The Administration Thread

[StarterForTen]

14 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

The EFL can back down and quickly they can also threaten to charge both parasite clubs with acting against the spirit of the league in fact they can impose anything they like based on our experiences 

All the EFL have to do is support the simple (and bloody obvious) fact that, as things currently stand, the claims made by MFC and WWFC are NOT considered Football debts, or indeed creditor debts of any standing.

They are potential future liabilities nothing more and, in a Cross-Class Cram Down action, could be wiped out completely by actions of the Administrators. In doing so, as these would not be Football Creditors, the exit from Administration could still follow the EFL's own Insolvency rules.

[Sparkle]

13 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

On a hunch, I'd say Couhig is more likely to be swayed by Wycombe fan opinion than Gibson. We should just be making the point to them that we broke no rules whatsoever when we submitted our accounts on the date we did. Their problem should be with the EFL for allowing us to do this.

Which is what I was suggesting - in terms of the Wycombe fans I suspect there are plenty of them who don’t trust him either ! 

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

They are potential future liabilities nothing more and, in a Cross-Class Cram Down action, could be wiped out completely by actions of the Administrators. In doing so, as these would not be Football Creditors, the exit from Administration could still follow the EFL's own Insolvency rules.

As much as this seems to be the cleanest route out of admin, there's definitely a part of me that thinks we need to have the cases heard and thrown out, for the sake of football as much as anything.

And I do wonder whether they actually would be wiped out.  If we were to exit admin without dealing with those cases, what's to stop 'Boro and Wycombe filing new cases against the new company?  I'm sure they're willing to argue that if the new company inherits the club's golden share, league placing, history, trophies etc, then they should also inherit their liabilities too.  There seems to be nothing stopping EFL clubs filing for arbitration against any other club for any reason.

[Sparkle]

7 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

All the EFL have to do is support the simple (and bloody obvious) fact that, as things currently stand, the claims made by MFC and WWFC are NOT considered Football debts, or indeed creditor debts of any standing.

They are potential future liabilities nothing more and, in a Cross-Class Cram Down action, could be wiped out completely by actions of the Administrators. In doing so, as these would not be Football Creditors, the exit from Administration could still follow the EFL's own Insolvency rules.

It’s worth noting that it’s the football clubs allegedly taking action and not the owners - the owners can sue us all they want if they had a case but they have to go to court where as this charade wants a kangaroo court to impose sanctions

[BriggRam]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Most football fans I know think Leicester City are a tainted club and will refer to the fact that they screwed over local buinesses.

Often gets mentioned when the media say what a fairytale story them winning the league was.

Not sure about that mate, I live in Lincolnshire and all my mates and people I spoke too were rooting for Liecester the underdogs to win the league......I was in a very small minority that wanted Spurs to win it that season, and alot of people didn't know why

Edited January 19, 2022 by BriggRam

[Eddie]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

There's not really much to disagree about what they say is there?

This debt has come about by a multi millionaire, paying other millionaires salaries, and the people that will pick up the tab is the taxpayer.

We look at it through Derby tinted glasses but if it was another club I'd think exactly the same as this person.

Of course, i don't want to see us liquidated but if we do find any new owners, and they buy the club under the agreement of paying the creditors a single penny less than what they are due, our club will be tainted.

As Leicester were, and still are.

[Sparkle]

17 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Here is a different angle - have 9 other football clubs in the EFL realised they will MISS a home game if Derby don't carry on after Jan 31st. That is 9 teams missing out on 100-200k income per game. Do they all take their claim to the EFL for this missed income? 15 teams will have benefitted from an additional game which may be struck of the records but they won't be giving ticket holders money back.

Also - not to mention - will every one of those 9 clubs need to look at their season ticket holders and refund a game?

I dare say the 9 clubs have a valid claim against the EFL for loss of income. 

Then on top of this - there will be seven teams who beat us, who would want the points from that game to count - so surely those seven teams would want DCFC to survive as well.

