Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

alpine_saint

alpine_saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
So it seems that a few things will happen today:

 

* Portsmouth possibly sign 10 non-contract players to get around the embargo. Obviously they will be some of the triallists and other free agents so probably a rag-tag lot but I think we want to know the terms on which the FL has allowed them to sign these individuals.

* News is reporting the PST have until December to turn pledges into cash so they will definitely enter the new season in admin if FL and PKF allow it it. So no 10 point reduction yet either.

* Birch to get more fees if admin continues.

 

Hang on....

 

Their only realistic buyer walks away and THEN they get permission to sign players ?

 

I am struggling with this. This club is making an absolute mockery of every basic founding principle by which every other business on the planet adheres to.

 

And they are being abbeted by a weak and utterly supine sport governing body.

 

I am sick of this. Rip people off, do over other businesses like a bunch of tarmac-laying gyppos, and still you get away with it.

 

Football is really leaving a bad taste in my mouth at the moment.

 

And this bit about the 10 points is a f**king joke. I reckon they will go through the whole season in admin and never see the -10 points.

Edited by alpine_saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ken Tone

Ken Tone

Posted
Posted
Hang on....

 

Their only realistic buyer walks away and THEN they get permission to sign players ?

 

I am struggling with this. This club is making an absolute mockery of every basic founding principle by which every other business on the planet adheres to.

 

And they are being abbeted by a weak and utterly supine sport governing body.

 

I am sick of this. Rip people off, do over other businesses like a bunch of tarmac-laying gyppos, and still you get away with it.

 

Football is really leaving a bad taste in my mouth at the moment.

 

And this bit about the 10 points is a f**king joke. I reckon they will go through the whole season in admin and never see the -10 points.

 

The News seems to think they must avoid being in admin for more than year .. hence the 'the trust have got till december' bit.

But I thought the rule was simply that the FL got cross if you started 2 seasons in admin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ken Tone

Ken Tone

Posted
Posted
So Trevor has given the green light for these non-contract signings, but have the FL? The timing is very interesting, given that the FL are meeting today...

 

Quite.

 

And is he planning to pay them out of the £3million parachute payments resting in their account? ('resting' as in the money that was resting in Father Ted's account?)

If so that means less money to pay the compromise agreements with the players, so yet again they'll be spending money that is already spoken for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted

Maybe they are being signed on monthly contracts simply because they have 1 month's money available. After that they can re-assess their financial situation, based on how 'packed' the park is, and renew as many or as phew of these players they can afford for the next 30 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AussieDog

AussieDog

Posted
Posted

If I was another FL1 team I'd be pretty p155ed if they can just round up another bunch of out of contract players with a few spare Saturdays on their hands, just to make them "competitive. They really are flouting the system aren't they. Rotten and cheating to the core. I'd rather give up watching football than support that corrupt bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TopGun

TopGun

Posted
Posted
If I was another FL1 team I'd be pretty p155ed if they can just round up another bunch of out of contract players with a few spare Saturdays on their hands, just to make them "competitive. They really are flouting the system aren't they. Rotten and cheating to the core. I'd rather give up watching football than support that corrupt bunch.

 

Yeah but at least they're just a load of down on luck and not very good desperados in the main. So not going to be much good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted
Maybe they are being signed on monthly contracts simply because they have 1 month's money available. After that they can re-assess their financial situation, based on how 'packed' the park is, and renew as many or as phew of these players they can afford for the next 30 days.

That's just the kind of guarantee to fulfill their fixtures that the FL are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CB Saint

CB Saint

Posted
Posted

I'm up for them being able to use non-contract players week in week out. Every time one of them shines, they will be snapped up by another club on a proper contract and Appy will be scrabbling around every week not knowing if his latest star player will be available.

 

It will be pure comedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
He's at the Telegraph now after the Guardian laid a bunch of staff off a while back.

 

From his twitter earlier (come on trousers, where are ya?)

 

Matt Scott ‏@diggermattscott

 

Telegraph today: Portsmouth Supporters' Trust rescue bid underfunded, putting Pompey on the brink of liquidation http://soc.li/21Jx1s

 

Give us a chance (FFS)! Packing the car for my drive down to Italy tomorrow. Some things are more important that this pesky thread y' know..... (ok, I made that last bit up...)

