Alan Nixon Breaks Silence on American Billionaire Bid

[Carnero]

2 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

That looks a plausible deal.

if that gets DCFC with the stadium, a long lease on the academy and a clean slate to keep the young players, it sounds fair to me. 

Yeah, it does rely on Mel Morris throwing in the stadium to make it a worthwhile deal to a buyer. I'm fairly confident that is what he'll do, but who can tell.

[i-Ram]

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think I had heard a rumour that 66% was the deal for Hmrc . Which I think is a very good deal for them all things considered.

You think you heard a rumour? 

[Tamworthram]

50 minutes ago, Curtains said:

I think Nixon knows something but hey the 55 million bid is more interesting.

 

But, unless I’m missing something, there is absolutely nothing new in this article. If Wycombe and Middlesbrough were to win then we’re really in the poo and a very dangerous precedent will have been set. As someone else said, NSS.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

Maybe the buyer has legal advice that Boro/Wycombe claims have little chance of winning and could put up a bond to cover failure for a “later see you in court” event post sale?

Edited December 8, 2021 by Dean (hick) Saunders

[BramcoteRam84]

15 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Yeah, it does rely on Mel Morris throwing in the stadium to make it a worthwhile deal to a buyer. I'm fairly confident that is what he'll do, but who can tell.

But he said he would do that from the outset. The administrators have consistently said the stadium is not a problem. But news outlets such as the Mail the Athletic etc have decided to ignore those statements as it doesn’t fit the certain liquidation narrative.

We will see and definitely having any confidence in Mel doing the right thing is dubious.

[BramcoteRam84]

6 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

Maybe the buyer has legal advice that Boro/Wycombe claims have little chance of winning and could put up a bond to cover failure for a “later see you in court” event post sale?

I don’t think Wycombe or Boro will get a single penny out of us. 

[Comrade 86]

So now we've got rumours about a rumour...

[hintonsboots]

10 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

But, unless I’m missing something, there is absolutely nothing new in this article. If Wycombe and Middlesbrough were to win then we’re really in the poo and a very dangerous precedent will have been set. As someone else said, NSS.

Nixon is being worked by Gibbo.

[Curtains]

15 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

But, unless I’m missing something, there is absolutely nothing new in this article. If Wycombe and Middlesbrough were to win then we’re really in the poo and a very dangerous precedent will have been set. As someone else said, NSS.

“Bleaker by the day “is a strange thing to say .

 Now Nixon may not know anything but we  have 106 pages with his name on the headline .

Edited December 8, 2021 by Curtains
Changed

[Sparkle]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

I will crowdfund it if Wycombe get a penny from us. It would then be a dead cert that we get money from qpr or villa if that is the precedent.

Villa haven’t been charged with anything so we couldn’t claim anything even though Middlesbrough who were crap finished a place behind us and want £45 million of us 

[FlyBritishMidland]

15 minutes ago, Curtains said:

“Bleaker by the day “is a strange thing to say .

 Now Nixon may not know anything but we  have 106 pages with his name on the headline .

But he hasn’t said that.  Some random journalist (who’s based in Paris according to LinkedIn) has written an entire article based on a nine word tweet.  And he spelt ‘precedent’ as ‘president’!!

[Tamworthram]

15 minutes ago, Curtains said:

“Bleaker by the day “is a strange thing to say .

 Now Nixon may not know anything but we  have 106 pages with his name on the headline .

But you have to agree there is nothing new in the article. It’s a bit unusual for a journalist to know something and only allude to by way of a cryptic comment.

[Rich84]

14 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Villa haven’t been charged with anything so we couldn’t claim anything even though Middlesbrough who were crap finished a place behind us and want £45 million of us 

Don't they have to be relegated so the EFL can slap their wrists, Whilst in the prem I didn't think  they had any recourse to be able to do anything 

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

Strange how the article, containing nothing new, ends with “Either way, the news is certainly not good for Derby County or their fans, with the future of the Rams looking bleaker by the day” when there isn’t any actual news.

Exactly, it's rehashed claptrap. The EFL themselves wouldn't determine the case anyway - under their rules it's supposed to be heard by an LAP. The two chancers have simply slapped a claim in hoping that the administrators will agree to put them on the list of official creditors or in the hope of frustrating any takeover. We've been over this endlessly. 

[Crewton]

19 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Villa haven’t been charged with anything so we couldn’t claim anything even though Middlesbrough who were crap finished a place behind us and want £45 million of us 

Wycombe are claiming even though we weren't hit with a PD for "cheating" until a few weeks ago. Their claim should be against the EFL tribunal that only fined us, but that hasn't stopped them claiming against us. 

[jono]

1 hour ago, SBW said:

I think you're burying your head in the sand.

 

If they agree a deal that makes them appear weak, that impacts any future club who owes them HMRC and negotiations upon what they receive.  Whatever deal they make with us, is what any club in the future will use as an example over what they will offer HMRC.  

 

We are the guinea pig for HMRC and other clubs.  I don't think they're going to show much leniency for the reasons above. 

I don’t think so at all. It just means having burned their fingers they will be less likely to let clubs run up arrears. They don’t want clubs or businesses to fail because wherever they are in the queue they will lose taxpayers money.

The only thing they will be doing now is try and maximise what the new owner offers them. They don’t want liquidation but they need to recover as much as they can. Can’t be a soft touch because they have a statutory duty, but they can’t be too hard because they know buyers will walk away and leave them with precious little. 
 

we aren’t an experiment, we are just one of many companies  in administration, something they deal with on a daily basis. The debt is unusually large (in respect of our turnover) because in football the wages do that, and because of covid there was, I suspect, a softly softly approach to arrears. You can bet that they have specialist teams looking very hard at arrears in other football clubs right now and will be trying to get cash in from them. 

[rebb1]

Another interesting comment re the £55 million bid was if there was crowd funding by DCFC fans of around £50,000, then there could be a 'fan on the board'

[OoooMarkWright]

I’m not concerned with the Boro or Wycombe lawsuits at all, they haven’t got a chance of being successful. It’s a ballache as it’s delaying the sale. HMRC is the biggie.

Hope Wycombe stay down. All being well we’ll smash them next season. 

[kevinhectoring]

17 hours ago, Sparkle said:

We most certainly do have a prove-able against QPR 

Sure they broke the rules   That doesn’t mean we can successfully sue them. The courts just won’t allow that, where would it end ?

Quite possible Kirchner will just shrug his shoulders and say ‘I’ll buy the club, bring it on Gibson”. And if he does that, Gibson and Couhig will drop their nasty law suits  

Edited December 8, 2021 by kevinhectoring

[Abu Derby]

We ought to sue Boro for selling us Mikel Beck in the late 1990’s; purportedly a striker, he demonstrated that he couldn’t hit a barn door from two yards. 
Whilst on the subject, I would also sue Charlton Athletic for selling us Derek Hales in 1976 - somebody who scored for fun whilst at Charlton but whilst here made the art of scoring as difficult as plaiting fog.