Birmingham City are in Financial Difficulties (Holding Co. in Receivership P2)
Comments
-
Well, it's going to be interesting. My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that going into receivership means the company will be liquidated with assets being sold off. (With administration the business would be run as a going concern until a buyer is, hopefully, found.)
But the BCFC statement seems to think they can continue to operated "normally". I don't see that is feasible unless HK law is considerably different from ours. I guess we will find out eventually.0 -
Another mess caused by an 'unfit' person passing the ever stringent 'fit and proper person' test.
Perhaps the Football League should get their own house in order before giving out punishments that their own failing processes have helped to cause.5 -
The imposition of a 10 point penalty will be in the assessment of the football league and its judgement of the ownership and solvency of the entity trading as 'Birmingham City FC'. Not sure we can take too much for granted there. FL has 2 and a bit months to sort it out and then inevitably 'BCFC' will have its right of appeal if/when FL misses something semantic or technical. Until we know for sure we'll have to assume no deduction.
If BCFC has taken any measure like creditor protection then morally the points deduction should apply cos they're no longer playing on a financial/legal level field, but this is the FL. Will make interesting reading in the coming months.1 -
Points deduction should be appropriate. If not, what's to stop owners structuring their club as a subsidiary of a holding Co and if problems arise just put the holding company under and say the club is unaffected.0
-
Short term: Points Deduction
Long Term: A better chance of selling the club0 -
10 points seems pretty standard0
-
10 point deduction- which is normally what it is puts them on 28 points tbale would be as followscantersaddick said:Would put them right down at the bottom.. below Wigan...
Charlton-36
Fulham-35
Rotherham-33
Brigton-31
Millwall-30
Birmingham-28
Wigan-22
Blackpool-210 -
Might make that last away game of the season v Brum more interesting.
If we are safe and Brum need a win to send Millwall down..............6 -
Wonder what Morro is thinking now?0
-
I'd still fancy Birmingham to stay up even with that deduction.2
-
Sponsored links:
-
It might have gone pear-shaped here but I'm still glad I got out of that madhouse back in SE7.The_President said:Wonder what Morro is thinking now?
8 -
Heard a League rep talking about the 'TEST' a while back. His explanation was that, unlike tbe PL, the FL is a very small organization with very limited resources. Running investigations at a level we might expect is beyond their capabilities.SurvivaloftheFittest said:Another mess caused by an 'unfit' person passing the ever stringent 'fit and proper person' test.
Perhaps the Football League should get their own house in order before giving out punishments that their own failing processes have helped to cause.0 -
Would still fancy Brum to stay up even without the 10 points.
Would leave them 2 behind Millwall...I think they would make that up easy enough tbh.0 -
Surely, if Birmingham aren't deducted 10 points, it is in the interest of ALL the club's below them to sue the FL.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
If not surely that would give Southampton valid cause for complaint.The_President said:
Thats exactly what I thought. Therefore would expect points deduction.Rob62 said:
Southampton were given the deduction when their holding company went into admin, because the club and the holding company were "inextricably linked as one economic entity." If it's the same situation for Birmingham, they will be deducted points.killerandflash said:Isn't there a difference in treatment between parent companies and the actual football club? It's not as if the football club itself has stopped paying bills, unlike Forest say who paid Peterborough late for Britt Assombalonga in January, preventing Posh making a signing in the window
Because of what happened at Southampton, the precedent has been set.
Birmingham should not get any special treatment.0 -
Poor sod............
12 -
These things take time.. often months to sort out.. If there is a point deduction it will happen for the start of next season...0
-
Nah, there's a rule about this , i'm sure someone will fill us in.cantersaddick said:These things take time.. often months to sort out.. If there is a point deduction it will happen for the start of next season...
0 -
What with all that TV money flooding into English football? Oh, wait...Hex said:
Heard a League rep talking about the 'TEST' a while back. His explanation was that, unlike tbe PL, the FL is a very small organization with very limited resources. Running investigations at a level we might expect is beyond their capabilities.SurvivaloftheFittest said:Another mess caused by an 'unfit' person passing the ever stringent 'fit and proper person' test.
Perhaps the Football League should get their own house in order before giving out punishments that their own failing processes have helped to cause.
1 -
I thought the rule was that if the deduction materially impacted the outcome of the season that club went into admin then the deduction would be applied then.cantersaddick said:These things take time.. often months to sort out.. If there is a point deduction it will happen for the start of next season...
0 -
I thought there was a date that was relevant too, something like if the club goes into administration before 31st March it's applied that season, but if it's after that date, then it depends on material impact on the course of the season.0
-
Sponsored links:
-
From Wikipedia.....
From 2007–08, any club entering administration after the fourth Thursday in March would have their 10-point deduction suspended until the following season. If the club is relegated the points will be deducted from their tally at the start of next season. If the club stays up the 10 points will be taken off their final total.0 -
Didn't they just turn down 5 m for their their winger ( Gray ) from Bournemouth. Why would they have not cashed in on him ?0
-
maybe because cash flow isn't the immediate problem. maybe it is a battle for control of the club and the anti Carson Yung group on the board did this to stop the pro yung group gaining control.markmc68 said:Didn't they just turn down 5 m for their their winger ( Gray ) from Bournemouth. Why would they have not cashed in on him ?
1 -
According to the Mail this is the reason for going into receivership. The Football League have demanded an emergency meeting with the club who have said they are not in financial difficulty.Henry Irving said:
maybe because cash flow isn't the immediate problem. maybe it is a battle for control of the club and the anti Carson Yung group on the board did this to stop the pro yung group gaining control.markmc68 said:Didn't they just turn down 5 m for their their winger ( Gray ) from Bournemouth. Why would they have not cashed in on him ?
0 -
If they let them get away with this excuse, then any club going into voluntary receivership will make the same claim to avoid a points deduction.0
-
Provided that all 'external' creditors in both 'holding' and 'trading' do not lose out what is the problem?msomerton said:If they let them get away with this excuse, then any club going into voluntary receivership will make the same claim to avoid a points deduction.
it's effectively an internal dispute where someone has decided to use the nuclear option!0 -