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hutch

hutch

Posted
Posted (edited)
I'm up for them being able to use non-contract players week in week out. Every time one of them shines, they will be snapped up by another club on a proper contract and Appy will be scrabbling around every week not knowing if his latest star player will be available.

 

It will be pure comedy.

I don't think it will be quite that simple. Non-contract terms means that there is no contract, but the player is registered with the club until the end of the season. Registration can only be cancelled (for instance to allow the player to sign with another club) by mutual consent of both club and player. So in theory the club could refuse to release the player if he gets an offer.

 

That's why so many players are rushing down to Portsea as fast as their Bentleys will take them.

 

edit: Although Birch isn't proposing non-contract terms, he's proposing short-term one month contracts, which is nt the same thing

Edited by hutch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
Matt Scott ‏@diggermattscott

 

Telegraph today: Portsmouth Supporters' Trust rescue bid underfunded, putting Pompey on the brink of liquidation http://soc.li/21Jx1s

 

Gerald Vernon-Jackson, Portsmouth’s council leader, said: “I fear the players will be greedy and chop off their noses to spite their faces.”

 

Greedy? GREEDY?! What, having already given up a significant percentage of what they're already owed you now want them to give up another 75% to avoid labelling them "greedy".

 

FFS....I know it's a well worn cliche but you truely couldn't make any of this sh*t up if you were locked in a room with J.K. f***ing Rowling for 3 years.

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
Might just be a last desperate throw of the dice by TB to demonstrate how Pompey can fulfill their fixture Saturday without having to resort to schoolboys. Maybe he is worried the FL are considering withdrawing the golden share today as it is a total basket case down there. Should know by 5pm.

Its a throughly difficult sell to the FL. Survival relies upon re-negotiation of the players' deferrals and payments, which Birch has already just spent the past few months to get to the current figure. He needs to now shave off another 75% of that agreed figure. There are still parachute payments in the system which could be withheld and diverted straight to the players, so all the guff of "accept the new conditions or they'll get nothing if the club is liquidated" is a bit of a nonsense. And the PFA will look after their own and lobby for those funds to be paid.

 

I genuinely cannot see how the FL can agree to the golden share in the current incarnation. And I cannot see how Trevor Birch, appointed by the courts, can justifaibly suggest there is a better than even chance that the takeover will go through with the current offer on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintRichmond

SaintRichmond

Posted
Posted
Hang on....

 

Their only realistic buyer walks away and THEN they get permission to sign players ?

 

I am struggling with this. This club is making an absolute mockery of every basic founding principle by which every other business on the planet adheres to.

And they are being abbeted by a weak and utterly supine sport governing body.

 

I am sick of this. Rip people off, do over other businesses like a bunch of tarmac-laying gyppos, and still you get away with it.

 

Football is really leaving a bad taste in my mouth at the moment.

 

And this bit about the 10 points is a f**king joke. I reckon they will go through the whole season in admin and never see the -10 points.

 

 

 

The FOOTBALL LEAGUE are the ones who are making a mockery of things

 

WHAT HOLD HAVE PORTSMOUTH F C GOT OVER THE Football League

 

Rules for them are far less stringent than for ANY OTHER TEAM

 

The Football League must be DISGUSTINGLY CORRUPT

Link to comment
Share on other sites
edprice1984

edprice1984

Posted
Posted
Its a throughly difficult sell to the FL. Survival relies upon re-negotiation of the players' deferrals and payments, which Birch has already just spent the past few months to get to the current figure. He needs to now shave off another 75% of that agreed figure. There are still parachute payments in the system which could be withheld and diverted straight to the players, so all the guff of "accept the new conditions or they'll get nothing if the club is liquidated" is a bit of a nonsense. And the PFA will look after their own and lobby for those funds to be paid.

 

I genuinely cannot see how the FL can agree to the golden share in the current incarnation. And I cannot see how Trevor Birch, appointed by the courts, can justifaibly suggest there is a better than even chance that the takeover will go through with the current offer on the table.

 

This!

