The Administration Thread

[kevinhectoring]

2 hours ago, i-Ram said:

I actually don’t think Q has played a blinder, and there are criticisms I could make (particularly regarding some naive comments about how long it might take), but I do appreciate what a basket case of a liquidation they took on. Morris left them with a crock of poo, and it seems to me he has been a pain in the arse subsequently in regards to a) quickly resolving the Boro matter and b) being more accommodating regarding the stadium sale.

You may recall that a few months back that you were arguing strongly with me that Morris had, and would have, no influence over the proceedings; that MSD were in control of the stadium situation because of their fixed charges, blah de blah. You were as wrong then as you are now in your back and forth with @duncanjwitham, who very ably popped your overinflated view earlier today.

It seems to me Q had no choice but to accept CK’s proposal, as he was the only one at the end offering to buy the club without the stadium.

My wife thinks you are a complete arse. Of course that is not my opinion as that would be against forum rules.

Do you think MSD could appoint admins at 202 tomorrow and arrange the grant of a 99 year lease of PP to the club? Interested in your thoughts.   
 

Not likely to happen of course, so yes, interesting question as to where we are now as regards Morris’ ‘control’ over the stadium. It’s been suggested (recently) that MM has a £20m deposit collateralising a PG of £20m of the MSD debt, which complicates things.  Quite possible that - in light of this - Q should have insisted that 202 was initially placed into administration. 

Interested in your thoughts on that as well.  
 

btw I think it’s likely Q have a written agreement with MM about the stadium which Q can’t now comply with because the bids are too low. Whoops ! 
 

(Your narrative on the Gibbo claim is hilarious by the way. Any fule can see that MM sorted the issue out pretty promptly, once Q got him involved having sat on their hands for months, then realised the folly of their analysis of the football creditors rule. Amateur hour at considerable expense) 

[May Contain Nuts]

27 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Q should have insisted that 202 was initially placed into administration. 

Says it ducking all about your attitude to this.

They should have done something that wasn't in their power to do, but they didn't do it because they couldn't do it, so they're incompetent idiots who should have done what they couldn't do, because you think it's what they should have done, even though they couldn't, and realistically wouldn't have some even if they could have done...

Edited April 8, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[FlyBritishMidland]

5 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Says it ducking all about your attitude to this.

They should have done something that wasn't in their power to do, but they didn't do it because they couldn't do it, so they're incompetent idiots who should have done what they couldn't do, because you think it's what they should have done, even though they couldn't, and realistically wouldn't have some even if they could have done...

Exactly.  When Gerald Krasner was on RD last week he said he would have tried to get MM to put the stadium company into admin as well but that would have needed him to agree.  Which he obviously wouldn’t do (and they may have tried for all we know) as he still wants some form of income from it, be it a lease or sale costs.

[FlyBritishMidland]

5 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

 

(Your narrative on the Gibbo claim is hilarious by the way. Any fule can see that MM sorted the issue out pretty promptly, once Q got him involved having sat on their hands for months, then realised the folly of their analysis of the football creditors rule. Amateur hour at considerable expense) 

At the time they said they had legal advice from three parties that all said they didn’t have to treat MFC as a football creditor as a debt didn’t exist.  And as they are appointed by the Courts they can’t go against the legal advice.

[Chester40]

Keep hearing the argument 'he had to prove he had the funds' but having watched the Allen Stamford documentary its amazing where a bit of Texas bluster can get you..... 

[RipleyRich]

11 hours ago, Curtains said:

Sorry to have to reiterate the Liquidation point but it’s really not a good option so for one in am thankful for CK 

 

https://www.footballcritic.com/news/clubs-going-into-administration-how-it-happens-and-how-they-recover/1083

3. Club liquidation and sale of all assets. 

The nuclear option, one that is inevitable if no viable buyers come forward and the clubs assets are insufficient to enable a workable CVA to be agreed. In the event a club is liquidated, fans organisations will typically found a phoenix club who will start at the bottom of the football pyramid. 

Depending on the funds available, these phoenix clubs may take over the ground of the original club and some intellectual property (e.g. the clubs name and badge).

 

This line drew my attention:

to pass, a CVA must be approved by at least 75% of the creditors, by value.

Edited April 8, 2022 by RipleyRich

[EnigmaRam]

I think most of us are a little sceptical and will be until the inks dried on the sale contract and CK purchases the club.

Lots of hurdles left to overcome, creditors, the EFL sign off etc and lots of unknowns, points deductions, player contracts etc. 

