The Administration Thread

[Sparkle]

37 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Clearly set out in the EFL rules for clubs exiting administration.

Yet it isn’t 

[atherstoneram]

Just now, Sparkle said:

Yet it isn’t 

It's there if you look for it.

[Ghost of Clough]

2 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

We won't know what the business plan will be that will have been discussed and agreed by the parties concerned and will be restrictive as opposed to what we could spend as per ratio of income. When you have debts of £30+ million there is no way the EFL will let a club go spending "x" millions of one player. The debts at Wigan were nowhere near as much as ours if i remember.

Only £45,712,567 of debt.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Seen posts from you on various aspects but not this one. Sorry if I missed it.  What are your views on the question you raised - ie the likelihood of co-investment between DC  and AA?

Go to my profile and trawl through the posts from today. It's all there. Basically, I think that IF all comes to a final agreement then Appleby through General Sports Worldwide will be a shareholder in the club. Whether the consortium will extend beyond DC and GSW I have no idea. But my understanding is that since CK withdrew, and maybe even before, there has been a lot of co-operation between the two and that would go some way to explaining how DC has gone so quickly from being the man to buy the stadium for CK  to the man to buy the club as well in such a short space of time since CK withdrew and all of a sudden the takeover is nearly complete. Sam Rush has been helping because of his knowledge of EFL protocols but he has no designs on coming back to working within the club.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Brailsford Ram

[curb]

23 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

Ownership or partnership? The League of Gentlemen was a partnership and it wasn't very complicated. It rescued us very successfully from the Three Amigos, two of whom went to prison together with their solicitor and financial director ?

Thanks for the history lesson, but I’m old enough to remember.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, curb said:

Thanks for the history lesson, but I’m old enough to remember.

If you'd remembered or understood that in the first place, I wouldn't have had to point it out to you then ?

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Don’t think it will happen, but it’s still not impossible that Ashley will swoop 

Impossible unless David Clowes relinquishes his exclusivity and just how likely do you think that is after his mammoth efforts of the past month? Do you believe in fairies?

And if you don't believe it will happen, why even say it?

Edited June 26, 2022 by Brailsford Ram

[atherstoneram]

1 hour ago, Ambitious said:

People who know him personally have mentioned that he has always said he had no interest in becoming owner, which makes sense, but he had the means and could see the club potentially going into a season without a fighting chance. I think he will get someone in to run the club, he’s fully engaged with his day job, he just hasn’t got the time or the know-how.

He certainly won't be doing a MM of trying to run the club without any knowledge

[Ambitious]

I do find restrictions to investment crazy after a club has gone into administration, it’s another backwards EFL rule. 

On one hand you’re begging for someone to bail out a club from going out of existence then on the other you’re telling that saviour: ‘oh, but you have to work under all these new conditions’ due to sins of the previous owner. 

There has to be a better way, especially when the actual bloke who caused this entire mess gets away almost no liability.

I know it’s an oversimplification, but an escrow account where new owners could put money in to cover investments makes sense. Equally, I’d love owners to be personally responsible for their actions. No reason to why football clubs are treated like any other limited company. Nothing is set in stone and there should be protections in place for fans of these huge community assets. Investment should be welcomed. When money is spent everyone benefits, but far more is focused on the buying club than the selling club. An active market actually benefits smaller clubs who can hold out for more money for their top players, but in a slower market, it only helps the rich get richer.

It’s another frustration I have with the EFL and their shortsightedness. 

[atherstoneram]

47 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

I think you underestimate the munificence of St David. I think he was determined to save us. Once he had bought the stadium, he knew that was in his power because he knew he himself was willing to make a bid for the club that cleared the points deduction hurdle. 
 

He was (is) our underwriter. 
 

If it proved that Ashley was willing to pay more than DC for the club, fine. I think DC would have let him have it and would have negotiated a long term lease. (That constitutes ownership of the stadium for all intents and purposes) 

Don’t think it will happen, but it’s still not impossible that Ashley will swoop 

Ashley has spouted a lot via his media friends but never once put his money were his mouth is.

[Van der MoodHoover]

2 hours ago, hintonsboots said:

Would little Ern be in agreement?

If Wayne was still with us it would have been a little "erm...." ?

