The Administration Thread

[Andicis]

Just now, PistoldPete said:

Rather a big one that one.

Think where we would be if our team on a shoestring budget hadn't been robbed by a team in breach of FFP in a final. And QPR got almost no punishment.

[Ram-Alf]

HELP!

I've just read the EFL statement from last night, From an old mans perspective, It looks like the EFL are slightly back tracking on the War with us, It looks to me that those in power at the EFL might have bitten off more they can chew.

Can I be hopefull or just bluster from them?

[Caerphilly Ram]

Curtis spoke really well as he always does, he made reference to the EFL saying they’ll do whatever they can to help and called it “laughable”….what a legend he is 

[StaffsRam]

1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

HELP!

I've just read the EFL statement from last night, From an old mans perspective, It looks like the EFL are slightly back tracking on the War with us, It looks to me that those in power at the EFL might have bitten off more they can chew.

Can I be hopefull or just bluster from them?

Bit of both. I think the main take aways are things not said; ie why are you putting out statements at 10pm (desperate)? The fact that they feel the need to profess that they have no vendetta against us (I think they doth protest too much). 
 

They are clearly rattled and in full backtrack/obfuscate/ar*e-cover mode.

[Duracell]

2 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

HELP!

I've just read the EFL statement from last night, From an old mans perspective, It looks like the EFL are slightly back tracking on the War with us, It looks to me that those in power at the EFL might have bitten off more they can chew.

Can I be hopefull or just bluster from them?

I don't think the EFL board is intelligent or competent enough to think at anything like this level.

I think they're so out of touch, they won't really grasp the severity of the situation until it's too late. 

There is absolutely no urgency at all. The statement we needed was one of clarity, the sort that would buy us every single second to get a takeover done, which would keep a founder member alive, a community with its heart still beating and also a chance that our creditors will actually be paid.

We got none of that. What we got only muddied the waters further. I think the EFL genuinely believe they were helping the situation with that statement, which is, in some ways, an even scarier prospect than the narrative that they are sinisterly plotting against us.

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

I can feel a good positive day coming along. 

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Duracell said:

I don't think the EFL board is intelligent or competent enough to think at anything like this level.

I think they're so out of touch, they won't really grasp the severity of the situation until it's too late. 

There is absolutely no urgency at all. The statement we needed was one of clarity, the sort that would buy us every single second to get a takeover done, which would keep a founder member alive, a community with its heart still beating and also a chance that our creditors will actually be paid.

We got none of that. What we got only muddied the waters further. I think the EFL genuinely believe they were helping the situation with that statement, which is, in some ways, an even scarier prospect than the narrative that they are sinisterly plotting against us.

This is the main problem. They seem to be interpreting their own 'flexible' regulations based on being 'bears of very little brain' and the situations they are dealing with are often very complex indeed.

[Nishfan]

9 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

Sounds like a good plot for Pride 2, the sequel.

We haven’t had many appearances from the corner flag lately 

 

perhaps been busy auditioning for the part 

 

(I know it may not be the time for jokes but hysteria may be setting in. I was okay until the EFL statement, couldn’t sleep after that) 

Edited January 18, 2022 by Nishfan

[duncanjwitham]

4 minutes ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

I can feel a good positive day coming along. 

Don't worry mate, it will pass soon ?

[Eatonram]

just sent the email below to Parry. Would someone in Margaret Beckett constituency fend this to her. I think she is most likely to run with this. 
 

Dear Mr Parry

Would you be kind enough to explain how para 4 on the link below does not conflict the EFL in its dealings between DCFC and Middlesbrough FC. 

 

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/c9fc5dceaa7f4b62b81dca0b9e2f7c9d/2020.10.26---decision-on-mfc-redaction.pdf

 

As you will see and no doubt be aware it clearly states that sn agreement was reached between the EFL and MFC in relation to future claims against DCFC. 

 

I would greatly appreciate your view on this in relation to the current situation. 

 

Regards

 

Nick ********
 

Sent from my iPhone

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

Do you know what, this just shows what fan power can do. 

We now don't stop until we have the resolution we want.

[Crewton]

25 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Yes, 2013/14. 

