The Administration Thread

[vonwright]

There is obviously a risk in all this if it brings clarity that has to be good. We need to know what we 'owe' these clubs - whether that's £0 or £50m. And the EFL, and the clubs, need to know that too. Otherwise it's virtually impossible to find a buyer. 

At the moment Boro and Wycombe have completely undue influence over the process, which the EFL is enabling, whether through weakness ('We are just here to act as an honest broker! We love all the clubs equally! Please don't ask us who is right or wrong!') or something more sinister. We are basically being held to ransom ('We know you can't sell while our claims are unsettled, and if you don't sell you get liquidated, so make us an offer and this can all go away...') And that's intolerable, and unfair, if those claims have no merit.

Even if it is decided that we owe Boro and Wycombe £50m how much worse off are we? They could still accept a far lower sum if they were serious about not wanting to force us out of business. And if they didn't we'd get liquidated and they'd get nothing anyway. So at least their motivation would be clear.

Edited January 29, 2022 by vonwright

[PistoldPete]

4 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

If you're not a legal expert in football compensatory claims then you can't realistically assess their chances of success. So either you're close to that line of work or you're making assertions that you probably can't be sure about. A lot of the same arguments could have been made by west ham to deal with their dispute against Sheffield United. I agree that according to how I read it the claims are little more than a shakedown and are utterly spurious. However, the fact they aren't willing to settle for legal fees alone indicates Gibson at least thinks he's got a case, is in the right and as we all heard Couhig thinks the same. 

I just think mediation seems like a safer option; get them to a number that a buyer is willing to additionally stump up and get this business over with so the club can move on. Obviously I'd prefer not to give them a penny but the potential risk if I'm reading it right is that we'll be sunk if we lose and in any case that is a possibility. 

I only assessed the quantum of the loss, which is a probabilistic and financial thing not a legal thing. Gibson bookie odds ridiculous. . Playing devils advocate on the merits but even Couhig says nothing is 100% and he's right about that ..but if you were looking to settle out of court that should mean you would settle for less than 100% of a realistic loss ... again a probabilistic assessment 50/50 would be neutral and in my view flattering. And a realistic loss isn't £45 million or anything close especially given the credit risk.
 

[Eddie]

50 minutes ago, David said:

Think we need to remember that not all Derby fans will spend everyday on forums and social media, reading every article, journalists tweet, listening to podcasts, reading independent tribunal reports trying to make sense of it all.

Forest, Boro and Leeds fans won't have read into detail either, they just see Derby cheated, Derby bad, try not to engage with those as it's hard to distinguish between a troll and genuine lack of understanding of the situation. It's not something that can explained fully in a single tweet or Facebook post. 

Not the best person to explain myself either, far more intelligent people on here that will be far too intelligent to waste their time on them.

 

I just link them to Martin Samuel's brilliant 'Fantasy Football' article.

Then I have to go and have a shower because it's the Daily Mail.

[CornwallRam]

42 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I've not had the time to keep up to date with all the complexities of this so I apologise if I'm completely misreading this. Doesn't the fact they're moving down this route indicate at least one or all parties involved genuinely believe they've got a good claim? I think whilst it's painful, I'd rather go through mediation and try to figure out a number that would be acceptable but offer absolutely no apology. In any process such as this there is a chance we will lose and does anyone really think if we become liable for these claims that the buyers will still be waiting in the wings? 

My understanding is that to exit administration we have 2 options.

A CVA, where the existing company remains, but so would any claims against that company.

The second option is a restructuring plan, where the existing company is liquidated, but the club is transfered to a new company. With this option, no claims are carried forward. 

The EFL won't allow a restructuring plan as it is against their rules - the claims have to be dealt with by arbitration. 

No bidder will commit to the CVA option whilst the claims remain. My feeling is that they are worried by a floodgate being opened. Even if we have to pay £5m to Boro, what's to stop Rotherham, Bristol City, Cardiff etc all claiming that the points Derby took off them caused financial harm?

By getting the case heard quickly, everything should be resolved. If the claims are rejected, the administrators can then find the best deal available from either option.

If the claims succeed, the options become either liquidation or a non-EFL approved restructuring plan. I suspect the viability of the latter will depend on what tier we can play in. League 2 and it's on, Conference and it's 50/50. Any lower and we're Bury.

It seems to me that neither Middlesbrough nor Wycombe will ever see a penny  whichever way the decision goes.

