The Administration Thread

[Sparkle]

15 minutes ago, Mckram said:

I also had a reply from Rick Parry.

Effectively he said P&S is not fit for purpose. The loophole to sell stadiums being an example of that. He also said that parachute payments don’t work because it means that other clubs can’t compete. So they acknowledge the issues at least.

Also said they don’t encourage disputes between teams and that there’s an arbitration process to deal with them which is objective and impartial and apparently works.

Finished that they don’t want to lose Derby but they have to follow their insolvency policy consistently.

Did he actually suggest what they are actually doing about any of it? Or are they still waiting for the the government to tell the rich boy league to be nicer to the poor boy league which is never going to happen.

[Miggins]

6 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

If you know this then why do you let it upset you 

 

Edited January 16, 2022 by Miggins

[Sparkle]

22 minutes ago, Mckram said:

I also had a reply from Rick Parry.

Effectively he said P&S is not fit for purpose. The loophole to sell stadiums being an example of that. He also said that parachute payments don’t work because it means that other clubs can’t compete. So they acknowledge the issues at least.

Also said they don’t encourage disputes between teams and that there’s an arbitration process to deal with them which is objective and impartial and apparently works.

Finished that they don’t want to lose Derby but they have to follow their insolvency policy consistently.

Actually thinking again is he indicating that they are going to let off clubs with P&S issues (FFP) but obviously not us.

[hintonsboots]

1 minute ago, Sparkle said:

Actually thinking again is he indicating that they are going to let off clubs with P&S issues (FFP) but obviously not us.

Boro ? For example.

[PistoldPete]

39 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Yes there are loads of outraged posts on here saying the EFl has caused this problem by claiming Boro is a ‘Football creditor’. (I don’t think it’s  the cause of the problem, but it makes it a bigger one )

The definition of “Football Creditor” I could find includes this: 

“80.1.3 any Member Club and any Club of The FA Premier League;”

Seems pretty clear (if I’ve got the right definition)

It’s tempting to say- well the claims are rubbish so Boro will never become a creditor. A very sensible proposition. The infuriating but unavoidable response by the regulator to that proposition is: “we can only come to that conclusion when the claim has been adjudicated by arbitration”

 

The issue is that they are not a class of creditor that can rank alongside proper footbal creditor items like player wages, unpaid transfer fees etc.

So unlike proper football creditor items they cannot trump insolvency law, and jump ahead of HMRC. And that's how it should be .. why should HMRC get squeezed out by these dodgy claims? 


 

[CBRammette]

3 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

Boro ? For example.

That is opening themselves up for more litigation is rules still in place but they waive for some. Eg Reading have lost points already. If others dont  when Reading relegated they can claim 

[PistoldPete]

24 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

It actually does all tie up.

A restructuring plan involves starting a new company, transferring the golden share to that company and paying off whatever percentage to the creditors that can be agreed. The old company then folds, and all its liabilities no longer exist, including the claims of Wycombe and Middlesbrough. The administrators would effectively strike off those claims.

The EFL have ruled against this, believing that the claims should go through due process and not just be wiped away because the administrators cannot deal with them.

The EFL are saying that an exit from administration via a CVA is perfectly possible, so a preferred bidder can be named, it's just that the new owners will have to deal with the claims and pay any subsequent liabilities generated as if they were footballing debts. In a CVA the existing company continues, so it can still retain some of the old liabilities. 

It actually makes sense. The problem is, will anyone pay £50m for the club, £20m for the stadium and risk another £50m if they lose the case?

Peculiarly, the Boro and Wycombe cases aren't technically stopping us naming a preferred bidder, but appear to be the reason that no bidder is willing to sign up.

 

As i say that isn't what the admin team has said. They have said the buyers can deal with the Boro and Wycombe claims if necessary.

[Boycie]

I wonder if someone else has a charge on PP or Moor Farm that we don’t know about?

Did a previous prospective buyer lend MM money thinking it would come off the sale price?

[Mckram]

27 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Did he actually suggest what they are actually doing about any of it? Or are they still waiting for the the government to tell the rich boy league to be nicer to the poor boy league which is never going to happen.

Nope said the P&S issues are ‘for another day’ and that they’re ‘working hard to find a solution’ to the Boro situation.

 

[Gritstone Tup]

14 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

The issue is that they are not a class of creditor that can rank alongside proper footbal creditor items like player wages, unpaid transfer fees etc.

So unlike proper football creditor items they cannot trump insolvency law, and jump ahead of HMRC. And that's how it should be .. why should HMRC get squeezed out by these dodgy claims? 


 

HMRC won’t be squeezed by anyone, the new governance of the EFL will be having its balls squeezed to make sure football isn’t seen to be taking advantage of the public purse.