 

The longer this situation goes on, the more and more it begins to resemble the final fate of Maidstone United. I fully expect the football league will drop the equivalent of an Atom bomb this afternoon/evening. They need an absolute guarantee that the Skates will be able to fulfill their fixtures...unless Birch employs JK f****** Rowling (as above) he won't be able to convince them.....

 

But of course this is the PST and we all know that logic and reason do not exist, forget the Island of Dr Moreau, this is the freakin' Island from Lost!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm getting progressively worried that I've picked the wrong time to head off on a two week holiday. Would be slightly ironic to put a lifetime's worth of work into this masterpiece of a thread only to miss the moment they finally go 'pop'.... :)

 

That said, what are the chances that I'll be visiting the ruined city of Pompeii on the very same day...? Now THAT would be poetic....

 

I would lava that...

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lifeintheslowlane

lifeintheslowlane

Posted
Posted
I'm getting progressively worried that I've picked the wrong time to head off on a two week holiday. Would be slightly ironic to put a lifetime's worth of work into this masterpiece of a thread only to miss the moment they finally go 'pop'.... :)

 

That said, what are the chances that I'll be visiting the ruined city of Pompeii on the very same day...? Now THAT would be poetic....

 

I would lava that...

 

Don't worry, with any luck it will be a very loud POP!! followed by a prolonged WHIIIIIIINE.:) You'll be able to hear it in Italy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Minty

Minty

Posted
Posted
Don't worry, with any luck it will be a very loud POP!! followed by a prolonged WHIIIIIIINE.:) You'll be able to hear it in Italy.

 

That whining has been audible for the last 2 years... hard to envisage it getting any louder but I fear you are right and we're yet to experience whining of biblical proportions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted

Ok, hold on, they're signing 10 non-contract players (allowed within the embargo as we established yesterday, but they can't get a fee for them if they leave) or they're signing 10 short-term contract players (which means their embargo has been lifted by the FL - which is extremely unlikely) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andysstuff

andysstuff

Posted
Posted

H

I'm getting progressively worried that I've picked the wrong time to head off on a two week holiday. Would be slightly ironic to put a lifetime's worth of work into this masterpiece of a thread only to miss the moment they finally go 'pop'.... :)

 

That said, what are the chances that I'll be visiting the ruined city of Pompeii on the very same day...? Now THAT would be poetic....

 

I would lava that...

 

Boom tish.

 

(surprisingly my iPhone spell check wanted to change tish to fish - does it know where I'm posting now!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazlo78

Lazlo78

Posted
Posted
I'm getting progressively worried that I've picked the wrong time to head off on a two week holiday. Would be slightly ironic to put a lifetime's worth of work into this masterpiece of a thread only to miss the moment they finally go 'pop'.... :)

 

That said, what are the chances that I'll be visiting the ruined city of Pompeii on the very same day...? Now THAT would be poetic....

 

I would lava that...

 

How magmanimous of you

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
The FL have replied to my enquiry about whether Pompey had fielded an ineligible player last night in Ashley Westwood.

 

They state that he had signed non-contract terms so was eligible. I was referred to section 56 of this document that explains it.

 

http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-6-players_2293633_2125731#56

 

I reckon that this is what Jordan Cross is referring to also when he says that there will be movement on the player front today or tomorrow. Portsmouth are attempting to bolster the ranks by signing all the triallists on non-contract terms for Saturday.

 

This may be a stupid question, but if it's not against the embargo by signing on non-contract terms why didn't Appleton do that on Monday so the trailists could play last night?

 

Doesnt make sense to me , Westwood isnt even registered as a player as far as i can see on the PFA list , so how can they have registered him as a player???it doesnt happen immediately

 

That's the key though. They can sign Unemployed Players during the Closed Period (non-Transfer Window) in the following circumstances.

 

It's in the definition of an "Unemployed Player" in the rules.

 

EDIT : Re-reading, if the person joined between 1 Feb/1 July 2012 (basically the Closed Period) his registration with a previous club needs to have "expired before the end of a previous Transfer Window and he has not since been registered with any such club". So no registration at any club since BEFORE Feb 1st" - or a player who has NEVER been registered with a FL member, a Premier League or Conference National club, or ANY OTHER CLUB IN A COUNTRY OTHER THAN ENGLAND.