Edited January 29, 2022 by CornwallRam

[Leeds Ram]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

I only assessed the quantum of the loss, which is a probabilistic and financial thing not a legal thing. Gibson bookie odds ridiculous. . Playing devils advocate on the merits but even Couhig says nothing is 100% and he's right about that ..but if you were looking to settle out of court that should mean you would settle for less than 100% of a realistic loss ... again a probabilistic assessment 50/50 would be neutral and in my view flattering. And a realistic loss isn't £45 million or anything close especially given the credit risk.
 

I am sure the administrators have tried mediation but to me that seems like the less risky route. If they can get Boro and Wycombe to a number that satisfies them and one of our preferred bidders is willing to pay. On the assessment of whether we'd win in court or not I don't think you nor I are qualified to make any claim on that, except that there is a chance we can lose. If Gibson is suing is for lost revenue then he can attempt to try and fit in claims of lost Premier league revenue, how their side is going to present that case none of us really know. I agree with you, according to my eye at least the claims are baseless and of a predatory nature but this still sounds like a potentially risky route to go down to me. 

[duncanjwitham]

1 minute ago, CornwallRam said:

Mt understanding is that to exit administration we have 2 options.

A CVA, where the existing company remains, but so would any claims against that company.

The second option is a restructuring plan, where the existing company is liquidated, but the club is transfered to a new company. With this option, no claims are carried forward. 

The EFL won't allow a restructuring plan as it is against their rules - the claims have to be dealt with by arbitration. 

No bidder will commit to the CVA option whilst the claims remain. My feeling is that they are worried by a floodgate being opened. Even if we have to pay £5m to Boro, what's to stop Rotherham, Bristol City, Cardiff etc all claiming that the points Derby took off them caused financial harm?

By getting the case heard quickly, everything should be resolved. If the claims are rejected, the administrators can then find the best deal available from either option.

If the claims succeed, the options become either liquidation or a non-EFL approved restructuring plan. I suspect the viability of the latter will depend on what tier we can play in. League 2 and it's on, Conference and it's 50/50. Any lower and we're Bury.

It seems to me that neither Middlesbrough nor Wycombe will ever see a penny  whichever way the decision goes.

I'm not sure that's right. It's tricky to be sure as we can't seem to find the actual EFL Insolvency Policy anywhere, but articles like this one:

https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/features/item/football-creditors-rule-is-the-football-league-s-new-insolvency-policy-a-step-in-the-right-direction

Indicate the requirement for a CVA has been dropped.

[Leeds Ram]

2 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

My understanding is that to exit administration we have 2 options.

A CVA, where the existing company remains, but so would any claims against that company.

The second option is a restructuring plan, where the existing company is liquidated, but the club is transfered to a new company. With this option, no claims are carried forward. 

The EFL won't allow a restructuring plan as it is against their rules - the claims have to be dealt with by arbitration. 

No bidder will commit to the CVA option whilst the claims remain. My feeling is that they are worried by a floodgate being opened. Even if we have to pay £5m to Boro, what's to stop Rotherham, Bristol City, Cardiff etc all claiming that the points Derby took off them caused financial harm?

By getting the case heard quickly, everything should be resolved. If the claims are rejected, the administrators can then find the best deal available from either option.

If the claims succeed, the options become either liquidation or a non-EFL approved restructuring plan. I suspect the viability of the latter will depend on what tier we can play in. League 2 and it's on, Conference and it's 50/50. Any lower and we're Bury.

It seems to me that neither Middlesbrough nor Wycombe will ever see a penny  whichever way the decision goes.

How much consolation will it be if we lose, face liquidation but those two don't get a penny? 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Just now, Leeds Ram said:

I am sure the administrators have tried mediation but to me that seems like the less risky route. If they can get Boro and Wycombe to a number that satisfies them and one of our preferred bidders is willing to pay. On the assessment of whether we'd win in court or not I don't think you nor I are qualified to make any claim on that, except that there is a chance we can lose. If Gibson is suing is for lost revenue then he can attempt to try and fit in claims of lost Premier league revenue, how their side is going to present that case none of us really know. I agree with you, according to my eye at least the claims are baseless and of a predatory nature but this still sounds like a potentially risky route to go down to me. 

How many other clubs are waiting in the wings using this as a test case though.  We will have more parasites wanting a piece if we lose . That's the concern.  We need to finish this off and pay nothing one way or the other.  There's  just not much time to do it.

[strawhillram]

This thread is more binge worthy than “Better call Saul” and more complicated than “Dark” both  on Netflix.

