The Administration Thread

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, RipleyRich said:

That's the scary bit.

Reports suggest that this months wages are £1.6m (when is pay day BTW?). Obviously that will come down massively, but there are all the other associated costs with running a football club. Matchday costs, policing etc, transport, hotels,  kit, ground maintenance,  god the list is so long.

What sort of cost are we looking at?

£8m?, £10m? ????

Who is going to lend it and against what?

And then there is the interest to pay?

Is this just prolonging the agony, or are Q holding a genuine bid that could effect a sale in 6-12 weeks?

The EFL agreed a business plan with CK, so I'd imagine that whatever that budget was would be the amount Q would be looking for. They will hope that this will be covered mostly by incoming funds as no doubt would have Kirchner.

[jono]

14 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

What would setting another deadline actually achieve?

Exactly .. ok so it seems bids are on the table, but these things require due process so a deadline is meaningless. The cogs have to mesh and turn before forward motion begins. My guess is this could take a 2/3 weeks. Meanwhile Q have to keep the engine running for the start of the season and ensure there is actually something to buy. 
 

With the parties involved I don’t see an issue with them physically having the funds to match their bid. It will simply be contracts, sign off with creditors, accord re stadium and getting boxes ticked with the EFL.

I am certain Q will know exactly what HMRC require and exactly the circumstances relating to the stadium and the choices available. The bidders will have this information and know that minor tweaking will be just that. It still has to be put on paper, reviewed and agreed. This sort of stuff just doesn’t happen in 48 hours. We just have to hope, pray and be patient. 

[PistoldPete]

19 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I understand what you're saying, but that is why Q have to prove the Club has funds to play for the whole season. Otherwise the EFL will not let us start, they don't want us dropping out or being kicked out.

Maybe the people "lending " money are local benefactors interested in buying the club too. And the financing might include a guaranteed refund of season ticket money if we go pop mid season. Speculation on my part obviously, but you never know. 

[duncanjwitham]

15 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Reading between the lines, the infamous "you will be surprised how quickly things will happen" came in February IIRC. SO it sounded like Q were expecting to close a deal then, which having allegedly told Ashley he was PB in January you would expect would have been a deal with Ashley. Why Ashley didn't then complete in February is maybe for him to explain, it seems that is exactly what Q were expecting him to do.     

That's the point where Ashley started to complain that Quantuma had devalued the club, by selling Plange and Kelleyman etc. So I'd guess he came back in with a lower offer, despite the club racking up another month of costs.

[LeedsCityRam]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Latest supporter groups statement is misleading, inaccurate and in the case of BAWT, hypocritical.

Offers from Ashley or Appleby in December could not be progressed due to Boro claim and EFL approach to it. Surely every Rams fan knows this, yet not mentioned in the statement? After the Boro claim "accord" betwen SW and MM in February,  the way was clear for either Appleby or Ashley to close the deal. Why didn't they? Only in April did CK surface, and his was the only then compliant bid. The allegation that months were lost due to pursuit of CK is just false... although I agree better checks on his money could have been done.  But wasn't CK re-introduced to Q by Nigel Owen of BAWT?

And can someone tell me what the point of the supporter group statement was? It seems misguided and pointless as well as misleading.

The point of the supporter group statement is to increase pressure on Quantuma as left to their own devices, nothing ever seems to happen. The fact Q are seeking external funding for 22/23 season rather than relying on PB funds further suggests they are not planning a quick sale.

With respect to Appleby & Ashley's bid on Dec/Jan, none of us know why these bids did not go forward but the fact journalists are openly calling Quantuma out (as well as the threatened legal action from Ashley) suggest that the bids were actionable despite the parasite claims. There is also the 28m bid from the Binnies (not including PP).

Quantuma continue to claim that none of the bids made (other than Kirchner's) are sufficient to take us out of administration despite Appleby's reported bid last week of circa 50m being comfortably enough to pay off football creditors which is the absolute minimum required by the EFL. A week has passed now with no further developments as reported by Ed Dawes & not unreasonably, people want to know why a) that offer hasnt been accepted & b) why that credible bid hasnt been the starting pistol for a best & final bid process with all remaining interested parties & a prompt deadline.

None of the supporter groups are making 'allegations', it is undeniably true that the exclusivity period with Kirchner was a waste of time irrespective of whether people believe Quantuma are to blame for that. That is not the suggestion in the letter though, they are asking Kwasi Kwarteng as Business Secretary to get involved to look into whether credible bids are being ignored as journalists in the know have suggested. I applaud their proactivity.

Edited June 21, 2022 by LeedsCityRam

[Sparkle]

33 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I understand what you're saying, but that is why Q have to prove the Club has funds to play for the whole season. Otherwise the EFL will not let us start, they don't want us dropping out or being kicked out.

But we would be kicked in March 2023 as we would have been administration for 18 months as no one is buying us in league one scrabbling around with hardly any players and a mountain of rising debt with reduced income - unless of course the EFL changed its interpretation of its so called rules on clubs in administration 

[Big Trav]

If the rumoured Appleby bid is 50 million pounds. Surely that’s enough to get the takeover done or has Q run up more debt and costs? 

