Day Posted January 21, 2022 Author Share Posted January 21, 2022 16 minutes ago, RamsfanJim said: Interesting - these minutes WERE written by Quantuma (or the club secretary). duncanjwitham and The Scarlet Pimpernel 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 21, 2022 Author Share Posted January 21, 2022 6 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said: David wouldn’t allow Kevin the tos$er I did try and negotiate you down to Kevin the EFL apologist, breaking my own rules to let you have a username that length, but you wasn't interested! ?? kevinhectoring 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Ram Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 19 minutes ago, David said: I did try and negotiate you down to Kevin the EFL apologist, breaking my own rules to let you have a username that length, but you wasn't interested! ?? Weren’t ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 21, 2022 Author Share Posted January 21, 2022 1 minute ago, i-Ram said: Weren’t ? You weren't meant to be reading into my post that deeply! i-Ram and kevinhectoring 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 12 hours ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said: I've run out of things to ask. I think we can only wait and see what develops now. What did you have for dinner ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 7 hours ago, PistoldPete said: So you don’t think they have experts in football law to look at it as well? With Derby’s very existence depending on it? Experts in football law ??!! Did I hear you right? is this QC’s who can do keepy uppies?? it’s a simple contractual point on the EFl articles which requires knowledge of restructuring/insolvency law and practice. It’s got nothing to do with football. Well except that the participants get paid very well I have thought about this very deeply Derby_Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 12 hours ago, kevinhectoring said: Experts in football law ??!! Did I hear you right? is this QC’s who can do keepy uppies?? it’s a simple contractual point on the EFl articles which requires knowledge of restructuring/insolvency law and practice. It’s got nothing to do with football. Well except that the participants get paid very well I have thought about this very deeply Ok so you don’t think quantuma and a sports lawyer between them can’t work it out? Think very deeply now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 22, 2022 Author Share Posted January 22, 2022 ariotofmyown and PistoldPete 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipperram Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 So still absolving themselves of any accountability.... is it not for them to decide if MFC an WW are to be considered football creditors.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 So who decides if they are football creditors or not? Can someone ask the EFL? Indy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Ram Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 45 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said: So who decides if they are football creditors or not? Can someone ask the EFL? Boro's recent statement specifically addresses this question in relation to the way Derby have allegedly delayed the resolution of their claim. "Had it been finally determined, and an award made in favour of MFC, there would be no dispute that MFC would be a Football Creditor." This is consistent with the rules cited in the first post of this thread. So they aren't football creditors but now but they will be in the future if they win their case. I've yet to hear a convincing argument to the contrary but would very much like to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 2 hours ago, David said: So Rick has become Danny? Whoever is writing this stuff, still playing the blame game. Still not getting it. And not answering a simple question about Boro and Wycombe claims. Are they football creditors or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Fran Van Rams Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 1 hour ago, Red Ram said: Boro's recent statement specifically addresses this question in relation to the way Derby have allegedly delayed the resolution of their claim. "Had it been finally determined, and an award made in favour of MFC, there would be no dispute that MFC would be a Football Creditor." This is consistent with the rules cited in the first post of this thread. So they aren't football creditors but now but they will be in the future if they win their case. I've yet to hear a convincing argument to the contrary but would very much like to? For me this is exactly the issue. The EFL are threatening withdrawal of the golden share as we can't get funding in for the rest of the season. This would make us worthless. The admins plan is for the funding to come from restructuring the debt and the new owners coming in. The EFL are forcing us to hear via arbitration the baseless and vexatious legal claims that haven't gone through a court of law and can't as we're in admin. EFL are forcing this as they believe all clubs deserve to have their claims heard and not allowing this to set a precedent. New owners don't want the risk of the arbitration going against us as the claims would turn into football debt, even though they aren't at the moment. We'd then be facing a further 15 point deduction next season which could relegate us to league two. EFL needs to come out and say to M and W they're not permitted to pursue their claims as the DC didn't offer them any compensation as the final decision (as per EFL rules) and that all future compensation decisions for clubs must be made at the DC hearings the sanctions are decided at. It can't be that hard for EFL to do this. It's frustrating. On one hand, the EFL want to be the law, yet on the other, say they can't interfere. Which is it?? Indy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Fran Van Rams Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 Oh and the EFL are hell bent on us selling players to raise funds. Crewton and Indy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 (edited) 10 hours ago, PistoldPete said: Ok so you don’t think quantuma and a sports lawyer between them can’t work it out? Think very deeply now? Sorry to be blunt but ‘sports lawyers’ aren’t the go-to people for contractual issues nor for restructuring expertise. Quantuma have no legal expertise whatsoever, it’s not their thing Edited January 22, 2022 by kevinhectoring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 11 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said: Sorry to be blunt but ‘sports lawyers’ aren’t the go-to people for contractual issues nor for restructuring expertise. Quantuma have no legal expertise whatsoever, it’s not their thing Quantuma are not the go to guys for restructuring expertise? So who is ? You? I think I prefer top rely on them , thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 (edited) 15 minutes ago, PistoldPete said: Quantuma are not the go to guys for restructuring expertise? So who is ? You? I think I prefer top rely on them , thanks. Sure Q have restructuring expertise, there is no doubt they are smart and experienced. I thought we were discussing legal expertise ? They don’t have that though like most restructuring accountants and bankers many of them doubtless have very good practical knowledge of law as it applies to restructurings. I don’t really know whether the ‘football creditors’ rooster up is their fault or their lawyers’ - it may just have been a point that fell between two stools Edited January 22, 2022 by kevinhectoring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 2 hours ago, San Fran Van Rams said: For me this is exactly the issue. The EFL are threatening withdrawal of the golden share as we can't get funding in for the rest of the season. This would make us worthless. The admins plan is for the funding to come from restructuring the debt and the new owners coming in. The EFL are forcing us to hear via arbitration the baseless and vexatious legal claims that haven't gone through a court of law and can't as we're in admin. EFL are forcing this as they believe all clubs deserve to have their claims heard and not allowing this to set a precedent. New owners don't want the risk of the arbitration going against us as the claims would turn into football debt, even though they aren't at the moment. We'd then be facing a further 15 point deduction next season which could relegate us to league two. EFL needs to come out and say to M and W they're not permitted to pursue their claims as the DC didn't offer them any compensation as the final decision (as per EFL rules) and that all future compensation decisions for clubs must be made at the DC hearings the sanctions are decided at. It can't be that hard for EFL to do this. It's frustrating. On one hand, the EFL want to be the law, yet on the other, say they can't interfere. Which is it?? Its Parrys personal relationship with Gibson that is over riding EFL rules. Plain and simple cowardice from Parry and vindictiveness from Gibson. RoyMac5 and Indy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 2 hours ago, San Fran Van Rams said: Oh and the EFL are hell bent on us selling players to raise funds. I certainly hope we don’t sell any more. But as a tax payer I can see why they might say we should conduct a fire sale and go down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 (edited) 9 hours ago, kevinhectoring said: I certainly hope we don’t sell any more. But as a tax payer I can see why they might say we should conduct a fire sale and go down I really don't know where you're coming from Kevin. The government clearly said in the House of Commons that the HMRC debt is not the issue here. The sports minister said it at the end of the debate last week. The only thing stopping this club surviving is the vexatious ambulance chasing Gibson and his chum Parry. Edited January 23, 2022 by angieram RamuelLJackson and RoyMac5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts