Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Six0
-
And from what the VOTV article implied, the cost of paying them off is less than half of the 7 million total. Surely Roland could afford that?Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.0 -
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.6 -
I expect Murray is happy to leave his money there to keep his toe in.Manicmania said:
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.1 -
Sworn enemies.Manicmania said:
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Think Capulets & Montagues.
Damn ! I vowed not to contribute to this thread again !4 -
Well if there is a scenario where the other 6 directors got paid up and walk away would he really want to take the entire fall on his own for the club essentially losing the valley and training ground?Arsenetatters said:
I expect Murray is happy to leave his money there to keep his toe in.Manicmania said:
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.0 -
All the more reason to assume the other 4 may get pissed off if 3 of them get paid up and they don't and maybe change their stances?Fanny Fanackapan said:
Sworn enemies.Manicmania said:
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Think Capulets & Montagues.
Damn ! I vowed not to contribute to this thread again !0 -
But don’t they ALL have to agree to being payed off first ... so if even one disagrees then it can’t go ahead??Arsenetatters said:
And from what the VOTV article implied, the cost of paying them off is less than half of the 7 million total. Surely Roland could afford that?Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
0 -
They don’t all talk to each other, no.Manicmania said:
On the other hand if I was an ex director who saw 3 others get paid off I would probably think about changing my position to get a pay off as well - i assume these ex directors talk occasionally...Davidsmith said:
From what I understand the three in question have had this position for over a year and are not going to budge, however if they are paid in full and the other four ex Directors take discounts thereafter and or allow Leases then he can do what he likes.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
Maybe because he sold Lennon and Konsa for cash discounts he might think he's on a roll and arrogant enough to think that the ex-directors will accept cash discounts too.RedChaser said:
It does beg the question though with the relatively small sum to be cleared from the those directors who are holding out for full repayment why RD doesn't bite the bullet. Still the bloke is so unpredictable, never wrong and doesn't do failure it should be no surprise to us unless the devil is the detail for him.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.3 -
I've had a look at those, they're pretty basic and don't specifically list the Property titles however no doubt this was covered by the registration of them at the Land Registry. Sight of the loan agreement forms would be more revealing as to the specific details of the advance.cafc-west said:MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.
All 7 debentures are listed individually on the companies house website. Click on each debenture and the terms are listed - but look a bit complex to decipher.MartinCAFC said:
I don't know if anyone knows the terms but the charges are listed individually rather than as a group.RedChaser said:MartinCAFC said:
RD doesn't even need to pay the lot of them off to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane.Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
Yes that's it, clear all the debt secured by the ex directors debentures and the Valley becomes unencumbered (free of charges).Arsenetatters said:
Thank you @RedChaserRedChaser said:
As I understand it the ex directors cannot refuse FULL repayment of their loans and that RD had tried to cut a deal or he was not prepared to satisfy the repayment terms as per the debentures. Therefore a lease on the Valley cannot be granted without ALL the debenture holders agreement.Arsenetatters said:@Airman Brown I've read your latest VOTV article and it's given me some hope if I've understood it correctly. Can you reassure me please?
- it only needs one ex director to refuse the debt to be cleared by RD and he can't lease out the Valley
- the ex-directors can refuse to have the debt paid (this bit I don't get)
Thank you
So if Roland did pay out according to the repayment terms he could lease the Valley?
What's a debenture?
Mortgage Debentures per se are Legal charges usually sought by banks from Limited Companies who have lending facilities which are regarded as security attaching all assets of the company both fixed (including specific charges over land) and floating over all current assets i.e. the debtor book.
Without seeing the actual terms of the debentures entered into it is difficulty to comment further but it would appear four directors were happy to give priority (sign a deed to this effect) and three weren't because full repayment has not been offered.
This confirms my fear that he'll pay them all off and try to lease the Valley.
It also reminds me why I don't work in finance. Chickens are so much easier to understand.
My understanding based on Airman Brown answering my questions a few pages ago is that if we have the scenario of 3 ex directors refusing to take a haircut on there loans RD could potentially pay the 3 off in full leaving us with 4 ex directors all happy for RD to lease The Valley and Sparrows Lane. RD wouldn't even need to pay off the 4 remaining ex directors to then be able to strike a deal with The Aussies.
This for me should it happen is the worst possible outcome of this takeover.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
I would like to observe that it's slightly worrying that a significant proportion of our user base hasn't worked out that pages all have exactly 30 posts, and long posts don't help the page count in that way.
Whether it's a simple WIOTOS or a Grapevine extravaganza, they all count the same toward the page count.
