Jump to content

Alan Nixon Breaks Silence on Scottish/Malaysian Billionaire Bid


Kernow

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:

If it is on the stadium it won't be the admins because they don't own it. Hope one of the groups in contact with the admins ask them if they know about it and the reasons behind it. All u can think of is its Mel and he needs some cash urgently

If the admins need more cash, they’d talk to MSD to work out the most sensible way to fund it. MSD lending to 202 with no guarantee from the club may well be the best option. They’d do it on the basis the cash will be sent on to the club. Lending with no club guarantee may be the best way to avoid destabilising discussions with HMRC and other creditors.  
Seems unlikely they would do this to get cash to MM but who knows 

Anyway I’d guess it is not a sign of anything out of the ordinary  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Nope. 

He's described some vague idea is all.

But neither does he have previous in football for his actions to be judged against like this pair. 

I haven’t bothered to read up on these two guys yet so, I can’t comment, but I thought you were questioning their motivation rather than their suitability in your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, I know nuffin said:

If it is on the stadium it won't be the admins because they don't own it. Hope one of the groups in contact with the admins ask them if they know about it and the reasons behind it. All u can think of is its Mel and he needs some cash urgently

absolutely right the admins can't borrow against the stadium.  But MSD and the admins are hand in glove and there's no way MSD would do something like that without the admins supporting it   And I think the admins would support it only if the cash was going to the club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Heisenberg said:

 

How on earth can Nixon claim to knoiw that Kirchner is the 'only one in currently'? - Kirchner and the Easdales were the only ones to have made their interest public, but that doesn't mean that there aren't more discrete parties also interested. Crap reporting with made up 'facts' yet again from Nixon.....

Edited by Gaspode
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

How on earth can Nixon claim to knoiw that Kirchner is the 'only one in currently'? - Kirchner and the Easdales were the only ones to have made their interest public, but that doesn't mean that there aren't more discrete parties also interested. Crap reporting with made up 'facts' yet again from Nixon.....

He has kinda been asked that question on Twitter......but yet to reply. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone on Twitter (Peterborough Utd fan I think) was opining that the Easdale's should come look at them, to which a Rangers fan replied:

"......got involved after our financial demise in 2012, ripped millions out of us. They are fairly well known gangsters in Glasgow tbh, everyone knows what they are. Horrible people. You wouldn't want them anywhere near your club!"

Obviously their opinion not mine just to caveat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The positive thing about this is that the administrators are obviously pushing any prospective buyers to get on with it.

They mean business, and want to ensure we are sold as a going concern, which pleases me.

That also still leaves Kirchner as our "millionaire in the hand" rather than "two billionaires in the bush"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

Kirchner was one of 3 bidders wasn't he?.

I just hope the delay/adjournment with EFL isn't putting people off.

Obviously my cynical perception is that the EFL has delayed this to negatively impact our chances of getting a buyer or at least push it nicely into the January transfer window and extend our embargo accordingly.  Is it a coincidence the Easdales have pulled out due to unacceptable timelines just as this is announced.   I can't see a reason for the adjournment provided anywhere, and the less than helpful EFL statement is, well, less than helpful.  

Anyone know why it's adjourned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BucksRam said:

Obviously my cynical perception is that the EFL has delayed this to negatively impact our chances of getting a buyer or at least push it nicely into the January transfer window and extend our embargo accordingly.  Is it a coincidence the Easdales have pulled out due to unacceptable timelines just as this is announced.   I can't see a reason for the adjournment provided anywhere, and the less than helpful EFL statement is, well, less than helpful.  

Anyone know why it's adjourned?

My thoughts exactly. It looks as if the EFL is trying to extend the process to prevent a resolution and make it impossible for the administrators to sell the club. If they had the slightest intention of trying to support a member club, they would expedite the process so another obstacle is removed, thereby helping the club survive as a going concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BucksRam said:

Obviously my cynical perception is that the EFL has delayed this to negatively impact our chances of getting a buyer or at least push it nicely into the January transfer window and extend our embargo accordingly.  Is it a coincidence the Easdales have pulled out due to unacceptable timelines just as this is announced.   I can't see a reason for the adjournment provided anywhere, and the less than helpful EFL statement is, well, less than helpful.  

Anyone know why it's adjourned?

I'm guessing the timeline is being set by the Adminstrators - the Bros Easdeale seem to have appeared late-ish and would possibly struggle to get the finance in place if they're intending to borrow (which was inferred in other Twitter posts etc).

I don't see this as a bad thing, given other reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I'm guessing the timeline is being set by the Adminstrators - the Bros Easdeale seem to have appeared late-ish and would possibly struggle to get the finance in place if they're intending to borrow (which was inferred in other Twitter posts etc).

I don't see this as a bad thing, given other reports.

Yep, had an uneasy feeling about the Easdale's backed by unknown Malaysian cash.

Kirchner or Appleby's group i'm perfectly comfortable with.

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...