The Administration Thread

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, Turk Thrust said:

Oh God, another post giving assumptions but portraying them as facts.

Which of them is an assumption? 

Do you think its a coincidence that we paid no HMRC debts and then entered administration as soon as they were allowed to pursue creditors?

The loan part of course is conjecture, MSD may have insisted on additional security.

[Donnyram]

Does anyone know why CK can’t or won’t lease the stadium from MM?  You can only assume MM is asking for a lease cost way above market rates…….. perhaps the positioning on leasing other stadiums is “tactical” and they have done the benchmarking of costs to support negotiations.  Maybe MM put the lease rates so high to force the stadium purchase……. hence why the council are involved as they would give reasonable lease rates.
 

If this reflects reality then I remain hopeful that there will be a positive outcome from this mornings meeting. ??

[Jawa]

7 minutes ago, Donnyram said:

Does anyone know why CK can’t or won’t lease the stadium from MM?  You can only assume MM is asking for a lease cost way above market rates…….. perhaps the positioning on leasing other stadiums is “tactical” and they have done the benchmarking of costs to support negotiations.  Maybe MM put the lease rates so high to force the stadium purchase……. hence why the council are involved as they would give reasonable lease rates.
 

If this reflects reality then I remain hopeful that there will be a positive outcome from this mornings meeting. ??

I'm still firmly of the belief that MM is and has been holding out for a bidder that's willing to buy the stadium rather than lease, hence why he's not dealt with CK up until now (as well as the fact they don't exactly have a good opinion of each other) as he only wants to lease. And apparently he wants more than the council are willing to / able to pay which is why it's still not been sorted by them. 

[derby8]

Just a thought about Pride Park.

Opened in 1997 so assumed in a fairly good state, just needs a bit of tidying up and could be expanded to 41,000 if needed at some stage.

But has all that been verified by engineers, etc.

Ask because the Birmingham City stadium problems mentioned above relate to 2 stands opened just before Pride Park, in 1994.

1994 and 1997 don't sound that long ago, to some, but much can go wrong in  a quarter of a century or so.

[Ram-Alf]

46 minutes ago, ColonelBlimp said:

Of course it's conjecture, 99% of this thread is conjecture.

I'm just postulating an alternative scenario.

Is it plausible? Who knows.

Has Mel done a lot of damage? Yes

Was any of it deliberate? I don't think so.

 

 

So buying the stadium was an accident ?

[G STAR RAM]

15 minutes ago, Donnyram said:

Does anyone know why CK can’t or won’t lease the stadium from MM?  You can only assume MM is asking for a lease cost way above market rates…….. perhaps the positioning on leasing other stadiums is “tactical” and they have done the benchmarking of costs to support negotiations.  Maybe MM put the lease rates so high to force the stadium purchase……. hence why the council are involved as they would give reasonable lease rates.
 

If this reflects reality then I remain hopeful that there will be a positive outcome from this mornings meeting. ??

I would guess CK doesn't particularly want to pay money too MM because he has been left having to pay 35% of the debts that he ran up.

From memory there is a lease in place for the ground, with various provisions, which MM told us was to protect the club. How true that is though is anyone's guess.

[ColonelBlimp]

44 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

 

@G STAR RAM has already beaten me to this.

I still also cannot fathom the need to try and defend the indefensible. 

Nowhere have I defended his actions, you made an assumption based on your own prejudiced reading of the post.

I just offered an alternative timeline, extrapolation common in SF.

It's probably way off the mark and we don't live in that timeline anyway but is it plausible? Who knows.

 

[duncanjwitham]

24 minutes ago, Donnyram said:

Does anyone know why CK can’t or won’t lease the stadium from MM?  You can only assume MM is asking for a lease cost way above market rates…….. perhaps the positioning on leasing other stadiums is “tactical” and they have done the benchmarking of costs to support negotiations.  Maybe MM put the lease rates so high to force the stadium purchase……. hence why the council are involved as they would give reasonable lease rates.
 

If this reflects reality then I remain hopeful that there will be a positive outcome from this mornings meeting. ??

