Wouldn't it be funny if the sale of the club to the aussies hit a snag because Roland didn't buy it properly from the spivs, and the EFL has just found out that they didn't check things out fully previously?!? No, maybe not...
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
Has the EFL ever explained how that lot were deemed 'fit and proper?'
Although it takes weeks to do, it just involves asking the question "are you currently serving time in a high security prison?"
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
Has the EFL ever explained how that lot were deemed 'fit and proper?'
As it was a 'distressed' sale at the time - they were probably under pressure to let it through otherwise they (the EFL) would be seen to let another club go into administration...
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
Be thankful then, it could well of been Roland - (after his successful renewal of the pitch undersoil heating, with no heater) he might of brought you a bike (with interest attached per mile) and no wheels on it!
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
I am beginning to think there is a lot of brinkmanship going on now. Two parties still interested ,one if not two in for EFL approval, but deal dragging on. Neither of them seem to be in a rush probably because they both have long term plans and the short term pain to Roland with next season planning and summer wages to pay leaves him in a difficult position. I have mentioned this before but I think his actions of playing one off against the other has done nothing but drive price lower and delay takeover. This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval? This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
The post Curbs era will make a pretty interesting book for anyone with the inside knowledge to write it.
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
The post Curbs era will make a pretty interesting book for anyone with the inside knowledge to write it.
Anybody got any ideas who might be capable ?
El Presidente, an autobiography, by Richard Murray out, August 2018.
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
I am beginning to think there is a lot of brinkmanship going on now. Two parties still interested ,one if not two in for EFL approval, but deal dragging on. Neither of them seem to be in a rush probably because they both have long term plans and the short term pain to Roland with next season planning and summer wages to pay leaves him in a difficult position. I have mentioned this before but I think his actions of playing one off against the other has done nothing but drive price lower and delay takeover. This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval? This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
EFL approval is the last piece in the jigsaw though isn't it? You can't apply until everything else is done surely?
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
The post Curbs era will make a pretty interesting book for anyone with the inside knowledge to write it.
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
. This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval? This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
Tony Jiminez was technically the owner of CAFC when they took over, but it was slater who was doing the photos and the tv interviews on the day they took over, iirc.
Don't think Jiminez actually owned that much of the club either. Didn't the recent court case struggle to show that?
The court ruled that neither Jiminez nor Cash owned the club, although they had obtained a loan by (falsely) saying they controlled it. It also found that Slater did have substantial shareholding, although few people believe that to be the full truth and Jiminez referred to Slater in an an email as being “a method actor” playing a part. In reality it appears they had set out to obscure the ownership through BVI trusts and then couldn’t satisfy the judge that they had ownership when it suited them to do so.
The court ruling effectively meant the club broke league rules by publishing bogus and/or incomplete ownership information in its official declaration, in turn making nonsense of the fit and proper persons test.
Has the EFL ever explained how that lot were deemed 'fit and proper?'
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
I am beginning to think there is a lot of brinkmanship going on now. Two parties still interested ,one if not two in for EFL approval, but deal dragging on. Neither of them seem to be in a rush probably because they both have long term plans and the short term pain to Roland with next season planning and summer wages to pay leaves him in a difficult position. I have mentioned this before but I think his actions of playing one off against the other has done nothing but drive price lower and delay takeover. This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval? This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
Are there two parties still involved?
No one seems to know who this "British" is and I personally am very dubious as to whether they even exist. Especially as the source seems to only be Roland.
I dont trust RD as much as I don’t rust Richard Murray it does strike me as confusing though that a few months ago there was demands of one liar to talk and now another one is talking there is a ground swell not to hear
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
I wonder if the EFL might have a view about the club sending it fit and proper person paperwork to process without the intention to proceed?
Have you heard something?
No - I’m commenting on the idea that RD might have misled independent third parties, including the EFL, into activity on the basis the Aussies are buying the club without a firm intention and commitment to sell to them. Or that the Aussies would appear in public, talk to staff, media and others, without such an expectation.
I dont trust RD as much as I don’t rust Richard Murray it does strike me as confusing though that a few months ago there was demands of one liar to talk and now another one is talking there is a ground swell not to hear
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
so you don't trust RD and he's not being truthful yet you have been using him as your source for months, without revealing so, and in doing so have been posting stuff as if it's fact which you are now saying it hasn't been. I don't think anyone is listening now.
I dont trust RD as much as I don’t rust Richard Murray it does strike me as confusing though that a few months ago there was demands of one liar to talk and now another one is talking there is a ground swell not to hear
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
so you don't trust RD and he's not being truthful yet you have been using him as your source for months, without revealing so, and in doing so have been posting stuff as if it's fact which you are now saying it hasn't been. I don't think anyone is listening now.
I dont trust RD as much as I don’t rust Richard Murray it does strike me as confusing though that a few months ago there was demands of one liar to talk and now another one is talking there is a ground swell not to hear
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
I don't think the aussies have been untruthful at any stage, not as far I can see. They may have underestimated how log EFL approval might take, but that's not the same as being untruthful.
