[cite]Posted By: RalphMilnesgut[/cite]
1. What is in it for the buyer if we are administration? Do they get CAFC cheaper and what penalties apart from 10 points would the club incur?
2. What is in it for the current owners to keep us out of administration? If a buyer did not come staright away, would we need to sell assets like players, training ground, The Valley? Are their investments somehow protected.
3. If we go into admin and then the new chaps snap us up straight away, do we only suffer a 10 point reduction.
1. They'd get the club with a large proportion of the debts wiped out.
2. As things stand when they sell they will probably do so at a loss and will probably have to write off or restructure their current loans to the club. They would do this in their own terms. The administrator would take this out of their hands and (presumably) write off more of their loans in a bid to make the club a more viable going concern. In short money. The administrator would make us sell whichever assets they felt we could get a good price for, so if someone put in a reasonable bit for Jonjo for example they'd be likely to take the cash.
3. Yes.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]perhaps murrays comments the other week were aimed at his fellow board members to accept the situation and follow his lead in writing off their investment, that's the way I read it anyway
Yes that is how I read it and what I hope for too.
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]I just get the feeling that past fallings out and the departure of PV have left a lot of simmering resentments. "I told you so at the time" seems writ large and the consortium see themselves as the rescuers and they want gratitude and humility from the fallen along with their pound of flesh. Big personalities and history are playing a very large part IMO.
I think PV is really only acting as a consultant to the bid and isn't actually part of it. Sadly I think the one issue is the amount of debt that the current board are prepared to wipe out: far more likely that cash is in the way rather than egos.
yes, hence the points deduction to stop clubs doing this deliberately - this was more about unfriendly debt and I guess the FA thought it was an unfair advantage and could bring the game into disrepute affecting the 'credit rating' of all clubs
re players I think they would pretty much start haucking them around other clubs to generate and auction and take the best offer after a period of time, they might also get valuations done.
[cite]Posted By: Sailor Browneye[/cite]I think his decisions have cost the club dear in terms of where it finds itself in the league (our second relegation was a disgrace and could and should have been averted but wasn't largely on monetary grounds) and we can add into this various well spun stories emanating from the club which amounted to little more than hot air
There's a danger we will take this thread off at a tangent. But I do think its important to point out that we don't know how decisions were made. For sure Richard Murray has made some mistakes, and some of them will have been costly. But I know he will have taken them because he wanted what we wanted. Generally when he was the dominant force, most of those decisions were excellent. We don't know what happened from the time Derek Chappell joined the Board, and began to assume more power. I have never understood what Derek Chappell wanted for the club, how he proposed to get there, and how this may have differed from Murray's vision. I also have misgivings about Bob Whitehand based on my limited personal dealings with him, although in his case it may simply be that he inhabits a different planet to me.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]perhaps murrays comments the other week were aimed at his fellow board members to accept the situation and follow his lead in writing off their investment, that's the way I read it anyway
Yes that is how I read it and what I hope for too.
I read it like that as well because if he thought there was merit in holding a line on the price/debt write off, why make it clear you are prepared to lose your entire investment?
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]to be fair to both Bob Whitehand and Derek Chappel he has thrown a load of money at the club.
Yes that is perfectly true, and in Whitehand's case he has been there a long time without apparently making any destabilising moves. My main point is that it's not just about Richard Murray.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]perhaps murrays comments the other week were aimed at his fellow board members to accept the situation and follow his lead in writing off their investment, that's the way I read it anyway
The administrator has a balancing act. Realising assets can prove risky because it can make it harder to find a buyer. Selling all your best players means any new investment would have to replace them or run serious risk of relegation bearing in mind the already aquired ten point deficit.
[cite]Posted By: se9addick[/cite]....Are you allowed to do something as cynical as go into administration simply to wipe the slate clean for future owners ?
That's exactly what Ken Bates did at Leeds.
Has anyone considered the possibility that a member(s) of the current board may be part of the consortium bidding for the club? I have no idea if it is so but it might explain the complete paralysis of the club's vocal chords.
[cite]Posted By: se9addick[/cite]If we go into admin, will the administrators sell all the decent players for penuts ?
Are you allowed to do something as cynical as go into administration simply to wipe the slate clean for future owners ?
They'd certainly have the final say. They ought not to, because they're supposed to be making the business they've taken over a good ongoing concern, but if they make the judgement that a million for Bailey keeps the wolf from the door, then they might.
Yes, which is why the 10 point rule came in: Leicester were masters of running up all kinds of bad debts and wandering away from them. Luton spent a couple of seasons merrily going in and out of admin to wipe out debts with good businesses. They fully deserved their fines.
That said, there is no way on planet earth that we'll go into admin with so much directorial debt. It's a red herring.
I'm not so sure, how long can the service the debt themselves, and also if we are still losing money? Certainly it may not happen overnight, but they do say a long slow death.
I think I'm right in saying if one shareholder, even Murray himself decides enough is enough he would just need to withdraw his cash and let administration take place - to probably similar results with the addition of the points deduction. So the article may even have come from Murray.