 

They can sign a "non-contract" player during the Transfer Window, though it doesn't really clarify what "non-contract" means, other than that they can't be transferred for any money, only have their registration cancelled.

 

That actually seems like quite a sensible question, to which the only answer is that "Appleton is very stupid".

 

They were only given dispensation as they didn't have a goalie & presumably as they'd sanctioned Westwood as a coach he slipped through because they took pity in a modest way on them. Not the same as a free hand though.

 

The definition is in the rules, I've edited above. He's an unemployed player if he doesn't have a club registration prior to the closure of the previous Transfer Window (TW), the fact he's got a job as a coach is irrelevant.

 

And they actually can sign anyone they like who isn't registered with anyone else on non-contract terms (and can't get a transfer fee for them) as long as the TW is open.

 

But they can only sign players with the express permission of the FL, regardless of the players' status - which presumably they gave in these cases and not in the case of the other triallists.

 

I had the same response from the FA as posted previously, and I have asked them to clarify exactly the point that you have made ie Westwood registered as a player with Lincoln in May 2012, how does that sit with Regulations 41 & 56 ?

 

Clarification received..

 

But it has to be with their consent - hence no Howard or McLeod.

 

Or with the agreement of the players to actually sign and get paid a pittance compared to what they were enticed with, which could also explain it.

 

I've been having a look around to see if there's any detail to the FL Transfer Embargo.

 

Coventry had one for not submitting accounts in time http://www.football-league.co.uk/championship/news/20120302/transfer-embargo-for-sky-blues_2293322_2630650 which according to the FL site "temporarily banned from any activity in the transfer market."

Birmingham the same : "consequently are now banned from any activity in the transfer marker until further notice" http://www.football-league.co.uk/championship/news/20120302/birmingham-under-transfer-embargo_2293322_2630756

 

The FL Rules indicate the right to "81.2.13 impose an embargo on registration of Players;" http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-8-offences-inquiries-commissions-disputes-and-appeals_2293633_2125735 . That's REGISTRATION, rather than transfer, or signing. That would prevent any players from being registered, whether they were unemployed, non-contract, player/coaches or whatever.

 

I'm not sure there's a better way of an unequivocal embargo on ALL players than preventing any players from registering no matter their previous status.

 

None of this answers how they've managed to sign two players whilst under embargo.

 

Ok, that's all. Still nothing about the detail of embargoes though. ;).

 

And we are still wondering...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TopGun

TopGun

Posted
Posted
Ok, hold on, they're signing 10 non-contract players (allowed within the embargo as we established yesterday, but they can't get a fee for them if they leave) or they're signing 10 short-term contract players (which means their embargo has been lifted by the FL - which is extremely unlikely) ?

 

I think they're non-contract players but TB has dressed the term up as a monthly contract on the basis that he has the money to pay them some peanuts for a month. I guess he's also footing the short term insurance that will be required on the players. It's clear that he can't sign contracted players until the FL lifts the embargo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
I think they're non-contract players but TB has dressed the term up as a monthly contract on the basis that he has the money to pay them some peanuts for a month. It's clear that he can't sign contracted players until the FL lifts the embargo.

 

You would hope so - see the recap above - oh, and sorry for misrepresenting your linking of the rules as being done by Torres, edited now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted

I'm confused.......

 

Fact 1 ) TB is charged with getting the best return for creditors

 

Possible fact 2 ) BC is a creditor ( I think )

 

Fact 3) The best deal for BC is to get his charge over Fortress Fatpipes repayed in full

 

Fact 4) TB is hoping to enable PST's takeover, inlcuding buying the ground, for as much ( as little ? ) as they can afford

 

Does TB therefore not have a conflict of interest ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

If the trust’s £2.75m offer to Balram Chainrai in return for him relinquishing his charge of the stadium is rejected, and there are no other bidders, it would be down to Mr Birch to try and make a compromise.However, if no compromise could be reached then the court can force Mr Chainrai to accept the deal and cut his losses.