The second bidder thing is the great mystery. If there really is one they've done very well to keep it secret. And why would they want to do that. Because the fans might not approve of them as potential owners?
I'm now seriously concerned that, contrary to what I previously said, the Aussies may not have the funds to buy the club.
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
I am beginning to think there is a lot of brinkmanship going on now. Two parties still interested ,one if not two in for EFL approval, but deal dragging on. Neither of them seem to be in a rush probably because they both have long term plans and the short term pain to Roland with next season planning and summer wages to pay leaves him in a difficult position. I have mentioned this before but I think his actions of playing one off against the other has done nothing but drive price lower and delay takeover. This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval? This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
EFL approval is the last piece in the jigsaw though isn't it? You can't apply until everything else is done surely?
Why is it? Why can't you? The whole point is preventing anyone who is subject to a 'Disqualifying Condition' being involved in or influencing the management or administration of a Club.
So wouldn't it make sense to get it done early rather than waste time and money on all the difficult stuff? To drag, kicking and screaming, the house analogy back into action - you wouldn't buy a plot of land and build a house on it until you'd got planning permission.
Again the EFL says the Club shall no later than 10 Normal Working Days (my emphasis) prior to the date on which it is anticipated that such person shall become a Relevant Person submit to The League a duly completed Declaration in respect of that person, at which point that person shall be bound by and subject to the Regulations....
There would appear to be no maximum number of working days before you can apply. Two things of note: first, it appears to be the member, that is the club, that does the application rather than the Relevant Person and, second, there doesn't appear to be a "forms" part of the EFL web site yet you'd think they'd want standardisation of application on this and other matters. (Perhaps it's in a secret "members only" section?)
Edited to add: as I alluded to earlier, teams being relegated from the PL also have to do a declaration to the EFL. So, at this time of year, if there is only one panel, they are likely to be busy.
I dont trust RD as much as I don’t rust Richard Murray it does strike me as confusing though that a few months ago there was demands of one liar to talk and now another one is talking there is a ground swell not to hear
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
I don't think the aussies have been untruthful at any stage, not as far I can see. They may have underestimated how log EFL approval might take, but that's not the same as being untruthful.
The second bidder thing is the great mystery. If there really is one they've done very well to keep it secret. And why would they want to do that. Because the fans might not approve of them as potential owners?
But then they've basically said nothing on the record. No statements, no press conferences etc
Has there ever been a bid where the buying parties have said so little?
Comments
Received a message wishing me luck for Friday's ProstateCancerUK ride to Amsterdam, but no sponsorship. Not a penny :-(
Neither of them seem to be in a rush probably because they both have long term plans and the short term pain to Roland with next season planning and summer wages to pay leaves him in a difficult position.
I have mentioned this before but I think his actions of playing one off against the other has done nothing but drive price lower and delay takeover.
This EFL approval is also strange, put yourself in Roland's position, wouldn't you want that done when proof of funds was done,so as to not waste time and Lawyers fees only to find out your buyer didn't get approval?
This is going to drag on for a while longer yet is my guess.
The post Curbs era will make a pretty interesting book for anyone with the inside knowledge to write it.
Anybody got any ideas who might be capable ?
It was triggered when Portsmouth had 3 "fit and proper" owners in the course of one season...
EFL approval is the last piece in the jigsaw though isn't it? You can't apply until everything else is done surely?
I make you right there large hence my doubt as to anything being lodged.
We know it has.
Are you saying there you’ve heard that one of the parties is having difficulty attaining EFL approval?
Cheers
No one seems to know who this "British" is and I personally am very dubious as to whether they even exist. Especially as the source seems to only be Roland.
Right now I think it’s fair to say all parties are not being totally truthful with what is being said and to whom
And @Davidsmith has said about this having a bit longer to play out is going to be bang on the money
;-)
Conjecture: an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information
Gossip: casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details which are not confirmed as true
Patience: the capacity to accept or tolerate delay, problems or suffering without becoming annoyed or anxious
The second bidder thing is the great mystery. If there really is one they've done very well to keep it secret. And why would they want to do that. Because the fans might not approve of them as potential owners?
So wouldn't it make sense to get it done early rather than waste time and money on all the difficult stuff? To drag, kicking and screaming, the house analogy back into action - you wouldn't buy a plot of land and build a house on it until you'd got planning permission.
Again the EFL says the Club shall no later than 10 Normal Working Days (my emphasis) prior to the date on which it is anticipated that such person shall become a Relevant Person submit to The League a duly completed Declaration in respect of that person, at which point that person shall be bound by and subject to the Regulations....
There would appear to be no maximum number of working days before you can apply. Two things of note: first, it appears to be the member, that is the club, that does the application rather than the Relevant Person and, second, there doesn't appear to be a "forms" part of the EFL web site yet you'd think they'd want standardisation of application on this and other matters. (Perhaps it's in a secret "members only" section?)
Edited to add: as I alluded to earlier, teams being relegated from the PL also have to do a declaration to the EFL. So, at this time of year, if there is only one panel, they are likely to be busy.
Has there ever been a bid where the buying parties have said so little?