I’m sure we’ve all got questions about his wealth, his Twitter habits, his vision for the clubs future, what he had for breakfast etc. I just think we need to let them get on with it in the hope that all parties involved really do have DCFC’s future’s best interests at heart.

Hes trying to purchase the club, effectively saving us from extinction. And he was the only one willing to do so, so he needs our support, not recriminations.

im just hoping to watch us play football at the Slincy dinky arena next year with my slincy dinky root beer and slincy dinky monster hot dog!

COYR’s

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

At the time they said they had legal advice from three parties that all said they didn’t have to treat MFC as a football creditor as a debt didn’t exist.  And as they are appointed by the Courts they can’t go against the legal advice.

No. The legal advice they had was that Gibbo’s claim would fail. From 3 QCs, as you say.  
 

That was specifically confirmed in the statement Q released at the time.  Q did NOT go on to say that they had legal advice from the QCs supporting them on the FC point 

And you can be 100% sure that they would have asked the QCs about the Football Creditors rule. And that if the QCs had supported Q’s view, Q would have put that in capital letters in their statement. 
 

So having not got the advice they wanted,  Q then scored another own goal. They resorted to railing against the EFL in order to deflect blame from themselves without regard to the fact it put our club further at risk
 

 

Edited April 8, 2022 by kevinhectoring

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

Exactly.  When Gerald Krasner was on RD last week he said he would have tried to get MM to put the stadium company into admin as well but that would have needed him to agree.  Which he obviously wouldn’t do (and they may have tried for all we know) as he still wants some form of income from it, be it a lease or sale costs.

In Sept I think MM might have agreed for 202 to go into admin if Q had forced the issue. But we can’t be sure.   It would have been expedient for Q not to force the issue because they wanted the appointment at the club and so couldn’t afford a spat with MM
 

MM would now oppose a 202 admin I think and it’s too late for Q to start thinking along those lines (imho)

[FlyBritishMidland]

16 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

No. The legal advice they had was that Gibbo’s claim would fail. From 3 QCs, as you say.  
 

That was specifically confirmed in the statement Q released at the time.  Q did NOT go on to say that they had legal advice from the QCs supporting them on the FC point 

And you can be 100% sure that they would have asked the QCs about the Football Creditors rule. And that if the QCs had supported Q’s view, Q would have put that in capital letters in their statement. 
 

So having not got the advice they wanted,  Q then scored another own goal. They resorted to railing against the EFL in order to deflect blame from themselves without regard to the fact it put our club further at risk
 

 

This is an extract from the minutes of the supporters group meeting towards the end of January.  This indicates the claim is invalid, not that it will fail……

“The administrators have received overwhelming legal advice that the Boro & Wycombe claims have no legal merit.”

Without seeing the exact wording of the advice, we’ll never know.

Edited April 8, 2022 by FlyBritishMidland

[RoyMac5]

9 hours ago, SamUltraRam said:

...

Big improvements for the fan experience & really connecting with the fan base, and plenty of progressive ideas. Believe it or not, they apparently don't rate the EFL Committee either !!

So if you get the right American etc etc

I always thought the best way to do that was win games? ? 

[RoyMac5]

15 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

In Sept I think MM might have agreed for 202 to go into admin if Q had forced the issue. But we can’t be sure.   It would have been expedient for Q not to force the issue because they wanted the appointment at the club and so couldn’t afford a spat with MM
 

MM would now oppose a 202 admin I think and it’s too late for Q to start thinking along those lines (imho)

How would that work anyway, what would happen to MSDs claims?

[PistoldPete]

32 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

No. The legal advice they had was that Gibbo’s claim would fail. From 3 QCs, as you say.  
 

That was specifically confirmed in the statement Q released at the time.  Q did NOT go on to say that they had legal advice from the QCs supporting them on the FC point 

And you can be 100% sure that they would have asked the QCs about the Football Creditors rule. And that if the QCs had supported Q’s view, Q would have put that in capital letters in their statement. 
 

So having not got the advice they wanted,  Q then scored another own goal. They resorted to railing against the EFL in order to deflect blame from themselves without regard to the fact it put our club further at risk
 

 

Q put their proposal on how they intended to deal with Boro and WWFC claims to the EFL in November. Only on Christmas Eve, just as Q were about to announce a PB, did EFL say they were not happy with it. Q questioned what was wrong with their proposal and did not get a proper response until early february. Morris stepped in shortly after to pick up the tab for Boro claim. So there was delay totalling nearly three months to sort that out.

