The Administration Thread

[G STAR RAM]

22 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I'm sure they have. But they will not name a PB unless and until the  EFL position is clear.. or the Court makes the EFL position clear for them. 

Well apparently none of the bids cater for payouts to Boro or WW, so not sure why they can't name the preferred bidder now?

[KirkIreton]

Having being trying to catch up with this thread, almost impossible due mis/information. The reality is:-

a) the takeover is being hampered by spurious claims,

b) those claims are from Middlesbrough/Wycombe,

c) Gibson is trying to suggest he is compromising a good claim,

 

d) reality is, he is a charlatan trying to make the best out of a bad claim by putting pressure on the administrators.

e) he panicked and got caught out and sent a less than professional PR message to the press. 
 

All the above and probably more,

[PistoldPete]

9 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well apparently none of the bids cater for payouts to Boro or WW, so not sure why they can't name the preferred bidder now?

Because they can't proceed yet. So what's the point of naming PB if you can't proceed? And risk putting off other bidders?  

[Ramslad1992]

50 minutes ago, Rev said:

Just having a quick glance through the Boro financials, they lost £30m upon their last promotion, presumably based on promotion bonuses being paid out.

Then banked a profit of £7m in their one season in the Prem, before being relegated and sustaining more losses as a result, including a eye watering £30m+ amount in the last reported year.

As these figures are very recent, and the £7m profit figure was inflated by the sale of David Nugent to Derby County, surely we can make the case that our actions actually saved Middlesbrough FC from further losses, based on their recent past performance?

Just give us £5m Gibson, and we'll call it quits.

 

 

Counter claim and take him for everything we can. Even taking off our rose tinted glasses we can all see Gibson has a malicious hatred towards us.

I won’t be happy until he’s living in a cardboard box and his ‘effin nuts’ wife has left him.

actually he can keep his wife.

[ilkleyram]

13 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well apparently none of the bids cater for payouts to Boro or WW, so not sure why they can't name the preferred bidder now?

Appears to be the EFL's point - name your PB and we’ll negotiate with them.

That is unless (very worse case scenario) there were/are no bidders - and the Binnies only put in a firm bid a few days ago - or the/any bids are contingent upon sorting out the mfc/WW situation or the administrators feel that if the mfc/WW situation is sorted out, preferably with them paid nothing, then the bids might increase in value and more bidders come forward to create an auction.

My bet (very much not itk) would be the last option - the administrators saying that they need the EFL to sort out their own mess first and the EFL saying it’s not their job. Arbitration would be a way through it if there’s no negotiation to be had and the EFL won’t get involved as judge and jury, but whether that can be done in quick time - hardly in mfc or ww's interests - remains to be seen. If it goes beyond mid March then we might run out of time and money.

It's going down to the wire. Probably.

[DCFC1388]

Only way forward is it going to arbitration.

Admins says the claims have no basis

Boro & Wycombe say they do

EFL say they cant make a decision either way

Now its a case of how long this arbitration process will take. SSN says next week, Nixon says could be 6 weeks. 

Once a decision is made on if the claims would mean that Boro & WW are football creditors we can move forward. If they are then im sure some (maybe all) interested parties will step back, if they arent then a PB will probably be named pretty quickly.

[We'll be back in 81]

2 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

Only way forward is it going to arbitration.

Admins says the claims have no basis

Boro & Wycombe say they do

EFL say they cant make a decision either way

Now its a case of how long this arbitration process will take. SSN says next week, Nixon says could be 6 weeks. 

Once a decision is made on if the claims would mean that Boro & WW are football creditors we can move forward. If they are then im sure some (maybe all) interested parties will step back, if they arent then a PB will probably be named pretty quickly.

I believe one of news outlets said the arbitration meeting would be next week.

[Tyler Durden]

41 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well apparently none of the bids cater for payouts to Boro or WW, so not sure why they can't name the preferred bidder now?

Guess it would be just a symbolic gesture and wouldn't do a jot in progressing matters. 

[Tyler Durden]

9 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

Only way forward is it going to arbitration.

Admins says the claims have no basis

Boro & Wycombe say they do

EFL say they cant make a decision either way

Now its a case of how long this arbitration process will take. SSN says next week, Nixon says could be 6 weeks. 

Once a decision is made on if the claims would mean that Boro & WW are football creditors we can move forward. If they are then im sure some (maybe all) interested parties will step back, if they arent then a PB will probably be named pretty quickly.

Wrong EFL don't want to make a decision either way.

Can't imagine the arbitration process will a take a week when one of the parties allegedly wants 45 million and we're prepared to offer them the square root of bugger all. Miles apart. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

Compromise solution:

Boro drop their claim against DCFC, however, to remove any lingering bad blood, outstanding matters are resolved with a.....

bare knuckle boxing match between Mel Morris and Steve Gibson.

Venue: Pride Park

Rules:

Figth club standard

Tickets:

£25 (£15 con) - All proceeds go to save DCFC funds.