[angieram]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, as it's fairly deep into legalese and that's certainly not my area of expertise. But Parry's comments to individual people emailing him don't sound to me like they are demanding the Wycombe and Boro threats be settled - not in as many words. It sounds like he's saying there's a standard process in EFL rules which means we should be looking at the internal mediation.

Wycombe and Boro aren't claims - there's no legal reason that we have to consider their request for payment. It's solely down to the EFL rules that say members with grievances need to use their framework to resolve them, and they won't allow the sale to proceed until these grievances are resolved.

So why don't the Administrators push the EFL to do that, at the earliest opportunity?

Then the EFL have to decide if the claims have merit - and if they decide they do, they truly have opened pandora's box on themselves. I think that could be the death knell of the football league, as every team can make a claim that something cost them points, which cost them places, which cost them money and promotion.

I also wonder how our wage bill is so high, when we've got such a small group of players with a lot of youth and academy stars in there. Surely they aren't a huge overhead on our wage bill?

 

I think our club is rightly wary that any process instigated by the EFL will be fair and impartial, Gboro. We haven't fared very well with their arbitration to date, in fairness.

[PistoldPete]

3 minutes ago, angieram said:

I think our club is rightly wary that any process instigated by the EFL will be fair and impartial, Gboro. We haven't fared very well with their arbitration to date, in unfairness.

FTFY.

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, angieram said:

I think our club is rightly wary that any process instigated by the EFL will be fair and impartial, Gboro. We haven't fared very well with their arbitration to date, in fairness.

I know, but genuinely, what happens if the arbitration says they have merit? What happens when dozens of clubs start filing claims for losses in the past? The EFL might want to make an example of us, but that would be cutting their own throats. 

[PistoldPete]

6 minutes ago, Gritstone Tup said:

HMRC won’t be squeezed by anyone, the new governance of the EFL will be having its balls squeezed to make sure football isn’t seen to be taking advantage of the public purse.

And when the issue came up in the case of Inland Revenue v Wimbledon, who was the administrator for Wimbledon, but Mr Andrew Hosking (then at Grant Thornton). Do EFL not think he understands the issues here?  And does the EFL not realise how it would look if Boro's ambulance chasing claims jumps ahead of HMRC in the creditor queue? Or even cause liquidation meaning HMRC gets nothing?  

 

[Rambalin]

4 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I know, but genuinely, what happens if the arbitration says they have merit? What happens when dozens of clubs start filing claims for losses in the past? The EFL might want to make an example of us, but that would be cutting their own throats. 

It would but it does not really help us.... No buyer will currently purchase the club whilst no ruling has been made unless they are indemnified against it. 

[angieram]

5 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I know, but genuinely, what happens if the arbitration says they have merit? What happens when dozens of clubs start filing claims for losses in the past? The EFL might want to make an example of us, but that would be cutting their own throats. 

I agree, but that appears to be what they are saying.

They could be saying to the administrators "Trust us, we're on your side in this" but then we're back to square one. Would you trust the EFL to stick to their word? I know I wouldn't. 

[GboroRam]

Just now, Rambalin said:

It would but it does not really help us.... No buyer will currently purchase the club whilst no ruling has been made unless they are indemnified against it. 

That's why I'm thinking the administrators could push for arbitration immediately. No way would the EFL risk giving credence to Wycombe or Boro. Once it is dismissed, we're free to name a buyer. 

[Jimbo Ram]

Regardless of the Gibbon, surely the EFL will think this through and realise that this will open the biggest can of worms and create problems between teams that they simply won’t be able to deal with. I am hoping common sense prevails on this….

[IslandExile]

Just now, GboroRam said:

That's why I'm thinking the administrators could push for arbitration immediately. No way would the EFL risk giving credence to Wycombe or Boro. Once it is dismissed, we're free to name a buyer. 

How long before the arbitration process would complete? Maybe too late.

[angieram]

2 hours ago, i-Ram said:

You seem to have taken my reply as some kind of personal dig. It wasn’t, and sorry if that is how it might have felt. I don’t expect you of course to offer unpaid Secretarial support for RamsTrust. For fans who are not members of RT though, I would have thought some post on here as to the position and proposals might be rather useful from Jim Wheeler or one of his executive. I am often tempted to stay way from this board. Twitter I rejected as a medium for social discourse and idea sharing many years ago ?

Iram, they are just so busy. Jim's email inbox is completely full. 

I just would say that if people really want to know what RT are doing, they can pay their £2 and become members OR join Twitter and follow them.

They just haven't got the volunteers to come on every messageboard to engage with everyone.