Then the minefield continues - is it 2 down, 3 up? Do the EFL really want to be sorting all of this out two-thirds of the way through a season.

There will be some unhappy people everywhere - and given that any team seems to be able to make absolutely ridiculous claims, then that is a minefield for the EFL!

All complexities but they all need to be focusing on the two parasite clubs and the EFL then and maybe threatening legal action of their own because we have 3 bidders who can’t bid due to a dreadful perception by the EFL 

[TheSlate]

47 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Can we email this guy directly? Putting the points to him he didn't answer? A few hundred should do it.

http://www.couhigpartners.com/robcouhig.html 

Edited January 19, 2022 by TheSlate
Removed email address

[TheSlate]

4 minutes ago, TheSlate said:

http://www.couhigpartners.com/robcouhig.html 

If I didn't have a grievance with Mr. Couhig because of his claim, and took my bias away, he seems like a good bloke. Then my senses kick in and remind me that he's a lawyer, who, like accountants sit in the legal thieves camp. Tribulations. 

[LauraH]

Possibly clumsy wording here from Dawes. 

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by LauraH

[Ram-Alf]

12 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Can we guse dopey, grumpy, stinky, bashful, baldy and cancerous tumor are in the story?

We are playing Black and White and the seven creditors aren't we?

Have you been on the lash Radio, And it's spelt Goose... Guse?

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, LauraH said:

Possibly clumsy wording here from Dawes. 

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by RoyMac5

[StaffsRam]

3 minutes ago, LauraH said:

Possibly clumsy wording here from Dawes. 

 

What bid?

[Tamworthram]

27 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Here is a different angle - have 9 other football clubs in the EFL realised they will MISS a home game if Derby don't carry on after Jan 31st. That is 9 teams missing out on 100-200k income per game. Do they all take their claim to the EFL for this missed income? 15 teams will have benefitted from an additional game which may be struck of the records but they won't be giving ticket holders money back.

Also - not to mention - will every one of those 9 clubs need to look at their season ticket holders and refund a game?

I dare say the 9 clubs have a valid claim against the EFL for loss of income. 

Then on top of this - there will be seven teams who beat us, who would want the points from that game to count - so surely those seven teams would want DCFC to survive as well.

Then the minefield continues - is it 2 down, 3 up? Do the EFL really want to be sorting all of this out two-thirds of the way through a season.

There will be some unhappy people everywhere - and given that any team seems to be able to make absolutely ridiculous claims, then that is a minefield for the EFL!

This arbitrary deadline of 1st Feb strikes me as another example of the EFL trying to bully and blackmail the club.

If the club can't provide evidence of sufficient funding to see us through until the end of the season it doesn't actually mean we won't be able to complete the season. We just can't prove it by the deadline they want to impose. Who would it benefit if we were expelled? Certainly not the creditors, players, staff, fans or other clubs. Not even the EFL. I can see the argument for keeping the transfer embargo in place but not expulsion.

[Ewetube]

This whole situation is, if not wholly of the EFL's making, is certainly compounded by it to the point of it being inexorable.

They have stymied our trading with constant embargoes, throttled us financially by preventing benefit from the covid loan.

They have encouraged the parasites to save their own hides:

don't sue us, sue them;

dual fixture lists;

leaks to the press.

 

Yet they have no vendetta against us, oh do cluck off EFL, you're fooling no one.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Ewetube
Limited brain cells

[StarterForTen]

3 minutes ago, StaffsRam said:

What bid?

The 'bid' to make a statement I presume

[Rammy03]

Just now, StarterForTen said:

The 'bid' to make a statement I presume

What a poor choice of words

[StaffsRam]

2 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

The 'bid' to make a statement I presume

If so that’s a mental way of phrasing it.

[RadioactiveWaste]

6 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Have you been on the lash Radio, And it's spelt Goose... Guse?

I made poor decisions last night.

[Ram-Alf]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

So I guess John Smith isn’t his real name?

I think he's just Bitter