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Quantuma continue to claim that none of the bids made (other than Kirchner's) are sufficient to take us out of administration despite Appleby's reported bid last week of circa 50m being comfortably enough to pay off football creditors which is the absolute minimum required by the EFL. A week has passed now with no further developments as reported by Ed Dawes & not unreasonably, people want to know why a) that offer hasnt been accepted & b) why that credible bid hasnt been the starting pistol for a best & final bid process with all remaining interested parties & a prompt deadline.

I don't have any insider knowledge on anything here etc, but only last week we were being told that Appleby's bid was "not easily resurrectable" as all of his original investors had gone.  This week we're being told he's slapped a £50m offer on the table.  It's more than a little bit unlikely that both of those things are completely true (but not impossible, obviously).  So I'm loathe to take either statement as absolute fact at this stage.  I suspect both statements are probably media briefings to pressure Quantuma (the first from Ashley to discredit other bidders, the second from Appleby himself to force Quantuma's hand or something).

And if Appleby has managed to cobble together £50m worth of investors in a few days, I imagine there is a fair amount of work to do proving funds etc.  The last thing we want is another repeat of Kirchner, where Appleby signs on but one or more investors don't come through.

[Sparkle]

13 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

That's the point where Ashley started to complain that Quantuma had devalued the club, by selling Plange and Kelleyman etc. So I'd guess he came back in with a lower offer, despite the club racking up another month of costs.

Ashley was correct as well - especially as we were more certain of relegation and less income 

[Sparkle]

24 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

same, spent a few months re-writing Bombardier Train Maintenance Documents, using Simplified English, so they could be easily translated into Indian once the trains were too old and were sold on.

Do not stand or sit on top of the train - was that it? 

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, Sparkle said:

Ashley was correct as well - especially as we were more certain of relegation and less income 

But the EFL were basically threatening to kick us out if we didn't sell players, and that would have devalued the club by a hell of a lot more...

[RoyMac5]

24 minutes ago, jono said:

...I am certain Q will know exactly what HMRC require and exactly the circumstances relating to the stadium and the choices available. The bidders will have this information and know that minor tweaking will be just that. It still has to be put on paper, reviewed and agreed. This sort of stuff just doesn’t happen in 48 hours. We just have to hope, pray and be patient. 

You'll be surprised how quickly it can all happen. 

[Gaspode]

1 minute ago, duncanjwitham said:

But the EFL were basically threatening to kick us out if we didn't sell players, and that would have devalued the club by a hell of a lot more...

This is true - but if Q and Ashley had an agreement in place and then Q reduced our value without his prior agreement , you can understanding him pulling the plug on any deal - and you can also understand why he'd not want to pay Qs fees from that point onwards if he belives their actions caused the deal to collapse......

[RoyMac5]

10 minutes ago, Big Trav said:

If the rumoured Appleby bid is 50 million pounds. Surely that’s enough to get the takeover done or has Q run up more debt and costs? 

I thought Dawes reckoned Q weren't talking to him?

[Elwood P Dowd]

Just a shot in the dark with this:-

if you sell season tickets aren’t you creating more creditors. If you have funds to fulfil the fixtures then that wouldn’t be an issue!!!

Edited June 21, 2022 by Elwood P Dowd

[LeedsCityRam]

Just now, duncanjwitham said:

I don't have any insider knowledge on anything here etc, but only last week we were being told that Appleby's bid was "not easily resurrectable" as all of his original investors had gone.  This week we're being told he's slapped a £50m offer on the table.  It's more than a little bit unlikely that both of those things are completely true (but not impossible, obviously).  So I'm loathe to take either statement as absolute fact at this stage.  I suspect both statements are probably media briefings to pressure Quantuma (the first from Ashley to discredit other bidders, the second from Appleby himself to force Quantuma's hand or something).

And if Appleby has managed to cobble together £50m worth of investors in a few days, I imagine there is a fair amount of work to do proving funds etc.  The last thing we want is another repeat of Kirchner, where Appleby signs on but one or more investors don't come through.

There's definitely misinformation out there but it would seem bizarre for a bid to have been reported from a credible bidder but it not to have materialised and/or funds not in place.

Furthermore any publicly reported bid would alert competition that a sale could be imminent, encourage rival bids & hence erode any hypothetical time needed for Appleby to get investors together. Not sure what the advantage to him would be in that scenario.

[Sparkle]

6 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

But the EFL were basically threatening to kick us out if we didn't sell players, and that would have devalued the club by a hell of a lot more...

It may have been intimated but they never actually said that but the principle remained the purchase 

was devalued and the price keeping going upwards 

[Mucker1884]

12 hours ago, StrawHillRam said:

I know how you are feeling. Same here. Someone or something needs to put us out of our misery

[Sparkle]

4 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

Just a shot in the dark with this:-

if you sell season tickets aren’t you creating more creditors. If you have funds to fulfil the fixtures then that wouldn’t be an issue!!!

I can’t imagine season ticket holders would get any money back of the administrators, maybe credit card companies if they were willing but even those might get the hump when you knew you were buying of a business in administration. Also the issue of not being allowed to be in administration after next March may well mean there are no matches to go and watch.

[TuffLuff]

14 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Dunno just get this:

 

Man who spends his time riling up Derby fans with a conspiracy narrative then wonders why the only journalist who is keeping fans updated daily is harassed off Twitter?

Maybe @_derby5hire needs to realise he’s part of the problem.