My guess, is that they just don't want the on-going uncertainty with the MSD loan. If Morris (for whatever reason) stops paying the repayments, it gets repossessed by MSD, and we have no idea what they will do in terms of rent or willingness to sell back to us in the future.  Plus there's all the mess with the loan being cross-secured against the training ground etc, and apparently other properties that Morris owns. It's better for everybody if the loan is cleared, and the stadium is back in the hands of someone relatively stable (i.e. the club itself, or the council).

[Tyler Durden]

1 minute ago, ColonelBlimp said:

Nowhere have I defended his actions, you made an assumption based on your own prejudiced reading of the post.

I just offered an alternative timeline, extrapolation common in SF.

It's probably way off the mark and we don't live in that timeline anyway but is it plausible? Who knows.

 

It speaks volumes that you even bothered to offer this alternative scenario. 

[winktheram]

5 minutes ago, derby8 said:

Just a thought about Pride Park.

Opened in 1997 so assumed in a fairly good state, just needs a bit of tidying up and could be expanded to 41,000 if needed at some stage.

But has all that been verified by engineers, etc.

Ask because the Birmingham City stadium problems mentioned above relate to 2 stands opened just before Pride Park, in 1994.

1994 and 1997 don't sound that long ago, to some, but much can go wrong in  a quarter of a century or so.

Think we are whittling a bit for no reason. For the safety certificate it gets inspected regularly. It's also different of construction. PP is essentially steel framed with its main columns bolted to concrete pile caps on piles. St. Andrews stand is reinforced concrete mainly. I understand their issues are their bolts at the base and some of the reinforcement that are both encased in concrete and are corroding. The corrosion is from moisture in the ground leaching into the concrete and poor grade bolts. Was only talking to an engineer colleague from our Brum office about it last week. 

[RipleyRich]

22 minutes ago, Jawa said:

I'm still firmly of the belief that MM is and has been holding out for a bidder that's willing to buy the stadium rather than lease, hence why he's not dealt with CK up until now (as well as the fact they don't exactly have a good opinion of each other) as he only wants to lease. And apparently he wants more than the council are willing to / able to pay which is why it's still not been sorted by them. 

I think the issue is more to do with the loan being on the clubs books, so the club are currently responsible for paying the loan and also paying rent to use the Stadium as they don't own it even though they are paying £20m plus interest towards its purchase.

[Seth's left foot]

11 minutes ago, winktheram said:

Think we are whittling a bit for no reason. For the safety certificate it gets inspected regularly. It's also different of construction. PP is essentially steel framed with its main columns bolted to concrete pile caps on piles. St. Andrews stand is reinforced concrete mainly. I understand their issues are their bolts at the base and some of the reinforcement that are both encased in concrete and are corroding. The corrosion is from moisture in the ground leaching into the concrete and poor grade bolts. Was only talking to an engineer colleague from our Brum office about it last week. 

And some work was done to PP a few seasons ago, hopefully not just the cosmetic parts that we saw.

[PistoldPete]

9 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

I think the issue is more to do with the loan being on the clubs books, so the club are currently responsible for paying the loan and also paying rent to use the Stadium as they don't own it even though they are paying £20m plus interest towards its purchase.

Yes. Except the £20m loan was not to purchase the stadium. It was taken out in 2020 I believe 2 years after the stadium sale.

[SaffyRam]

 

[Ram a lamb a ding dong]

That's that then. ?

[PistoldPete]

9 minutes ago, SaffyRam said:

 

Not clear what the impasse is? Morris not selling to the council? Or council not ready to buy the stadium… yet?

[Dai Capp]

10 minutes ago, SaffyRam said:

 

Nothing about that series of tweets is good - an impasse sounds ominous and death threats are simply unacceptable. I've never been more concerned about DCFC finding a way through this than right now. Not the news any of us wanted to hear today...

[TuffLuff]

Nixons tweets are interesting, but it’ll need someone smarter and less ill than myself to go through them and explain in simple terms what the state of play is.

[SaffyRam]

 

[Topram]

Never gonna end