Prize:

The satisfaction of the beaten man in front of you

Referee:

Stephen Pearce

 

[StaffsRam]

Just now, RadioactiveWaste said:

Compromise solution:

Boro **** off, and we forget how laughable they are.

[duncanjwitham]

4 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Wrong EFL don't want to make a decision either way.

Can't imagine the arbitration process will a take a week when one of the parties allegedly wants 45 million and we're prepared to offer them the square root of bugger all. Miles apart. 

It’s either going to take like 5 minutes to kick the claims out on procedural grounds (lack of jurisdiction, standing etc), or it’s going to drag on for days while they all argue about how on earth you figure out a sensible financial penalty.

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Gibsonomics

Beaten in Final = £180m

Beaten in Semi-Final = £90m

7th place = £45m

Reminds me of the old Visa adverts

"Telling him to duck off, priceless"

[Tyler Durden]

14 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

It’s either going to take like 5 minutes to kick the claims out on procedural grounds (lack of jurisdiction, standing etc), or it’s going to drag on for days while they all argue about how on earth you figure out a sensible financial penalty.

If the reported figures are correct (big if) then can't see this being resolved in days otherwise this could and should have been resolved now between the protagonists 

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, Tyler Durden said:

If the reported figures are correct (big if) then can't see this being resolved in days otherwise this could and should have been resolved now between the protagonists 

Like I said, there’s a decent chance that the majority of the claims get booted out on day 1. Pretty much the only thing the rules are clear on is that only the EFL can bring disciplinary claims, so that kills any arguments from ‘Boro over the stadium sale. They simply cannot bring disciplinary claims themselves, and we’ve already been cleared over that issue.  Likewise any other brand new claims they might bring.  It arguably defeats the Wycombe claim too, as their claim seems to be related to the timing and enforcement of an existing EFL disciplinary issue. Which again, they can’t argue because they don’t have jurisdiction.  If the panel agree that they can’t bring those claims, it cuts out all of the complicated arguments and we get a quick decision.

The only aspect where it might get interesting is ‘Boro arguing over compensation for the amortisation issue. Like it or not, we’ve been found guilty on that, so there’s possibly no quick get out there.  But even then, precedent seems to imply that you simply can’t link overspending to actual on-field results, so there’s possibly a quick decision there too.

I think it’s quite likely that if it goes in our favour, it will be a very quick decision. And if it doesn’t, it’s probably irrelevant anyway as any kind of substantial award means we just get liquidated.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 minute ago, duncanjwitham said:

 But even then, precedent seems to imply that you simply can’t link overspending to actual on-field results, so there’s possibly a quick decision there too.

I think it’s quite likely that if it goes in our favour, it will be a very quick decision. And if it doesn’t, it’s probably irrelevant anyway as any kind of substantial award means we just get liquidated.

I'd say mathematical logic drives you into a contradiction. 

Overspending suggests we should have spent less in aggregate and the inference is then that we would have amassed fewer points. 

But there is as a matter of fact the case of Boro spending MORE and amassing fewer points. 

So a logical contradiction..... 

[BriggRam]

37 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Compromise solution:

Boro drop their claim against DCFC, however, to remove any lingering bad blood, outstanding matters are resolved with a.....

bare knuckle boxing match between Mel Morris and Steve Gibson.

Venue: Pride Park

Rules:

Figth club standard

Tickets:

£25 (£15 con) - All proceeds go to save DCFC funds.

Prize:

The satisfaction of the beaten man in front of you

Referee:

Stephen Pearce

 

We'd never get to know the result.........1st rule of fight club

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, Van der MoodHoover said:

I'd say mathematical logic drives you into a contradiction. 

Overspending suggests we should have spent less in aggregate and the inference is then that we would have amassed fewer points. 

But there is as a matter of fact the case of Boro spending MORE and amassing fewer points. 

So a logical contradiction..... 

Thats the entire argument, really.  You simply can’t correlate spending to results, some teams will spend more and do better, some will spend more and do worse.  So the EFLs argument (by precedent in previous judgments at least) is that punishments are awarded for overspending, but they are intended to be punitive to the team that committed the breach, they aren’t supposed to be corrective (I.e to readjust the league to compensate for other teams).  So there is simply no way for ‘Boro to prove that our overspending cost them in league position.

[Ghost of Clough]

5 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I'd say mathematical logic drives you into a contradiction. 

Overspending suggests we should have spent less in aggregate and the inference is then that we would have amassed fewer points. 

But there is as a matter of fact the case of Boro spending MORE and amassing fewer points. 

So a logical contradiction..... 

Birmingham case. DC stated something along the lines of overspending likely had a positive impact on points earned.

[Tyler Durden]

6 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I'd say mathematical logic drives you into a contradiction. 

Overspending suggests we should have spent less in aggregate and the inference is then that we would have amassed fewer points. 

But there is as a matter of fact the case of Boro spending MORE and amassing fewer points. 

So a logical contradiction..... 

This is what concerns me about the burden of proof in a civil case, more often than not a team whom spends more than a rival will then accrue a greater points total which would then uphold Boros case.