Including Leicester's overspending that they tried to disguise with a £10M circular deal for "Image & Marketing Rights for the Far East" using a £1 company set up by the son & daughter of Sir Dave Richards (ex-Chairman of the PL and the Football Foundation) who was a close friend of the late Leicester owner, Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha. This allowed the Leicester owner to effectively invest, through a £1 SPV, an additional £10M that would have meant they'd pass FFP checks if it hadn't been spotted. They eventually accepted a fine from the EFL who, staggeringly, accepted that there "hadn't been an intention to deceive". Quite how this has been accepted as anything other than overt fraud, I'll never know. The links below explain all this for anyone who is unaware and wants to find out. 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/11/leicester-city-finances-football-league-financial-fair-play-investigation

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6401879/Sir-Dave-Richards-tells-sad-loss-Vichai-Srivaddhanaprabha.html

Everything that Leicester have achieved since that promotion was facilitated by cheating. Who says crime doesn't pay?

 

[ptt1]

The middleborough claim is based entirely on an estimate of the lost revenue by Gibson and his band of merry men. He seems to have missed the fact that against that revenue there would be considerable increase in cost relating to playing in and competing with other teams in the premier league. The latest table I can find is for 18/19. 11 teams lost money and this was pre covid. The teams comparable to boro Watford profit £10m Burnley £5m palace £3m. Brighton lost£19m sheff utd lost £21m Bournemouth lost £32m Norwich lost £39m. So if this claim is about money you have to take net benefit in to account and the net benefit is probably £0 or even a loss.

[Sparkle]

43 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

2014/15
Middlesbrough vs Bournemouth - Bournemouth failed 14/15 FFP, Middlesbrough missed out on autos

2015/16
Ipswich and Cardiff vs Derby and Sheff Weds - DCFC and SWFC failed periods comprising of the 15/16 season, taking playoff places off Ipswich and Cardiff

2016/17
Leeds vs Sheff Weds - SWFC failed a period comprising of the 16/17 season with Leeds missing out on the playoffs
Blackburn vs Birmingham - BCFC failed a period comprising of the 16/17 season, finishing the season just 2 points above Backburn who were relegated

2017/18
Barnsley and Burton vs Reading and Birmingham - Reading and Birmingham failed periods comprising of the 17/18 season, finishing 3 and 5 points above the relegated sides
Preston vs Derby - DCFC failed a period comprising of the 17/18 season, taking a playoff place off Preston

2018/19
Rotherham vs Reading - Reading failed a period comprising of the 18/19 season, finishing 7 points above relegated Rotherham
Bristol vs Derby - DCFC failed a period comprising of the 18/19 season, taking a playoff place off Bristol City

2020/21
Sheff Weds vs Derby - If Derby's points deduction was applied to 20/21, SWFC would have stayed up due to DCFC not putting the effort in to stay up on the final day 

 

Have I missed any?

I have to mention the ones who are yet to be convicted who sit in the premiership - then again quite clearly plenty of teams are going to be point deduction territory this season - if we go down and someone else should be taking a 6 point hit for example we can obviously claim money of them if that affected placings - it’s a farce 

[May Contain Nuts]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

Well they are contingent claims and the extortionists have 6 years to launch them. Until now the EFL has not been willing to agree that they are so remote they can be ignored. But the signs are that this may be changing and that they will give their own view on the merits. We are getting to them

so far as Ashley is concerned, he’s clearly not willing to take the risk. Not surprising - he made a big error with his diligence when he bought the Toon and he’ll never forget that, he doesn’t enjoy looking foolish. And the EFL’s position on ‘compressing’ footie claims will have made him all the more wary. I don’t think the EFL will change their position on that in time to help us -  I think this will be resolved by other means 

Indeed, but that only serves to show you that they had it in their power all along to hurry the claims along and to assist in making the claims go away.  More power to do so than the administrators, I sense... but they spin it as our inaction rather than theirs, because of course they do. Same as they spun it as us not applying for the Covid loan.

What the EFL were unwilling to do is stick their neck on the line and and use their self-appointed powers of 'discretion on how to deal with any particular club' and 'right to review and amend the procedures for each individual case' (or any of the rules they leave so open to interpretation and then use to punish clubs for interpreting them differently!) to tell Boro and Wycombe to back off, for fear of the legal repercussions.