As you know, my belief is the Boro claim  was jointly against DCFC and others (including Morris). Quite common especially for litigious people like Gibson to name a number of parties . For example a medical negligence claim could be made against a doctor and the NHS trust jointly. But you would focus on the NHS trust as they have deeper pockets. With derby now its the other way around the individual who broke the rules , Morris has deeper pockets than us.

If you look back at Gibson rant on the Boro forum he wasn't accepting we couldnt pay his claim. Q had told him we didn't have the money to pay him but he wouldn't accept that. Only when everyone was putting pressure on gibson Including us Rams fans) did he accept that Q were not bluffing we really are broke. So he agreed to drop his claim against DCFC but keep his claim against Morris going.    

Bottom line is the only people to blame for Boro claim dragging on are Boro themselves and the EFL. Not Q's fault as far as I can see.  
 

 

Edited April 8, 2022 by PistoldPete

[kevinhectoring]

7 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Says it ducking all about your attitude to this.

They should have done something that wasn't in their power to do, but they didn't do it because they couldn't do it, so they're incompetent idiots who should have done what they couldn't do, because you think it's what they should have done, even though they couldn't, and realistically wouldn't have some even if they could have done...

Q persuaded MM that the club should file. (MSD could have made the club filing, but would have had a strong preference for the directors to do it.)

the position at 202 was little different so far as we know. Q could have persuaded MM as sole director to file, and MSD could also have made a filing at 202 over MM’s head. We don’t know whether Q initially recommended that 202 should file.
 

Hindsight suggests they should have recommended a filing at 202. So does Krasner. But the cynic in all of us would say that in Sept, Q’s objective was the appointment at the club and they may have concluded that a row with MM over 202 was not going to bring that about 

 

 

[Ram-Alf]

10 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Changed jobs last year, had tons of introductory business waffle.

"Be professional, do your job well, treat your colleagues and our clients with respect" just doesn't seem to do it in business language when expectations of clients are 99% provide the services contracted efficiently and professionally to a high standard within time/budget, like, thats what the customer wants.

 

A true reflection of some American citizens I have spoken too while visiting North America.

On my one and only Jaunt to the USA...Clear Water Florida, It was the January after 9-11, I'll not go through the hassle at Toronto Airport, So landed at Orlando airport, Picked up the hire car and we drive to Clear Water, All good, Get to the apartment and settle in, We're with the Brother and Sister in Law who live in London Canada, As we met them in Toronto.

My Brother in Law loves the USA space programme so we drive to the American Space Centre to see all the old rockets and stuff, It's not my cup of tea but went as didn't want to pi$$ anyone off, Our last bit was a film about the Mir space centre with the Russians, We watched in a cinema, I get a tap on the shoulder and this fella asks...are you English...Yes, Do I live here...No, Where do I live...England...Have I been in the States long...3 days...How did you get to the USA...we flew...What even after 9-11, Yes security was a god damn pain but it did it's job, He introduced himself as Clark a farmer from Columbus Ohio, Hiya I'm Alf from Derby, Where is Derby...about 2 hours drive north of London, Now here's where I get to have a little fun, He asks...do we have farms in England...Yes I said, Also trees, Rivers, Cars, Building and Hospitals, How far Is England from the USA...around 3000 miles...and you flew to get here...yes as it's the quickest way, There's more tooing and frowing and I'm getting a little restless with his questioning, So begs his pardon and turn to talk to the Brother in Law which was just as bad ?

Now this is not a criticism of Clark, It's just that Americans I have met are pretty insular and now very little outside of the USA, But love to here about the UK. 

[duncanjwitham]

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

How would that work anyway, what would happen to MSDs claims?

As far as I can tell, it wouldn't have made that much difference to the actual amounts owed - the MSD loan is a secured one, so can't be paid off at 25% or anything.  The admins would have assumed control of the company owning the stadium, which would have given them the power to agree a deal with a purchaser, rather than having to go through Morris.  But if the admins are correct, and Morris isn't being particularly troublesome, other than wanting the MSD loan paid off (which would have to be done anyway), then it maybe doesn't make that much difference.  There's the issue of whether the MSD loan is secured against anything else that Morris owns (I've heard suggestion of it being secured against some other property he owns in London, but no idea if this is correct), and if it is then he's still involved in the process anyway.  But if he is completely shut out, then it probably removes the option of having him pay some of the MSD loan off too and (part) gifting the stadium back.  

Overall, it's hard to know when we don't know the exact mechanics of the loan security agreement, but I certainly don't think it's some silver bullet that would have just fixed everything.