Edited January 29, 2022 by StrawHillRam

[Gritstone Tup]

14 minutes ago, vonwright said:

There is obviously a risk in all this if it brings clarity that has to be good. We need to know what we 'owe' these clubs - whether that's £0 or £50m. And the EFL, and the clubs, need to know that too. Otherwise it's virtually impossible to find a buyer. 

At the moment Boro and Wycombe have completely undue influence over the process, which the EFL is enabling, whether through weakness ('We are just here to act as an honest broker! We love all the clubs equally! Please don't ask us who is right or wrong!') or something more sinister. We are basically being held to ransom ('We know you can't sell while our claims are unsettled, and if you don't sell you get liquidated, so make us an offer and this can all go away...') And that's intolerable, and unfair, if those claims have no merit.

Even if it is decided that we owe Boro and Wycombe £50m how much worse off are we? They could still accept a far lower sum if they were serious about not wanting to force us out of business. And if they didn't we'd get liquidated and they'd get nothing anyway. So at least their motivation would be clear.

Hadn’t we already found a buyer who was prepared to deal with this privately!?

[Leeds Ram]

2 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

How many other clubs are waiting in the wings using this as a test case though.  We will have more parasites wanting a piece if we lose . That's the concern.  We need to finish this off and pay nothing one way or the other.  There's  just not much time to do it.

If Middlesbrough and Wycombe are basing their claims on the fact they were immediately behind us how could clubs multiple positions behind us make such claims?

[strawhillram]

3 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

If Middlesbrough and Wycombe are basing their claims on the fact they were immediately behind us how could clubs multiple positions behind us make such claims?

They get more money for a higher finish

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

2 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

If Middlesbrough and Wycombe are basing their claims on the fact they were immediately behind us how could clubs multiple positions behind us make such claims?

I'm thinking more Bristol and those relegated.

[Elwood P Dowd]

18 minutes ago, Gritstone Tup said:

If the court want to see evidence that they lost money as a result of losing their play off place then that is undoubtedly true!

The only thing up for doubt is how much.

But was losing their playoff place a directly linked to Derbys beaches of FFP, this would be a difficult one to prove.

[strawhillram]

1 minute ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

But was losing their playoff place a directly linked to Derbys beaches of FFP, this would be a difficult one to prove.

If we had  9 points deducted that season then yes

[WhiteHorseRam]

9 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

It seems to me that neither Middlesbrough nor Wycombe will ever see a penny  whichever way the decision goes.

While we are playing the counterfactual history game (which makes me feel slightly dirty as I am a historian) ...

Let's assume we are liquidated, what happens then?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing - 

We are obviously unable to fulfill our fixtures, so we immediately take one of the three relegation slots.

But then would all the points earned against us be deducted? I would have thought so. It's only fair to the teams who have outstanding fixtures against us. After all, we are rubbish and they could honestly claim they would have earned 1 or 3 pts off us.

So, off the top off my head Barnsley lose three of their precious points - could get them relegated.

Forest lose three points - could just drop them out of play-off contention.

Who would they both claim off?

 

[Indy]

3 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

But was losing their playoff place a directly linked to Derbys beaches of FFP, this would be a difficult one to prove.

And let’s not forget that an LAP has already ruled that our finances could not be said to have directly caused Boro’s failure in the case they brought wanting to be added as an interested party to the stadium valuation case. 

[Elwood P Dowd]

4 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

If we had  9 points deducted that season then yes

But only the EFL has the power to deduct points.

[Rambam]

Stop talking about the two parasites as if they have a claim. They don’t. 
EFL claim to represent all the league clubs. They cannot sit on the fence and allow their members to sue each other. There would be no end to it. 
I don’t know why they haven’t put it to the vote. ‘Should member clubs be able to sue each other, yes or no?’ 
That would put an end to it. 

[PistoldPete]

23 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I am sure the administrators have tried mediation but to me that seems like the less risky route. If they can get Boro and Wycombe to a number that satisfies them and one of our preferred bidders is willing to pay. On the assessment of whether we'd win in court or not I don't think you nor I are qualified to make any claim on that, except that there is a chance we can lose. If Gibson is suing is for lost revenue then he can attempt to try and fit in claims of lost Premier league revenue, how their side is going to present that case none of us really know. I agree with you, according to my eye at least the claims are baseless and of a predatory nature but this still sounds like a potentially risky route to go down to me. 

My reading of the court thing is only to deal with the insolvency/ football creditor thing .. the merits of the cases if they  survive that will still to be decided. It may be that a buyer may offer them a sweetener once the claims have been reduced by the insolvency court... it's more about horse trading then.  But we don't have enough information yet due to MPs gagging orders.