Jump to content

Abu Derby County


tinman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 10.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Its interesting to have the claim for 500k but is it likely thats money the potential new owners would not have given that Derby would need to see proof of available funds before consideration given towards a sale.

60 million is something where the English football league would probably need to see proof of available funds as well before they through any support behind the potential sale.

Derby are likely to have audited the potential buyer in case they was any money laundering involved before the potential sale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Asheville Ram said:

Details so far 

The case is Pinsent Masons LLP v. Bin Zayed Investments LLC, case number QB-2020-000744, in the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

International law firm Pinsent Masons LLP filed a breach of contract claim against Bin Zayed Investments LLC, case filed in February 2020 High Court Judgement in favour of Pinsent Masons in September 2020.

Be careful of what you wish for you might get it.

Thanks. I remember laughing at the constant court reports of winding up orders being pursued against Fawaz. In our case, I would rearrange the following words into a well known phrase or saying:

do bargepole not with a touch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bubbles said:

Good job picking out only the negative parts, rather than the part where it says the club remain confident that the last remaining obstacles will be cleared and the takeover will proceed as planned...

You mean Mel will ditch us to anyone that offers up five bob he's so desperate to get rid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RedSox said:

Mel won't sell us unless it's right for us - as well as him.  He strikes me as a very honourable man that has done so much good for the overall club and community that it would be totally out of character - unless there is something compelling him to sell regardless?.....

I agree with you, Mel’s character as an honourable man is not in question, however I wonder if he can be too trusting, I’m convinced he was tucked up by both Rowett and Rush. Consequently I worry this prospective buyer may have given the Blarney Stone a good seeing to but appears convincing enough to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends what the legal bill is for though doesn't it ? Pinsent Mason we're the legal advisers for Ashley when he took over the club, it could be that the dispute is around who is responsible for the bill as the deal collapsed.
 

High court judgements are not uncommon in the world of business, does anyone know why they refused to pay ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pearl Ram said:

I agree with you, Mel’s character as an honourable man is not in question, however I wonder if he can be too trusting, I’m convinced he was tucked up by both Rowett and Rush. Consequently I worry this prospective buyer may have given the Blarney Stone a good seeing to but appears convincing enough to him.

The man has made millions, he is an astute businessman, very very clever, don't be fooled about being to trusting. Money talks.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Barney1991 said:

30 million debt from the loan that the new owner will have to take on 

He could buy the shares for £90m if MM repays the debt. Or he could buy them for £60m if the buyer assumes the debt. Or something like that.   Does it matter which?  The tax planning will drive all that, as someone said before. 
Still excited about this deal despite all the doom gloom hysteria and baalocks posted here 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Oldben said:

Its interesting to have the claim for 500k but is it likely thats money the potential new owners would not have given that Derby would need to see proof of available funds before consideration given towards a sale.

60 million is something where the English football league would probably need to see proof of available funds as well before they through any support behind the potential sale.

Derby are likely to have audited the potential buyer in case they was any money laundering involved before the potential sale

The English Football League would accept a bag of magic beans as proof of funds and that is only if they do any checks at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rampage said:

In everyone's road in life there must be some bumps. It is how we respond that makes us what we are. However I think that I may need a new mechanic. COYR

This Covid season, the colossal number of off thread posts that even I, as a seasoned campaigner, thinking of turning professional have seen on here have been profoundly challenging. What with the 'Every thread is a Chris Martin thread',  'the geopolitical discussions' and the 'financial conundrum threads' etc. I feel that my best off the thread posts have been eclipsed and it is almost like the wheels have fallen off my journalistic vehicle. Hey ho, we move on, undaunted. COYR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, roboto said:

This sounds like the news I want to hear ?. Also, more realistic an explanation than some of the recent consiparcy theories out there.

I know Steve Nicholson gets a bad rep these days for not breaking news first or seemingly not knowing anything, but the truth is he is a great reporter and one of a dying breed. I believe he posts his information when allowed to in good faith with the club. He learnt his trade from Gerald Mortimer, the best Derby County reporter there ever was.

Steve is just unlucky that the Telegraph are behind the curve when it comes to delivering news in todays world of social media and people wanting all the news yesterday. The amount of bottom feeder "journalists" on twitter who copy and paste "news" and "rumours" to get their following and click rate up is very disruptive to the media industry.

Hi Steve, nice to meet you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

High court judgements are not uncommon in the world of business, does anyone know why they refused to pay ?

They’ve not refused they just haven’t got round to paying it yet. 

Monday was his cousins dogs birthday 

Tuesday was the 150th national holiday that year 

Wednesday was his sisters friends daughters first day back at school, so couldn’t possibly do it then 

Thursday was the 151st national holiday that year 

He doesn’t work Fridays 

Or Saturdays 

He was going to send it Sunday but the bank was closed. .  .

Cant you see it’s not his fault!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read The Athletic article this morning and other than this Unpaid bill from the Lawyers for the failed Newcastle takeover, what new information has come to light? 
 

The “several sources” telling the Athletic the takeover has stalled all could be off, the source could be this thread. I mean ducking hell at 227 pages there is enough material!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Derbados said:

Monday was his cousins dogs birthday 

Tuesday was the 150th national holiday that year 

Wednesday was his sisters friends daughters first day back at school, so couldn’t possibly do it then 

Thursday was the 151st national holiday that year 

He doesn’t work Fridays 

Or Saturdays 

He was going to send it Sunday but the bank was closed. .  .

You are Craig David and I claim my £5

fill me in craig david GIF by Romy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...