[PistoldPete]

7 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

As far as I can tell, it wouldn't have made that much difference to the actual amounts owed - the MSD loan is a secured one, so can't be paid off at 25% or anything.  The admins would have assumed control of the company owning the stadium, which would have given them the power to agree a deal with a purchaser, rather than having to go through Morris.  But if the admins are correct, and Morris isn't being particularly troublesome, other than wanting the MSD loan paid off (which would have to be done anyway), then it maybe doesn't make that much difference.  There's the issue of whether the MSD loan is secured against anything else that Morris owns (I've heard suggestion of it being secured against some other property he owns in London, but no idea if this is correct), and if it is then he's still involved in the process anyway.  But if he is completely shut out, then it probably removes the option of having him pay some of the MSD loan off too and (part) gifting the stadium back.  

Overall, it's hard to know when we don't know the exact mechanics of the loan security agreement, but I certainly don't think it's some silver bullet that would have just fixed everything.

My guess is that he may have offered Personal Guarantees but fact is it is a  Ioan from Msd to Dcfc and is already secured against an asset that Morris owns ie PPS. 

[kevinhectoring]

17 minutes ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

This is an extract from the minutes of the supporters group meeting towards the end of January.  This indicates the claim is invalid, not that it will fail……

“The administrators have received overwhelming legal advice that the Boro & Wycombe claims have no legal merit.”

Without seeing the exact wording of the advice, we’ll never know.

Difficulty is it had already been agreed by dcfc and MFC at the time of the MFC intervention that in principle MFC had a right to sue us under the rules. Para 13 of that decision confirms that. 

So Q should not have been surprised when EFL said: ‘we can’t adjudicate your claim, the rules say the tribunal does that. So either settle it or let us fast track it for you “

Your point about the legal advice is well made. If the opinions had said: “this claim has 0 chance of success” the outcome might have been different. But QCs don’t often say that sort of thing

[Crewton]

28 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Q persuaded MM that the club should file. (MSD could have made the club filing, but would have had a strong preference for the directors to do it.)

the position at 202 was little different so far as we know. Q could have persuaded MM as sole director to file, and MSD could also have made a filing at 202 over MM’s head. We don’t know whether Q initially recommended that 202 should file.
 

Hindsight suggests they should have recommended a filing at 202. So does Krasner. But the cynic in all of us would say that in Sept, Q’s objective was the appointment at the club and they may have concluded that a row with MM over 202 was not going to bring that about 

 

 

Isn't all of that pure conjecture on your part though? 

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere, possibly in the briefing notes from the Supporters Group or Team Derby, that it wasn't Morris who appointed the Administrators. Does that ring a bell with anyone else? 

 

[BobdeBilder]

21 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

A true reflection of some American citizens I have spoken too while visiting North America.

On my one and only Jaunt to the USA...Clear Water Florida, It was the January after 9-11, I'll not go through the hassle at Toronto Airport, So landed at Orlando airport, Picked up the hire car and we drive to Clear Water, All good, Get to the apartment and settle in, We're with the Brother and Sister in Law who live in London Canada, As we met them in Toronto.

My Brother in Law loves the USA space programme so we drive to the American Space Centre to see all the old rockets and stuff, It's not my cup of tea but went as didn't want to pi$$ anyone off, Our last bit was a film about the Mir space centre with the Russians, We watched in a cinema, I get a tap on the shoulder and this fella asks...are you English...Yes, Do I live here...No, Where do I live...England...Have I been in the States long...3 days...How did you get to the USA...we flew...What even after 9-11, Yes security was a god damn pain but it did it's job, He introduced himself as Clark a farmer from Columbus Ohio, Hiya I'm Alf from Derby, Where is Derby...about 2 hours drive north of London, Now here's where I get to have a little fun, He asks...do we have farms in England...Yes I said, Also trees, Rivers, Cars, Building and Hospitals, How far Is England from the USA...around 3000 miles...and you flew to get here...yes as it's the quickest way, There's more tooing and frowing and I'm getting a little restless with his questioning, So begs his pardon and turn to talk to the Brother in Law which was just as bad ?

Now this is not a criticism of Clark, It's just that Americans I have met are pretty insular and now very little outside of the USA, But love to here about the UK. 

Yep, we all live in London which is, as most Americans think, England. I lived in Missouri where my wife is from, now she is well traveled. She has also lived all over the US, Japan and Korea and I met some people she went to school with. One had been out of the country to Mexico, one had been out of Missouri once to Arizona and couple had never left the state. The daughter of some friends once asked my daughter if we had Christmas in England. They are mostly really nice friendly people, but so insular.