[Sparkle]

27 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

It's there if you look for it.

Then you will be able to show it in the rule book for all to see - if you can’t - well you know ! 

[atherstoneram]

8 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

I do find restrictions to investment crazy after a club has gone into administration, it’s another backwards EFL rule. 

On one hand you’re begging for someone to bail out a club from going out of existence then on the other you’re telling that saviour: ‘oh, but you have to work under all these new conditions’ due to sins of the previous owner. 

There has to be a better way, especially when the actual bloke who caused this entire mess gets away almost no liability.

I know it’s an oversimplification, but an escrow account where new owners could put money in to cover investments makes sense. Equally, I’d love owners to be personally responsible for their actions. No reason to why football clubs are treated like any other limited company. Nothing is set in stone and there should be protections in place for fans of these huge community assets. Investment should be welcomed. When money is spent everyone benefits, but far more is focused on the buying club than the selling club. An active market actually benefits smaller clubs who can hold out for more money for their top players, but in a slower market, it only helps the rich get richer.

It’s another frustration I have with the EFL and their shortsightedness. 

Because the EFL don't want another "Leicester" to happen.

[atherstoneram]

7 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Then you will be able to show it in the rule book for all to see - if you can’t - well you know ! 

Whatever.

[Sparkle]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

Whatever.

Like I said you keep saying stuff as fact yet it seems it’s not, let’s not push the point as you’ve demonstrated yours 

[Ghost of Clough]

8 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Because the EFL don't want another "Leicester" to happen.

Which is why the 12 points deduction for entering administration were introduced.

[kevinhectoring]

22 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

Impossible unless David Clowes relinquishes his exclusivity and just how likely do you think that is after his mammoth efforts of the past month? Do you believe in fairies?

And if you don't believe it will happen, why even say it?

Clowes has complete control absolutely right. But if someone comes in with a better deal and if you’re  in the large camp of people who think Clowes is ambivalent about ownership, sure he might step aside. I mention it because it’s still a possibility. A slim one 

[Caerphilly Ram]

13 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Then you will be able to show it in the rule book for all to see - if you can’t - well you know ! 

Yeah, I’ve been through this a couple of times and can’t find the info about what happens AFTER administration/an insolvency event (which seems to be the term used in the EFL rules). Plenty in there about the points deductions at the start of such an event, just not the afters.

https://www.efl.com/contentassets/b3cd34c726c341ca9636610aa4503172/regulations-season-2021-22-final.1.pdf

There’s various articles and a couple of legal pages online that cite info about it, the 35p over 3 years or 25p in one go and the like. But nothing about a business plan and revenues that I can see in the official regs. I’m aware it’s late and my brain is even less effective than it’s normal limited functions. Is anyone able to direct me to it?

Not the most thrilling reading I know but would be good to see in published regs what the likely scenario is for the immediate future of the club rather than having to speculate or guess what the wise and powerful EFL may do.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Caerphilly Ram

[B4ev6is]

42 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

We won't know what the business plan will be that will have been discussed and agreed by the parties concerned and will be restrictive as opposed to what we could spend as per ratio of income. When you have debts of £30+ million there is no way the EFL will let a club go spending "x" millions of one player. The debts at Wigan were nowhere near as much as ours if i remember.

I think all depends if clows can just clear the lot which means we could be allowed to spend fees on players.

[kevinhectoring]

39 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

Go to my profile and trawl through the posts from today. It's all there. Basically, I think that IF all comes to a final agreement then Appleby through General Sports Worldwide will be a shareholder in the club. Whether the consortium will extend beyond DC and GSW I have no idea. But my understanding is that since CK withdrew, and maybe even before, there has been a lot of co-operation between the two and that would go some way to explaining how DC has gone so quickly from being the man to buy the stadium for CK  to the man to buy the club as well in such a short space of time since CK withdrew and all of a sudden the takeover is nearly complete. Sam Rush has been helping because of his knowledge of EFL protocols but he has no designs on coming back to working within the club.

I’m not itk so have no inside view on what’s likely to happen. I also completely understand if Clowes says - this is the family silver, I need to derisk.

But for me a consortium is a weak ownership model and I’ll be disappointed if we end up in the position where decision making is stymied by lengthy clauses in shareholders agreement.