Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

Alan Nixon

@reluctantnicko

·

12h

Nothing on Wycombe yet …

Quote Tweet

Dan

@_D_A_N__

· 12h

Replying to @reluctantnicko

Don’t you think they are clear?

1

1

Alan Nixon

@reluctantnicko

·

12h

Presuming the obstacles are actually clear … there should be no reason why a bidder doesn’t commit and put in the cash

Quote Tweet

Dan

@_D_A_N__

· 12h

Replying to @reluctantnicko

But surely they would be in it if they didn’t know that or want that? Fund it straight away, there’s a chance of getting the embargo lifted and a few faces in. Real chance of staying up. Surely that’s worth trying for?

1

1

3

Alan Nixon

@reluctantnicko

·

12h

That’s the target … but whoever gets picked will need to be willing to fund it immediately …

Quote Tweet

Dan

@_D_A_N__

· 12h

Replying to @reluctantnicko

Admins said a few days ago that they will be naming a PB in 7 days and talking with EFL about starting exiting administration in 10 days so they must be confident?

3

2

Alan Nixon

@reluctantnicko

·

12h

EFL to review on March 1 was the plan

Quote Tweet

Gary

@Gary43GL

· 12

Replying to @reluctantnicko

So what happens 28th February? Do Derby get another extension? Stinks!

3

4

Alan Nixon

@reluctantnicko

·

18h

Funds run out before that. Will need a loan or a deposit pretty soon.

Quote Tweet

Mark Watson

@M_Watson__

· 18h

Replying to @TheSunFootball and @relucta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this for real?  All the turmoil and legal wrangling, heartache for supporters, people losing their jobs etc etc and the EFL say 'yes crack on Mel'.

Would Mel Morris pass the Owners’ & Directors’ Test?

* Yes – he has only been involved in 1 football club insolvency. The ruling is 2 failures to fail the test.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DCFC27 said:

Any prospective buyer isn’t likely to buy us with the knowledge of another heavy points deduction. They will want to make sure the deal is just enough to buy us without. Otherwise they will likely be buying a league 2 club, which financially wouldn’t make sense. 

Ah, but back in January when we thought we were going to name a PB and the EFL had other ideas, we were going to be using the cross class cram down method to remove Middlesbrough & Wycombe from the equation - that route would have meant us getting the -15 next season so evidently there was a bidder who was willing to accept that.

Edited by Coconut's Beard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

Is this for real?  All the turmoil and legal wrangling, heartache for supporters, people losing their jobs etc etc and the EFL say 'yes crack on Mel'.

Would Mel Morris pass the Owners’ & Directors’ Test?

* Yes – he has only been involved in 1 football club insolvency. The ruling is 2 failures to fail the test.

 

I guess it depends what they mean by "involved in".  I assume Roy McFarland has a strike against him now, being on the board of a club that's gone into admin?  I'm not sure any of us think he should be banned from being involved with the club in the future, do we?  But technically, he's in the same position as Stephen Pearce, as a board member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

It's what the administrators said would be the required non- refundable deposit upon being named preferred bidder way back when the world was young and dark fruits ram was on ribena....

But as the amount needed to keep us funded, before we sold players and had big crowds...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Curtains said:

Yes I mentioned CVA a while ago but had to ask Moodhoover what it implied to the bidders. 
I would have preferred the other route though 

I think a restructuring plan was required in order to cram down Gibbo. So assuming Couhig is sorted I’d guess they now do whichever is simpler and more certain. I’d think the outcome is the same, 25% to unsecureds, HMRC gets what it agrees and 100% to FCs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

I guess it depends what they mean by "involved in".  I assume Roy McFarland has a strike against him now, being on the board of a club that's gone into admin?  I'm not sure any of us think he should be banned from being involved with the club in the future, do we?  But technically, he's in the same position as Stephen Pearce, as a board member.

Anyone who accepts a role as a director of a company needs to ensure they are at all times on board with the decisions being taken, and the general direction of travel. So yes, Roy Mac has to take some responsibility for the plight we are in, and should not be excluded from ‘blame’ or being on the EFL one strike list. He could have resigned at any time if he was uncomfortable with Morris’s plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Anyone who accepts a role as a director of a company needs to ensure they are at all times on board with the decisions being taken, and the general direction of travel. So yes, Roy Mac has to take some responsibility for the plight we are in, and should not be excluded from ‘blame’ or being on the EFL one strike list. He could have resigned at any time if he was uncomfortable with Morris’s plans.

Very harsh Iram. 

he was in an honorary position and I doubt he had much idea what was going on . 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Very harsh Iram. 

he was in an honorary position and I doubt he had much idea what was going on . 
 

Well he bloody well should have done. That excuse is like a parent saying they aren't liable for the damage done by their tearaway teenager.

 

All that said, company directors (in the UK at least), get away with murder! Fred "the Shred" Goodwin being one of the worst examples.

Edited by Grumpy Git
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

Well he bloody well should have done. That excuse is like a parent saying they aren't liable for the damage done by their tearaway teenager.

If it was an honorary membership I doubt he would have been privy to those discussions and doubt there will be a strike against his name at all. He wouldn’t have any power or role other than being an ambassador more than anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Anyone who accepts a role as a director of a company needs to ensure they are at all times on board with the decisions being taken, and the general direction of travel. So yes, Roy Mac has to take some responsibility for the plight we are in, and should not be excluded from ‘blame’ or being on the EFL one strike list. He could have resigned at any time if he was uncomfortable with Morris’s plans.

I take your point i-Ram. But in mitigation Roy Mac was a non-executive director was he not? Furthermore, Mel Morris and Stephen Pearce kept Wayne Rooney, the playing staff, the club staff and the whole fan base in the dark about the dire state of affairs. John Kirkland RIP was an astute business man and also a non-executive director I think but he seemed to have identified the problems and resigned before the fall into insolvency. To my mind, Roy Mac was just on the board as a club ambassador and I feel he may well not have realised how bad things were. For me and I expect most supporters it would rub salt into our wounds if Roy McFarland is in any way tarnished by Morris' actions. I just wish that we could have any faith at all that the EFL might be able to see it that way. Roy McFarland has done more good for football in this country than ~Rick Parry, Peter Ridsdale et al could even dream about.

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...