

   

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

This is a bizarre forum
it’s now obvious that our interests and the EFL’s interests are aligned. They want us free from all of this, because if we are liquidated they will get it in the neck.
We also know that EFl involvement in the M&A process will be to our benefit - because only serious bidders will be willing to allow the EFl to see negotiations, because if the EFl is involved they can give a real time response to bidder questions about the (non- transparent) EFl  insolvency rules; and because q have been turned inside out by bidders who are far savvier than they are and the EFL’s involvement will moderate behaviour. 
 
But still there is a vocal group of posters who support q in their attempt to exclude the EFL from the process 
Q’s position on this is spurious and confirms that - contrary to the club’s interests - they will throw the dice and seek to do a deal themselves, rather than be seen to seek EFL help.
They should simply be telling bidders: thank you for your interest, we will take you forward to bid stage but only when you have confirmed we may share all documentation with EFL. Genuine bidders should have no problem with this. We don’t want the rest   

This is a bizarre forum
it’s now obvious that our interests and the EFL’s interests are aligned. They want us free from all of this, because if we are liquidated they will get it in the neck.
We also know that EFl involvement in the M&A process will be to our benefit - because only serious bidders will be willing to allow the EFl to see negotiations, because if the EFl is involved they can give a real time response to bidder questions about the (non- transparent) EFl  insolvency rules; and because q have been turned inside out by bidders who are far savvier than they are and the EFL’s involvement will moderate behaviour. 
 
But still there is a vocal group of posters who support q in their attempt to exclude the EFL from the process 
Q’s position on this is spurious and confirms that - contrary to the club’s interests - they will throw the dice and seek to do a deal themselves, rather than be seen to seek EFL help.
They should simply be telling bidders: thank you for your interest, we will take you forward to bid stage but only when you have confirmed we may share all documentation with EFL. Genuine bidders should have no problem with this. We don’t want the rest   

You could not make it up. We’re in a crisis and the first substantive statement from our esteemed administrators for ages is not about the club but about ... them 

You could not make it up. We’re in a crisis and the first substantive statement from our esteemed administrators for ages is not about the club but about ... them 

This is a bizarre forum
it’s now obvious that our interests and the EFL’s interests are aligned. They want us free from all of this, because if we are liquidated they will get it in the neck.
We also know that EFl involvement in the M&A process will be to our benefit - because only serious bidders will be willing to allow the EFl to see negotiations, because if the EFl is involved they can give a real time response to bidder questions about the (non- transparent) EFl  insolvency rules; and because q have been turned inside out by bidders who are far savvier than they are and the EFL’s involvement will moderate behaviour. 
 
But still there is a vocal group of posters who support q in their attempt to exclude the EFL from the process 
Q’s position on this is spurious and confirms that - contrary to the club’s interests - they will throw the dice and seek to do a deal themselves, rather than be seen to seek EFL help.
They should simply be telling bidders: thank you for your interest, we will take you forward to bid stage but only when you have confirmed we may share all documentation with EFL. Genuine bidders should have no problem with this. We don’t want the rest   

You could not make it up. We’re in a crisis and the first substantive statement from our esteemed administrators for ages is not about the club but about ... them 

It's not the EFL this time, it's Q not being able to accept or want to accept low bids. Who stands to lose their money if there are only low bids - Mel and Q mostly!

like i saiud yesterday GDPR is a convinient wall to hide behind.
 
it could all be sorted in 5 mins by all parties giving transparency.
 
but no, they want it all done in pure secracy, for god knows what reason! my guess is because Q are useless and want as few people as possible to see that.

They could make it part of the NDA's being signed. After all they'll have to pass EFL's Fit & Proper test and so on further down the line.

Cobblers   Q should just tell bidders that if they want to stay in the frame then they need to consent to disclosure to EFL
Once again Q make the wrong call 

Cobblers   Q should just tell bidders that if they want to stay in the frame then they need to consent to disclosure to EFL
Once again Q make the wrong call 

Cobblers   Q should just tell bidders that if they want to stay in the frame then they need to consent to disclosure to EFL
Once again Q make the wrong call 

Cobblers   Q should just tell bidders that if they want to stay in the frame then they need to consent to disclosure to EFL
Once again Q make the wrong call 

I don’t think there’s any connection between exiting administration and the football creditors rule. In the same way that we can exit administration whilst paying unsecureds less than 25% 

I hope your future posts to me reflect your new found antipathy to libel.
Anyway, I think we can agree that big Mike can look after himself. I’d also settle for him as an owner, btw

Thanks for noticing.  But I don’t think the two views are incompatible. Yes Q should have acted earlier. Yes talk of the great escape (as today’s poster said) in Dec was only going to hurt us 

Can’t see why creditors want this to carry on. The liabilities increase day by day 

Thanks. To be honest I only looked at the fixed charge against the stadium as the rest of it is kind of meaningless given where we are now. The whole amount must be guaranteed (imho) because who on earth (and why on earth) would MSD make an unsecured loan to a company in administration? must be guaranteed. Don't you agree?
Ps. We already know that player's registrations move to the EFL in the event of liquidation, so have no residual value

Can’t see why creditors want this to carry on. The liabilities increase day by day 

Yes, but their objective is to avoid the crunch point.  They want to cling to the fallacy that CK bid was lowest allowable.  

They do seem slightly incompetent tbh

It’s like playing whack-a-mole, trying to debate with you. Thin air once again and I’ve lost my shilling