Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, alram said:

So them bidding 30m and not coming close all but confirms that there is no deal to be done with hmrc

 

i am sorry but we are doomed. nobody is going to pay 50m for a club with no assets 

Why does it? We already know Mel wants £20 mill for the stadium.

If the administrators want £50 mill for the club and the stadium that leaves £30 mill to pay the rest of the debts. HMRC on its own is approx £30 mill, so either no other creditors get a single penny or you are being a tad over dramatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BucksRam said:

Am I sad in being pleased to have popped on here for a nose only see see I was looking at page 1000.  Small things.  I'd have been a bit disappointed if it was page 1001 and I'd have missed it by a couple of posts.

Almost A Space Odyssey innit

Edited by Grumpy Git
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BucksRam said:

Am I sad in being pleased to have popped on here for a nose only see see I was looking at page 1000.  Small things.  I'd have been a bit disappointed if it was page 1001 and I'd have missed it by a couple of posts.

Hey you've got something to cheer about, BucksRam cleens a big big carpet for less than half a crown

image.thumb.png.ef6104285615ca4154ba1ed305666d26.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

Not necessarily. 

£30m including the Stadium wont touch the minimum requirements to exit administration and satisfy Legal and EFL requirements. Therefore Quantuma cant accept it.

If the Binnies won't go higher they are out.

Quantuma have said negotiations are ongoing and it can only be hoped that the remaining parties will go higher. It speculates in the article that nearer £50m is required. My guess was £55m based upon reading the Creditor list and the supposed loans etc.

As I understood it from the initial Radio report the offer was 28 million not including the stadium.  Perhaps he wants to sell rather than lease.  Would be odd if their covering MSD  payments though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

"It was felt the sum accurately reflected the reduced status of Derby following the sale of players during the January transfer window..."

That line should maybe make a few people think, especially those who were criticising the admins for not selling more players and slashing costs.  

I think that is a bit of a cheap and easy line though - I don’t think the players sold materially affect the vale of the club? And Shinnie and Jagielka the only ones who left who affected the first team’s chances of survival if that’s what they mean, arguably only Jagielka even given Shinnie would’ve been a bit part player.

Dont mean this to say we should’ve sold more, just an easy line to use when your offer wasn’t enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, alram said:

So them bidding 30m and not coming close all but confirms that there is no deal to be done with hmrc

 

i am sorry but we are doomed. nobody is going to pay 50m for a club with no assets 

I can see that it is no coincidence that your name is an acronym for ALARM!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 Million would mean 15 point penalty so not enough.  
 

That’s why Administrators want 50 Million 

I think the Stadium will be leased from Mel who will pay MSD 

PS That’s my theory 

Edited by Curtains
Added
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to laugh at the Binnies really.

They think they've put in offer that matches how the squad/club has been devalued, and they're not willing to put in enough to avoid a 15 point penalty next season.

A points penalty next season would massively devalue what they've bought, and risk a severe chance of us ending up in League Two in two years, which would devalue what they've bought further still.

Is the lowball offer really worth the risk? Surely better to at least attempt to avoid the -15 next season and actually have a League One club in two years rather than a League Two club.

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

33 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Because they couldn't Bin Off the Binnies  while there was still any chance of them increasing their offer and discussions to be had.

Quantuma have an obligation to the creditors to keep the offer open as long as possible.

By The Binnies setting the deadline for an answer, the creditors can be satisfied that there was no possibility of their bid being increased.


Quantuma’’s work load  just reduced as there is one less bid to deal with. 

Let’s hope the other one or two don’t pull out too.  Or reduce their offers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is celebrating the thread reaching 1000 pages.

Meanwhile Rome burns, the Titanic sinks and we lose another prospective bidder.

If there were only two bids submitted by the Administrators' own deadline, does that mean the other one is the Preferred Bidder - by default?

If so, why haven't they been named? Or are they now - standing alone - realising it's a buyers' market and, consequently, reducing the value of their bid? Or maybe there just isn't any other bidder.

Edited by IslandExile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Everyone is celebrating the thread reaching 1000 pages.

Meanwhile Rome burns, the Titanic sinks and we lose another prospective bidder.

If there were only two bids submitted by the Administrators' own deadline, does that mean the other one is the Preferred Bidder - by default?

If so, why haven't they been named? Or are they now - standing alone - realising it's a buyers' market and, consequently, reducing the value of their bid? Or maybe there just isn't any other bidder.

If that was the case the Binnies would have been accepted. Surely you can reason that. 
Liquidation would be far worse . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, nottingram said:

I think that is a bit of a cheap and easy line though - I don’t think the players sold materially affect the vale of the club? And Shinnie and Jagielka the only ones who left who affected the first team’s chances of survival if that’s what they mean, arguably only Jagielka even given Shinnie would’ve been a bit part player.

Dont mean this to say we should’ve sold more, just an easy line to use when your offer wasn’t enough. 

I'd say it's more the likes of Plange, Williams and Kellyman. They went for £2m tops, but could have gone for far more if we weren't under pressure to sell.

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...