The Administration Thread

[DCFC27]

These admin are so frustrating, stop giving people timelines. It’s done when it’s done. 

[IslandExile]

Some of the adverts on here seem very targeted at the audience....

[atherstoneram]

26 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

And where does it say this? On what authority? 

https://www.accountancyage.com/2015/06/09/football-league-toughens-insolvency-rules/

Satisfied now?

[FlyBritishMidland]

55 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.

Does the -15 points apply to not agreeing to 25p in the pound immediately or the 35p in the pound over three years?  What off the PB proposed 20p in the pound immediately, 10p in the pound next year and 5p in the pound the following year?

[i-Ram]

1 hour ago, IslandExile said:

The story about the MSD loan.

The lack of communication from the Administrators.

The rumour of the 15 point deduction.

They all point to one thing:  Ashley will buy the club at the end of the season but at a cut price.

I would suggest that they all point to the fact that without actual information being made available by Q, the vacuum is being filled by bullsh!tters.

[atherstoneram]

Just now, FlyBritishMidland said:

Does the -15 points apply to not agreeing to 25p in the pound immediately or the 35p in the pound over three years?  What off the PB proposed 20p in the pound immediately, 10p in the pound next year and 5p in the pound the following year?

To not agreeing to 25% upfront from the outset,if they want to take it to Three years then it's 35% upfront.

[IslandExile]

4 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I would suggest that they all point to the fact that without actual information being made available by Q, the vacuum is being filled by bullsh!tters.

And I know you think the Administrators are generally and genuinely doing the right thing. Does that include their lack of communication?

Edited March 1, 2022 by IslandExile

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

And I know you think the Administrators are doing the right thing. Does that include their lack of communication?

God knows how some people would have gone on in pre internet,social media days,all we had was local radio and local/national rags.

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

The EFL can dock us 50 points,I don't care if the club is finally saved.

 

[hintonsboots]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

God knows how some people would have gone on in pre internet,social media days,all we had was local radio and local/national rags.

Still could have phoned Steve Gibson for an update .

[WhiteHorseRam]

Just now, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

The EFL can dock us 50 points,I don't care if the club is finally saved.

 

[kevinhectoring]

47 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

And where does it say this? On what authority? 

I think it’s part of the insolvency policy.  Not aware it’s published 

[Caerphilly Ram]

Something to lighten the mood? It is pancake day after all 

 

[IslandExile]

9 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

God knows how some people would have gone on in pre internet,social media days,all we had was local radio and local/national rags.

And, unlike during Mel's tenure, the local radio station and newspaper were given club news.

[Mucker1884]

1 hour 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.

Para 2 suggests a further 3 points on top of the 12 we've already had ("could rise to 15").

Para 3 ends with a suggestion of "a further 15 points" (presumably after, and on top of, the -12 for going into admin.

But both para's appear to be referring to the same potential shortfall in repayments to creditors, so which is it?  A further 15, or a further 3 on top of the 12 we've had?  ?‍♂️

 

 

 

[IslandExile]

18 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I would suggest that they all point to the fact that without actual information being made available by Q, the vacuum is being filled by bullsh!tters.

 

13 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

And I know you think the Administrators are generally and genuinely doing the right thing. Does that include their lack of communication?

Just a weekly update - through whatever media outlet they prefer - would only take them 5 minutes.

It need not say much but just fill that void that is being otherwise filled.

[Ghost of Clough]

19 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

To not agreeing to 25% upfront from the outset,if they want to take it to Three years then it's 35% upfront.

It's 25% upfront (75% wiped out) or 35% over 3 years (65% wiped out)

[Mucker1884]

7 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Something to lighten the mood? It is pancake day after all 

 

 

That's a bit crepe!
Mel should batter whoever wrote that, and flatten whoever put up the pic.

[sage]

2 hours ago, Jourdan said:

We have funding for a matter of weeks and all parties involved think it’s a game of 9D chess. Scandalous.

The lack of urgency and the lack of willingness to get a deal done suggests to me that no-one involved really cares about the fate of the club, but merely about their bottom line.

At the end of the day, these ‘interested parties’ know what it will take to get a deal done and they know that the club’s future hangs in the balance.

It gets to a point where you just think: stop wasting everyone’s time. If you can’t offer what’s needed, walk away.

The ironic thing is if someone else had bought the club instead of Mel Morris, he would have bought the club by now and bought a few players in January. 

We as supporters wants a purchaser to a have fan's perspective and buy the club asap rather than scratch around for the best deal.

We moan how that ended up but then hope (in some ways) for the same kind of person again.

 

[atherstoneram]

4 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

Para 2 suggests a further 3 points on top of the 12 we've already had ("could rise to 15").

Para 3 ends with a suggestion of "a further 15 points" (presumably after, and on top of, the -12 for going into admin.

But both para's appear to be referring to the same potential shortfall in repayments to creditors, so which is it?  A further 15, or a further 3 on top of the 12 we've had?  ?‍♂️

 

 

 

A further 3 on top of the 12 if we are not keeping up payments whilst in administration and 15 points if we exit administration without offering 25%.