Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

The debts remain the same or actually get bigger so how much cut price is debatable Still HMRC to pay,administrators to pay,if nobody wants to pay the administrators what they are owed they will simply liquidate the club

The debts will be bigger but I suspect Ashley is proposing to pay a lesser proportion of them - hence the 15 point penalty.

(The Administrators fees will be less than the wad owed to HMRC/UK population)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

The "Statement of affiairs" document that was filed at the start of the admin, work out from that what 25% is.

However, the big question is what will HMRC settle for, if they settle for 25% i think that's where the £28m (without Pride Park) comes from. However, i could be wrong on that and will be happily corrected. And also, that figure may not be total cost, administrators fees, loans to cover operating etc etc are also racking up.

Plus: Admin fees, MSD loan, Stadium rent
Minus: Transfer instalments paid

The maximum including everything but excluding change to transfer fees due will be £75m.

£20m for the stadium can be pushed down the road if the PB is willing to rent the stadium (I assume at a rate equal to the interest on the loan c£2.3m iirc). Therefore...

Assuming HMRC and Football creditors will be paid in full: £50m
Assuming HMRC are willing to go as low as 25%: £30m

It's this £30m figure which needs to be met to avoid the 15 point deduction next season.

To get everything, you're looking at something like the following breakdown:
MSD - £25m
Transfers - £8.4m (minus what has been paid)
HMRC - £7m
Admins - £5m
Other Football creditors - £2.3m
Other unsecured creditors: £1.6m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

The "Statement of affiairs" document that was filed at the start of the admin, work out from that what 25% is.

However, the big question is what will HMRC settle for, if they settle for 25% i think that's where the £28m (without Pride Park) comes from. However, i could be wrong on that and will be happily corrected. And also, that figure may not be total cost, administrators fees, loans to cover operating etc etc are also racking up.

Where does it say there will be a penalty if you don’t pay 25% and what that penalty would be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EnigmaRam said:

At least will actually know something today. One of three possible outcomes

Win, draw or defeat against Cardiff. Unless there's a dusting of snow in South Wales of course...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Plus: Admin fees, MSD loan, Stadium rent
Minus: Transfer instalments paid

The maximum including everything but excluding change to transfer fees due will be £75m.

£20m for the stadium can be pushed down the road if the PB is willing to rent the stadium (I assume at a rate equal to the interest on the loan c£2.3m iirc). Therefore...

Assuming HMRC and Football creditors will be paid in full: £50m
Assuming HMRC are willing to go as low as 25%: £30m

It's this £30m figure which needs to be met to avoid the 15 point deduction next season.

To get everything, you're looking at something like the following breakdown:
MSD - £25m
Transfers - £8.4m (minus what has been paid)
HMRC - £7m
Admins - £5m
Other Football creditors - £2.3m
Other unsecured creditors: £1.6m

Ignoring the Msd loan that’s about £24 million less transfer instalments.

 

so how do you get to £30 million GOC ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Where does it say there will be a penalty if you don’t pay 25% and what that penalty would be. 

It's in the EFL's super-secret insolvency policy, which seemingly nobody is allowed to look at.  We're going entirely on comments made by admins/EFL etc, articles by 3rd parties and previous administrations at the likes of Luton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what is coming through now is just how effective in a negative sense has Gibson's spurious claim been.The delay caused by the claim and the way the EFL dealt with it (not) has meant that as each week has past the value of the Club has got less.

I genuinely believe that the Administrators thought they had a deal at Christmas only for it to be scuppered by the EFL effectively not having to comply with English Law.

Likewise something must have changed significantly  in the last 10 days, most probably Ashley reducing his bid.

We may well carry on until the end of the season in a playing sense but we will still be under an embargo and will almost certainly lose all of the non contracted players and youngsters. 

So we may not be liquidated but as good as - starting from scratch and on -15 points.

What a mess !!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

MSD is formed of two parts. £20m connected to the stadium, plus £5m taken out by the administrators to fund the club.

Ok thanks GOC . I believe the transfer instalments should have taken transfer fees down quite a bit so the £28 million quoted by Binnies would have been enough… I think it was referred to as “the asking price.” I think they meant minimum. 

if bids have come in below that figure I would be disappointed to be fair 

Edited by PistoldPete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Where does it say there will be a penalty if you don’t pay 25% and what that penalty would be. 

INSOLVENT Football League clubs will face stricter sanctions and be forced to repay the majority of their debts to unsecured creditors under new rules agreed at the competition’s annual conference.

Clubs entering administration will be slapped with an increased 12-point deduction, which could rise to 15 if they are found to have flouted new rules around repaying funds to creditors.

The Football Creditors’ Rule, which guarantees 100% repayment of debts to clubs and players for transfers and wages, will be retained but unsecured creditors will now receive a minimum of 25p in the pound, which must be paid upon takeover of the clubs’ assets, or the sum rises to a minimum of 35p in the pound over three years. Failure to comply will result in a further 15 point deduction at the start of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

INSOLVENT Football League clubs will face stricter sanctions and be forced to repay the majority of their debts to unsecured creditors under new rules agreed at the competition’s annual conference.

Clubs entering administration will be slapped with an increased 12-point deduction, which could rise to 15 if they are found to have flouted new rules around repaying funds to creditors.

The Football Creditors’ Rule, which guarantees 100% repayment of debts to clubs and players for transfers and wages, will be retained but unsecured creditors will now receive a minimum of 25p in the pound, which must be paid upon takeover of the clubs’ assets, or the sum rises to a minimum of 35p in the pound over three years. Failure to comply will result in a further 15 point deduction at the start of the season.

And where does it say this? On what authority? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jimtastic56 said:

That’s fair enough . I am not allowed to ask for info. Therefore I will keep my £2,000 per year in my pocket.

That is of course, your prerogative, as sad as it would be to lose you!  I'd also venture to spout something about noses, cuts, and faces! 

I hasten to add, if the tone of your post was aimed at me (my post you were responding to), I wasn't suggesting you are not allowed to ask.  It just strikes me that... for some at least... the more they ask, and the more those questions go unanswered, the more disappointed/angry/frustrated/riled they get.  That's simply not healthy! 
Of course, you could (fairly) argue that "If you don't ask, you don't get", so I doff my cap to you for your doggedness and perseverance, but in this particular instance, Q don't seem too generous in handing out titbits and nibbles for us to feast on, so the phrase "Don't waste your breath" springs to mind.

 

If the tone of your post was aimed at Q, then of course, I fully understand and appreciate your frustration, but hindsight is now telling us Q will offer nothing until they are 100% ready to do so... even if they get half a million requests a day for info!
We simply have to appreciate the role... and legal duty... of the Administrators.  They simply won't allow the thoughts, opinions, and frustrations of the company's customers/fans to interfere with their daily grind.  Their bosses wouldn't like it.  The courts wouldn't like it. And any powers that be who are directly linked/involved wouldn't like it either.
It's not in their remit to provide public updates for the consumer.

Regrettable?  Sad?  Frustrating?  Hell yeah it is! 
But you, me, and I assume everyone else on here have absolutely no control over that, no matter how much we scream, shout, stamp our feet, and threaten to take away our £2k per year!

  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mostyn6 said:

I hope we stay up, stick two fingers up to the carpet-bagger Ashley, as his involvement has been a bigger hindrance than help right now.

IN that time, hope Appleby and co can get their act together and take the club.

I think you might mean Gibson and the EFL'S involvement. 

How can a potential buyer be an hinderance and how do you know what Ashley has done. Making things up in your own head. 

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...