However they were happy to use these powers against statute & insolvency laws to reject a perfectly legal proposition put forward by the administrators (albeit one which sees us lose 15 points next season) by saying that we can do it... but they'll take away our golden share if we do!

So they're happy to 'follow their regulations'  to put a roadblock infront of us, but too scared to do use the same method to help us, because they don't want to upset Steve Gibson. Double standards? Victimisation? Vendetta? Whatever you call it, it's piss weak governance, only looking after themselves and not acting in the best interests of the league.

On our actual exit plan - I've said all along that nobody would buy the club if they had even one doubt that the claims against us could lead to a large payout in future, and this still holds true.

The proposal that the EFL rejected therefore must have had the backing of Ashley or another bidder (or gone at least some part of the way to assuaging their fears) or else the admins wouldn't have gone into that meeting giving expecting it to be rubber stamped, the PB named and our ability to retain and add players intact.

If all these discussions can lead to the claims being expeditiously resolved now that the EFL aren't simply pretending to ignore their existence then hopefully, ideally we don't need to go down the restructuring route at all now. I'm not holding my breath though, I think we're pretty screwed next season too tbh

Edited January 18, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[Sparkle]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

I agree with the last sentence. 

 

EFl were saying only last few days they couldn't intervene in Boro and Wycombe issue. Now it seems they are. What took them so long? 

I don't agree that anyone can jus make any old claims up. The sort of thing brings football into disrepute. The Wycombe guy if anything is worse than Gibson which is saying something. 

If Nixon is to be believed then the Middlesbrough claim has been in a year and only now the EFL are looking into it and actually reading it and asking questions now if this is true it’s probably the most staggering level of incompetence or corruption you could imagine especially when the Middlesbrough chief executive sits on the EFL board.

[Gritstone Tup]

The EFL have made it clear that Boro Wycombe situation does not fall under there remit and is a matter for a court of law.

The problem for dcfc is that we don’t have a representative to fight and win this case. MM should have dealt with this a year ago and there isn’t a serious enough bidder to take it on.

The administrators aren’t here to represent dcfc but are here for the creditors principally. It’s nonsense, easily sorted in court I’m sure, by a buyer but we don’t have one.

[IslandExile]

1 hour ago, DanDan said:

There was a very brief segment on ITV news this morning saying the admins will release a statement today and funding had been sorted for the season. Can’t find it anywhere, don’t know if anyone else heard it or if it’s been mentioned on here ?‍♂️

Any more on this or was it merely a mis-interpretation of the EFL statement from last night?

[The Baron]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

"As much as he loathes me Rick Parry attempting to put Derby out of business, why would he do that?"

Well if he is someone who loathes people so much maybe he has  similarly vindictive streak towards football clubs? EFL is backed into a corner, an  last night's statement jus shows how desperate they are . He is plainly a very arrogant man who does not like backing down. But EFL are the only thing stopping Derby from announcing the preferred bidder. And there is no proper reason why EFL should stop Derby from doing that. Yet they are.       

Mel could come to the rescue, put the stadium co into administration and underwrite the claims from Boro and Wycombe. If those claims are as certain to fail as some believe then it won't cost MM much,  Quantuma have a much more attractive package to sell to a PB, at a price which will increase the chances of unsecured creditors getting a 25% payout and therefore avoiding a further points penalty, which again helps in terms of the price. 

Edited January 18, 2022 by The Baron

[Indy]

11 minutes ago, ptt1 said:

The middleborough claim is based entirely on an estimate of the lost revenue by Gibson and his band of merry men. He seems to have missed the fact that against that revenue there would be considerable increase in cost relating to playing in and competing with other teams in the premier league. The latest table I can find is for 18/19. 11 teams lost money and this was pre covid. The teams comparable to boro Watford profit £10m Burnley £5m palace £3m. Brighton lost£19m sheff utd lost £21m Bournemouth lost £32m Norwich lost £39m. So if this claim is about money you have to take net benefit in to account and the net benefit is probably £0 or even a loss.

So what you’re saying is that if Boro had their cast iron place in the Premier League they would have lost millions of pounds? Perhaps we should decide a nominal figure and apply that loss retrospectively to their accounts. It makes as much sense as the argument against us.