Jump to content

El DerbyCo


roboto

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Can't remember, did Erik say 'cash or cheque' previously then?!

Did these people not listen to the interview or did they just not understand what was being said?

My take on it was that he wants the loan from MSD transferring from Gellaw to him personally (or whatever vehicle he is buying the club in) that way, rather than using the money to clear the MSD loan it can be used for funding the club instead.

I am not sure how that equates to a leveraged buyout?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Not sure Ed Dawes logic stacks up here. How is this sort of interview being conducted on a nationally broadcasted station brushing it under the carpet compared to doing it on a locally broadcasted station that gets about 8 listeners?

BuT HeS mATeS WiTH MeLVyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Any comments from all of the people that have decided the guy is a 'chancer' based on completely factually incorrect information in the Daily Mail now?

The Daily Mail should probably be applauded. Not for the first time, they have forced the issue with these kinds of stories and a "horse's mouth" interview follows soon after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Can understand Ed Dawes reacting the way he did when he and his radio Derby colleagues are being completely trashed publicly and unfairly 

Agreed.

In the example shown in this thread the guy didn't just question why radio Derby hadn't got this interview, I'm sure the reply would've been far more civil if he did, but specifically called out Dawes and his colleagues for "poor journalism". I don't care who you are, if you choose to frame a question in this aggressive manner you'll likely receive a reply in kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Anon said:

Agreed.

In the example shown in this thread the guy didn't just question why radio Derby hadn't got this interview, I'm sure the reply would've been far more civil if he did, but specifically called out Dawes and his colleagues for "poor journalism". I don't care who you are, if you choose to frame a question in this aggressive manner you'll likely receive a reply in kind.

Alonso or Mel are less likely to talk to good journalists than to mou

Getting the big interview might be everything in the entertainment world but getting the big story, or rather the truth of the big story is what makes good journalism. On that front I have far more faith in Dawes and Nickleson than talksport or the mail.

 

Edited by RadioactiveWaste
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

The Daily Mail should probably be applauded. Not for the first time, they have forced the issue with these kinds of stories and a "horse's mouth" interview follows soon after.

I don't think any media outlet should be applauded for publishing factually incorrect information.

They have not really forced the issue, they have forced someone to have to come out and defend themselves against their made up story, and in the meantime many fans have now decided this guy is a 'chancer' on the back of this story.

Edited by G STAR RAM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Yes, but that's just 'incorrect' usage of words isn't it. How much would it cost the club to buy back the stadium and the mortgage on the Academy then?

And if his funding is not a 'debt' how come he's having such problems selling the club?

to buy back the ground?  £80m the size of the loan which will be forgiven, straight swap.  I mentioned this a few weeks back, I believe that accountancy practices changed last year whereby revaluation reserves were abandoned (subject to confirmation from a trained accountant) .  Now whether the EFL would accept this arrangement is another matter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rev said:

I was referring to the amount Cornwall posted earlier in the thread.

It would seem sensible to loan the club the club money, rather than inject more equity into something you've agreed to sell.

no idea, none of us have seen the accounts, repayable funding has never been part of his MO but I don't know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ollycutts1982 said:

Brief overview of what was said. 
 

- Not true he’s pulling out, it’s going ahead

- Not refinancing stadium, wants it put in his name so he can use it to buy players 

- If relegated he still wants it go through. 
 

Simon Jordan -

— Erik Alonso has significant financial means

- Switching debt from club to Alonso makes sense, it frees up cast to buy players

- Doesn’t think there’s any worry, other than winning Saturday

- If he was in Alonso’s position he would renegotiate if relegated, he agreed a price for a championship club not a league one. 

How does putting the stadium in his name but not refinancing it ensure he can buy players with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

We’ll know when we see the accounts. But hasn’t he borrowed money in the company that owns the stadium.  And paid that money to the club to cover cash shortfalls, so reducing the 80m debt due to the club

no idea what the cashflow looks like, could have repaid all, some or none of the debt due

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

The Daily Mail should probably be applauded. Not for the first time, they have forced the issue with these kinds of stories and a "horse's mouth" interview follows soon after.

Do you feel this way despite Ed Dawes saying he had heard the same thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...