Jump to content

The Administration Thread


Boycie

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, plymouthram said:

Mike Ashley wants Derby for peanuts and is hoping Andy Appleby's group will fail.  The EFL and Q are now under pressure to get a deal done and thats to save face from previous balls up by both parties. I feel Andy Appleby will get the club and it will happen very quick. Bargain hunter Mike Ashley will turn his attention to Sheffield Utd which is closer to Shirebrook (Sports Direct HQ) than Derby.

The fixtures are released on Thursday and I feel there could be a big announcement on the Friday.

Didn't someone buy sheff utd not long ago? Must've grown tired of the yorkshirreness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:

Saw something this morning that said he still has shares on Newcastle. If true he would not be allowed to own another club?

He doesn't. Newcastle is owned 80% by the Saudi Public Investment Fund, 10% RB Sports & Media (Reuben brothers) and the other 10% PCP Capital Partners (Amanda Staveley.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After telling myself last night I'm going to stop looking for a while, as it wasn't doing my mental health any good, yeah  you know it, I had to just have "one quick look" tonight.

Christ on a bike! Actual positivity. AA looks like he could get it over the line. I long for a time 2 years in the future where we could look forward to a ' Barker type ' fee - Not a Mel type fee, that could bankrupt us.

Boring finances are good if they ensure our survival - and out of all the names in the frame Mr Apples is our sensible nan, who tells us not want we want, but what we need and can afford.

Please get it over the line Andy...????

I bet Cockerney Mike is seething though. Beware the bruised ego attempting to scupper the deal, and looking under the sofa cushions in Ashley Towers to find the odd extra million to save face. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, I know nuffin said:

Saw something this morning that said he still has shares on Newcastle. If true he would not be allowed to own another club?

I recall him having some issue when he sold up regarding money he'd lent someone to buy shares in the club and went to court about it or some such convoluted nonsense.  I assume if he does he may do a Maxwell and sign them over to an Ian for safekeeping, or the Oxford syndrome as it's better known. 

It won't be him anyway, he's had ample opportunity to pull 40 -45 million out his arse at any point and hasn't bothered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

So has Mrs iram now had chance to opine on the following proposition (which you denounced ‘drivel’)?

if an IP is owed a debt by the insolvent party which is material to the IP, this can give rise to a conflict and may require the IP to resign its position, or to appoint an alternate IP to determine any and all matters to which the conflict relates 

I can just hear her now, sweet thing that she is: “oh iram,   poor, poor Kevin, why DO you say these things? And that horrible thing you said about his poor wife “
 

(Seriously, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that - if loans are to be made by AA or whomever - that part of those loans are applied to reduce Q’s exposure )

Mrs I-Ram says, ‘he does bang on doesn’t he love, but if he wants me to play his games what is his definition of material’. She also said ‘my understanding love is there is no debt presently as those nice chaps at Quantuma haven’t been billing as yet”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

The EFL were simply trying to distance themselves from the blame that would ensued if we had gone into liquidation.

 

The condition imposed by EFL can be assessed in the context of :

A the impact on the sale process

B the impact on Q’s standing and their level of time cost recovery

C EFL’s motivation in imposing the condition 

Surely it is obvious that B and C should not play any part in Q’s decision as to how to respond to the condition 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Mrs I-Ram says, ‘he does bang on doesn’t he love, but if he wants me to play his games what is his definition of material’. She also said ‘my understanding love is there is no debt presently as those nice chaps at Quantuma haven’t been billing as yet”.

Haha - the old girl’s not on bad form  

but does she really think this might not be material to Messrs Hoskin and Jackson, the decision makers?   (she’ll know people use 5% as a broad brush test of materiality)

And have they not been billing? Or have they not been receiving payment ? And does she really think it makes a difference ? 

 

 

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...