Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

It's in one of the Nixon releases buddy, maybe 4 or 5 pages back. Obviously we need to take his word at face value, but if we're prepared to give Dawes the benefit of the doubt, then why not Nixon.

If true, then the use of escrow is quite telling, as it would seem to suggest that the release of funds is dependent on conditions being met by the destination account holder. In so much, the hold up may well be nothing to do with CK.

This is of course conjecture, as none of us know for sure what the situation really is, hence my plea for patience.

Same old problem then. One journo saying the sky is falling in whilst another is saying chill out. Who to believe eh? ?

I sincerely hope Nixon is right in which case, it’s all a bit of a none story kicked off by ED and he should be ashamed of his journalistic skills/sources of information.
 

Here’s hoping. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

No, he absolutely should not have.

The man is a well-known business vulture - he waits in the shadows until the business is on its knees before swooping in and putting a tenner on the table.

He will let us get to the point of having absolutely nothing to our name - no Rooney, no player re-signings - before offering a derisory amount that will see us start with -15. All for the sake of getting something a little bit cheaper than market value.

I promise you, he should only ever be a last, last, absolutely final choice.

As fans, would we be comfortable with the non playing employees at Derby being treated like the Sports Direct workforce? 
Newcastle fans are United in their loathing for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

I know its down to interpretation, but looking at Ed’s replies this morning, he might be looking to backtrack a little bit. I can’t share the tweet due to Ed not allowing sharing and my signal is bad so I can’t upload a photo so I’m going to write it out. I’d appreciate if someone could possibly screengrab the thread that it’s from because I think it’s probably better to have the context, but for now.

 

”I stand by my source at 7am this morning. It is fast moving story with people briefing different versions of events from all sides…”  

 

written at 12.16

New Girl Facepalm GIF by HULU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

No, he absolutely should not have.

The man is a well-known business vulture - he waits in the shadows until the business is on its knees before swooping in and putting a tenner on the table.

He will let us get to the point of having absolutely nothing to our name - no Rooney, no player re-signings - before offering a derisory amount that will see us start with -15. All for the sake of getting something a little bit cheaper than market value.

I promise you, he should only ever be a last, last, absolutely final choice.

Are you a Geordie?

The very fact that he buys low and sells high is the reason he should be number 1 choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.54a92c156ccb12fe0ea852639e96b50d.png

"As of 7am" LOL. 

If this guy has f***** up again, he is going to get absolutely rinsed. Any journo can get stuff wrong, but if he's rushed to get this out first just to pander to his ego and it turns out to be nonsense, he's done. All credibility shot to s***. Be a shame really but that's the risk you take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Seth's left foot said:

As fans, would we be comfortable with the non playing employees at Derby being treated like the Sports Direct workforce? 
Newcastle fans are United in their loathing for him.

Do we know if the non playing staff at Newcastle United were treated the same as the Sports Direct workforce?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Ed Dawes is in the wrong to be honest. I'm pretty sure he's been given good information "as of 7am this morning" and that's triggered a reaction from the cK camp (telling Nixon it's just banking checks etc).

Someone is fed up of cK not paying up and was/is ready to pull the plug. Fed up enough to let radio derby know about it.

Could ed have been played? It's possible, but I'm inclined to believe Ed Dawes.

After all, if CKs money doesn't arrive - no matter the reason - sooner or later it will collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tomsdubs said:

Has Dawes jumped the gun here to get an exclusive? Seems like it's quite more complex than saying it's going to collapse.

I doubt that's the case tbh. It's not like Ed is reliant on breaking news to keep him in a job (he's not a journalist desperate to fill pages in a paper, or to drive punters to his Patreon etc), he's a radio broadcaster first and foremost.  I have no doubt that he's been asking questions from the contacts he has, probably because Derby fans keep bugging him, and he's been told something by someone he trusts and has gone with it.  It may turn out to be wrong, or (most likely IMO) only partially true, but I don't doubt that Ed is acting in good faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think for one minute Ed has put this info out maliciously, or that he hasn't been given information from what he deems a reliable source.

For once I actually feel for him a bit here, he has surfaced a message a lot of people don't want to hear and is probably getting hammered for it.

His source might be right, his source might be wrong. Ed was just trying to give the fans the latest as he understood it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

I doubt that's the case tbh. It's not like Ed is reliant on breaking news to keep him in a job (he's not a journalist desperate to fill pages in a paper, or to drive punters to his Patreon etc), he's a radio broadcaster first and foremost.  I have no doubt that he's been asking questions from the contacts he has, probably because Derby fans keep bugging him, and he's been told something by someone he trusts and has gone with it.  It may turn out to be wrong, or (most likely IMO) only partially true, but I don't doubt that Ed is acting in good faith.

And of course, it could be the deal gets done today, but last night/this morning someone was seriously close to collapsing the deal - Dawes didn't say it had, only that it was seriously close to collapsing. If it doesn't, that doesn't mean it wasn't close to and it doesn't mean he was wrong to run the story.

Whatever his flaws,ed Dawes is a Derby fan and he's not playing games for the sake of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Maybe Ed  Dawes has this all wrong 

CK thinks it’s going to be completed today

EFL-meeting today 

I wonder whether this might not be part of the reason for the delay. Is it a stipulation for final transfer of funds from escrow that the EFL formally endorse CK's ownership and is there an internal procedure required to do so? Given their track record, I'd definitely make this a mandatory condition.

Perhaps the silence is actually because we've been waiting for the EFL to convene and confirm, akin to exchange of contract when house buying and parties are keeping schtum to ensure they don't give Parry and co any reason to cause further delays. I'd not be surprised, though I'd not considered this before now, but now I have, it kinda stacks up in my mind.

Put it this way: CK saying deal done today - EFL meeting today - coincidence? 

Edited by 86 Hair Islands
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

No, he absolutely should not have.

The man is a well-known business vulture - he waits in the shadows until the business is on its knees before swooping in and putting a tenner on the table.

He will let us get to the point of having absolutely nothing to our name - no Rooney, no player re-signings - before offering a derisory amount that will see us start with -15. All for the sake of getting something a little bit cheaper than market value.

I promise you, he should only ever be a last, last, absolutely final choice.

You may be right about Ashley he is a very successful business man and will not pay over the odds for anything,we may not have a choice if this story is correct,We were left to believe CK had completed the takeover and he would pay the players this month,well that as not happened

Ashley as the cash to proceed and was even prepared to do a joint venture with Kirchner if im not mistaken,if the deal does fold its Ashley or liquidation take your pick

 

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...