Wes Tender Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Oh! $hit! I'll reserve judgement on that when more is known about them.
SOTONS EAST SIDE Posted 30 June, 2009 Author Posted 30 June, 2009 I'll reserve judgement on that when more is known about them.Comment is not a judgement on the Swiss, rather than there only being one bidder left!
Hatch Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Are they anything to do with the Swiss bidders that were interested in Pompey a while back. ie Ramon Vega
darren Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Do you think mr fry will have to lower the price now if the swiss are the only ones I can't see them buyin the club this week for the money fry's askin.
Wes Tender Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Comment is not a judgement on the Swiss, rather than there only being one bidder left! I share your concern that after apparently being the subject of interest of 4 groups, we are now down to one, but still feel that until we know who this Swiss group are, we might yet be in for a pleasant surprise to come. Having been forced into a position of extreme pessimism by the events of the past several weeks, the fact that only one potential buyer remains does not necessarily mean that they are the worst of the lot, merely that they may have entered the fray later than others who have fallen by the wayside. Even though I do not know who they are, I am encouraged to believe that they might be more serious contenders than the Jackson lot, for example.
Bakovnetski Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 The drugs dont work they just make you worse.......
JustMike Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance.
Katalinic Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance. When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money.
Barry the Badger Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Even though I do not know who they are, I am encouraged to believe that they might be more serious contenders than the Jackson lot, for example. Wow, you really are a glass half full guy. Fair play to you. I'm sh*tting it.
Paul Chuckle Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money. Can't argue with that. As soon as Mark Fialka appeared we all new we were fooked!!!!!!! Didn't come as any surprise that they pulled out a few days after he appeared an all the info that was found out about in As for the Swiss lets just hope they are very interested and not more tyre kickers
Flyer Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance. The league had the same stance with other teams. Quote from the BBC. "Last summer, the League refused to allow Rotherham, Bournemouth and Luton to begin the season unless they accepted points deductions following spells in administration. " Its not the leagues fault. Its standard policy that should have been known to bidders weeks ago.
John B Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money. Yes I think you are right I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for a No Deduction b 10 point Deduction c 20 or more Deduction or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money. I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity
krissyboy31 Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Yes I think you are right I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for a No Deduction b 10 point Deduction c 20 or more Deduction or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money. I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity I suspect that there bid was based on b with a chance of a. Once they found out it could be substantially more than 10 and the FL license was only to be issued for 2 years, the initial backers walked. Lynam then tried to rescue the bid by getting Fialka on board but that was always going to go pear shaped.
modern matron Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Yes I think you are right I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for a No Deduction b 10 point Deduction c 20 or more Deduction or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money. I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity I really hope they didn't have the backers and are using the excuse of the 10 point deduction/appeal etc. I hope it's not over the alleged 25 point deduction and that that will puit of the Swiss and whoever else. Anyone know?
Leslie Charteris Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 If there's only one bid then it depends on whether or not the creditors will accept the amount offered, so come on, Mr. Fry, now is the time to earn your fees.
krissyboy31 Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 I really hope they didn't have the backers and are using the excuse of the 10 point deduction/appeal etc. I hope it's not over the alleged 25 point deduction and that that will puit of the Swiss and whoever else. Anyone know? We're all guessing here but the club is certainly not worth what Pinnacle had bid, if we are to have a 25 point deduction. The Swiss if they're serious will bid quite a bit less but that may not satisfy the creditors.
waggy Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 We're all guessing here but the club is certainly not worth what Pinnacle had bid, if we are to have a 25 point deduction. The Swiss if they're serious will bid quite a bit less but that may not satisfy the creditors. I would suggest that at this late hour the creditors will probably take what they can get?
Mole Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 There may only be one taker at this stage, but even if they fail or pull out there'll be takers at the break up stage, but we will effectively be consigned to L2 by the Lutonesque penalties.
Dalek2003 Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Patience is a virtue, I would hazard that there has been some very clever tactics played here.
buctootim Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Patience is a virtue, I would hazard that there has been some very clever tactics played here. Its not been a very scenic tour getting to this point - but here is the best place to be.
Window Cleaner Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance. what league's stance? It's -10 and a CVA. The rest is about doing it properly and have reputable money at your disposal.The way to do it is buying SLH with a CVA (ie paying everybody concerned and not cherry picking) and then sort it out correctly. Fry will have told them that.
Window Cleaner Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 I would suggest that at this late hour the creditors will probably take what they can get? the creditors have probably put a break up value of around 12 million on the affair. They can get that. If the 'bid' or offer doesn't come up to that figure then it's curtains.
Doctoroncall Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 I would suggest that at this late hour the creditors will probably take what they can get? Not unless they think the individual parts would get more...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now