#NoOneElseHasAnythingConstructiveToAddAnywaySoIThoughtIWouldSayThis16 -
0
-
For anyone who doesn’t want to read the first 994 pages i’ll sum it up below...
Roland still wants out
Aussies don’t have the dough
Doucher is Colin
James Seed supports Millwall
A lot of us like Pot Noodles
NLA doesn’t know certain long words
I vaguely recall a section on some sort of kettle
We’re all really good at fish puns
Blackpool still wants him to sell up and fuck off
Most of us would like him to take Murray with him
Nappa’s shit at maths
Scarfy made a brief appearance
Mark Curry from Blue Peter showed up once and hasn’t been seen again
We’re not moving to the peninsular... yet
And in the words of Henry - let’s all WIOTOS!
23 -
This. Or 30,000 comments.PaddyP17 said:I would like to observe that it's slightly worrying that a significant proportion of our user base hasn't worked out that pages all have exactly 30 posts, and long posts don't help the page count in that way.
Whether it's a simple WIOTOS or a Grapevine extravaganza, they all count the same toward the page count.
#NoOneElseHasAnythingConstructiveToAddAnywaySoIThoughtIWouldSayThis0 -
I can't answer for everyone.Themightyath2 said:For anyone who doesn’t want to read the first 994 pages i’ll sum it up below...
Roland still wants out
Aussies don’t have the dough
Doucher is Colin
James Seed supports Millwall
A lot of us like Pot Noodles
NLA doesn’t know certain long words
I vaguely recall a section on some sort of kettle
We’re all really good at fish puns
Blackpool still wants him to sell up and fuck off
Most of us would like him to take Murray with him
Nappa’s shit at maths
Scarfy made a brief appearance
Mark Curry from Blue Peter showed up once and hasn’t been seen again
We’re not moving to the peninsular... yet
And in the words of Henry - let’s all WIOTOS!
But you are spot on regarding me.4 -
Is Henry paying you, so he can get to a 1,000 pages by midnight?
I feel it should be organic and not for members just to quote the verbose but talented MrRipleyGrapevine
There's enough compost we can use to reach the milestone.
1 -
Spaceman came down to answer some things
Charlton Life gathered round from paupers to kings
"I'll answer your questions, I'll answer them true,
I'll show you the way, you'll know what to do"
Who is wrong and who is right?
Yellow, brown, black or white?
Spaceman, he answered, "You'll no longer mind
I've opened your eyes, you're now colour-blind"
The spaceman looked human, but with black shiny eyes
He spoke brilliant English, his voice synthesised
Travelled the web just spreading the word
Of love and takeovers, he picked up a bird
The bird it was dead, but he made it just fine
He walked on the water, and turned it to wine
A young poster he said, "Are you Muir in a mask?"
No I'm just ITK but I can see why you'd ask
[x4]
Spaceman came down (Spaceman)4 -
FFS! I am not ITK but I can categorally state there will be no deal without The Valley and Sparrows Lane.3
-
@Henry Irving your big day tomorrow, have you prepared a speech ?2
-
He will blub for sure.CafcCrazy said:@Henry Irving your big day tomorrow, have you prepared a speech ?
3 -
Sponsored links:
-
Still won’t get a promotecfgs said:
He will blub for sure.CafcCrazy said:@Henry Irving your big day tomorrow, have you prepared a speech ?
3 -
No speech, no promote.CafcCrazy said:@Henry Irving your big day tomorrow, have you prepared a speech ?
The achievement of starting the site and the site's greatest thread is enough.
4 -
So size, does not matter, I have always said thisPaddyP17 said:I would like to observe that it's slightly worrying that a significant proportion of our user base hasn't worked out that pages all have exactly 30 posts, and long posts don't help the page count in that way.
Whether it's a simple WIOTOS or a Grapevine extravaganza, they all count the same toward the page count.
#NoOneElseHasAnythingConstructiveToAddAnywaySoIThoughtIWouldSayThis4 -
He’s just trying to work out which cardigan to wear.CafcCrazy said:@Henry Irving your big day tomorrow, have you prepared a speech ?
3 -
Five0
-
I can see the summit.
"It is not the mountain we conquer but ourselves."0 -
Bond :- 'Well what do you expect me to do Mr Irving'?Henry Irving said:Five
Henners :-'What do I expect you to do Mr Bond? I expect you to implode with this site and all who post on it! Ha ha ha ha'.
0 -
I'd love AFKA to ban Henners when it's on 999 :-)16
-
Henners gaveth to AFKA and Lookie and he shall soon taketh away
0 -
No need for that.Addickted2TheReds said:I'd love AFKA to ban Henners when it's on 999 :-)
Just close the thread and open a new one on 9993
This discussion has been closed.