I just wish that we could get some sort of announcement from the club, because we are all speculating wildly now and all of us could be completely wide of the mark. Unfortunately, the longer they leave it, the more worried we will get and the more wild the possibilities we can think up will become....
P.S I am glad that this story was reported and I hope that Mick will let us know of any other info that he can get out - because we are certainly getting the mushroom treatment from the club at the moment. Whether that will be justified when the truth unfolds we just cannot tell right now.
As fans, we just have to settle for feeling completely helpless for now.
Why don't we just all email the club asking for answers? Surely if they get enough reuests, they would have to at least put something out to keep us all quiet for a while!
Good grief this is one hell of a story to read through not too mention eternally depressing!
Haven't quite made my mind up yet as to what to make of it all, but one thing struck me and that was I wonder if we are in Max Mosely territory here?
I mean in terms of press announcements and jumping the gun and Richard Murray's comments in the SLP.
Here was the new consortium riding in as the cavalry to bail us out from the deep mire that the present encumbants had dropped us in and lead us onwards and upwards into shangri-la.
Then RM cheerfully pops up and tells one and all that he and others will be prepared to walk away with nothing to enable the club to be sold, so making it look like the consortium would actually be paying a lot less for the club than was first thought and RM et al, would be demed heroes for allowing such a move to take place.
Leaving the potential new buyers a tad miffed and thinking, 'well stuff you'?
Now going to try to digest all the rest, wish me luck, I'm going in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[cite]Posted By: KillersBeard[/cite]Then RM cheerfully pops up and tells one and all that he and others will be prepared to walk away with nothing to enable the club to be sold
I didn't quite read it that way. More a reduction or re-structure of the loans, which you could take as read anyway.
Comments
2. As things stand when they sell they will probably do so at a loss and will probably have to write off or restructure their current loans to the club. They would do this in their own terms. The administrator would take this out of their hands and (presumably) write off more of their loans in a bid to make the club a more viable going concern. In short money. The administrator would make us sell whichever assets they felt we could get a good price for, so if someone put in a reasonable bit for Jonjo for example they'd be likely to take the cash.
3. Yes.
Yes that is how I read it and what I hope for too.
Are you allowed to do something as cynical as go into administration simply to wipe the slate clean for future owners ?
re players I think they would pretty much start haucking them around other clubs to generate and auction and take the best offer after a period of time, they might also get valuations done.
There's a danger we will take this thread off at a tangent. But I do think its important to point out that we don't know how decisions were made. For sure Richard Murray has made some mistakes, and some of them will have been costly. But I know he will have taken them because he wanted what we wanted. Generally when he was the dominant force, most of those decisions were excellent. We don't know what happened from the time Derek Chappell joined the Board, and began to assume more power. I have never understood what Derek Chappell wanted for the club, how he proposed to get there, and how this may have differed from Murray's vision. I also have misgivings about Bob Whitehand based on my limited personal dealings with him, although in his case it may simply be that he inhabits a different planet to me.
Any player with any sort of transfer value could be at risk of being sold.
Even the stadium and other physical assets.
Then a consortium could make an offer that needs to be acceptable only to the Administrator.
I read it like that as well because if he thought there was merit in holding a line on the price/debt write off, why make it clear you are prepared to lose your entire investment?
Yes that is perfectly true, and in Whitehand's case he has been there a long time without apparently making any destabilising moves. My main point is that it's not just about Richard Murray.
I think this must be right.
Has anyone considered the possibility that a member(s) of the current board may be part of the consortium bidding for the club? I have no idea if it is so but it might explain the complete paralysis of the club's vocal chords.
Yes, which is why the 10 point rule came in: Leicester were masters of running up all kinds of bad debts and wandering away from them. Luton spent a couple of seasons merrily going in and out of admin to wipe out debts with good businesses. They fully deserved their fines.
That said, there is no way on planet earth that we'll go into admin with so much directorial debt. It's a red herring.
I think I'm right in saying if one shareholder, even Murray himself decides enough is enough he would just need to withdraw his cash and let administration take place - to probably similar results with the addition of the points deduction. So the article may even have come from Murray.
P.S I am glad that this story was reported and I hope that Mick will let us know of any other info that he can get out - because we are certainly getting the mushroom treatment from the club at the moment. Whether that will be justified when the truth unfolds we just cannot tell right now.
As fans, we just have to settle for feeling completely helpless for now.
Haven't quite made my mind up yet as to what to make of it all, but one thing struck me and that was I wonder if we are in Max Mosely territory here?
I mean in terms of press announcements and jumping the gun and Richard Murray's comments in the SLP.
Here was the new consortium riding in as the cavalry to bail us out from the deep mire that the present encumbants had dropped us in and lead us onwards and upwards into shangri-la.
Then RM cheerfully pops up and tells one and all that he and others will be prepared to walk away with nothing to enable the club to be sold, so making it look like the consortium would actually be paying a lot less for the club than was first thought and RM et al, would be demed heroes for allowing such a move to take place.
Leaving the potential new buyers a tad miffed and thinking, 'well stuff you'?
Now going to try to digest all the rest, wish me luck, I'm going in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
maybe to many people looking for a response to the article
Make that two.
It's still working, just a bit slow. As you say probably just down to the amount of people trying to get on.