After all, the alternative would be for the club to be liquidated, and then Mr Chainrai would only get a fraction of what he’s owed.

 

Carefully failing to point out that 2.75 million is also a fraction of what he is owed. Also can the court actually force him to accept the deal? Sounds unlikely to me.

Edited by pedg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted

 

 

I think my favourite bit is this :

What about the players who generously agreed to leave early? Will they still get the money they are owed, no matter how little?

 

Yes. The players were always going to be paid directly using the parachute payments from the Football League, which add up to about £8.5m of the £11m payments.

 

I'm pretty sure that until Chainrai came out and said "Birch spent it all on player agreements" that pretty much no-one in Portsmouth had the foggiest clue it was coming out of the money they were expecting the club to get from the PPs. PST budgeted for there being PPs left AND agreeing to pay only £2m to the players, not £8.5m. But apparently this was "always" going to be the case.

 

Also worth noting, the Football League have the PPs. The Prem has definitely paid the FL not Portsmouth directly. A just a little nuance of note to remind everyone that no-one trusts them around money any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
Some fans have voiced their desire to see a phoenix club emerge from the ashes, without the shackles of debt, a beleaguered history, and zero involvement from any former owner from 1998 onwards.

 

That’s all well and good, and AFC Wimbledon has proved it can be done.

 

The trouble is, if that were to happen huge numbers of local creditors would lose out.

 

Also amusing. Because they wouldn't want any creditors to lose out on money owed to them, how could anyone suggest such a thing ? :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
For example, last time Pompey was in administration, by the time the final creditors numbers were filed, Qatar Airways had managed to find 20p it was owed.

 

The airline never managed to explain to The News how it was owed 20p, but nevertheless it was included in that CVA, which means it is technically still owed 1p.

 

 

Now that made me laugh. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
So hang on, I’ve pledged £1,000 for the trust’s bid, but so far have only handed over £100. When am I going to be asked for the rest?

 

As soon as Trevor Birch accepts the trust’s bid, fans who have pledged their £1,000 stake will be asked to pay the full amount.

 

 

Probably an obvious point, but The News appears to be claiming here that Birch will only find out how many of the £100 pledges will convert to actual tangible £1000 cash AFTER he's agreed that the Trust can take over.

 

You'd expect he'd be doing some digging for himself to try and get an accurate conversion rate, but I suppose it's only when it's definitely happening you get a realistic response to this. I wonder if there are any previous examples of pledges to Trust clubs and their return rate ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huffton

Huffton

Posted
Posted

Just asked on twitter what they would be paying the new signings with, to receive this reply by one of the more intelligent members of the phew:

 

 

beerygranet beerygranet ‏@grantkenward

 

@paulrhoughton @solentsport the trust taking over-proper fans not like bandwagon jumping scummers

 

So there we have it, the trust are taking over, they are saved

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
@pn_neil_allen: Another excellent article from @blueballoo2000 well worth a read for #Pompey fans. Spot on. Again. http://t.co/EHvtQaa1

 

And then there was one. Portpin finally bowed to reality and withdrew their bid, having apparently realised how unwelcome it was, and how unlikely they ever were to see their money again.

 

 

All eyes now turn to the Pompey Supporters Trust and Trevor Birch. This situation is now a rather simpler ones. That may be a minority opinion, but one that is supported by the facts.

 

Pompey is for sale. It is a business with 8,000 season ticket holders, no players and £4m in the bank. Considering the Trust's break even budget put aside £2.65m for player salaries and we have a small handful of first year pros earnings a few hundred quid per week, the club is like any football club, far better off financially without all those footballers hanging around.

 

There is one buyer, who have a limited amount of money. The club has one tangible asset, a stadium worth £2m according to an independent valuer. The Trust submitted a bid weeks ago. It has a fully costed business plan that passed muster with Portsmouth City Council. It has actual, real money to invest, unlike any other bidder in recent years.

 

So what is the problem, why doesn't Birch just sell to the Trust? Well, for one, there is Portpin. They still hanker after their lost money and are still scrambling for a way to get it back. However, again this is quite a simple one. They can howl all they like, there is one sum of money on offer. There won't be any more. They can take it or leave it. Birch said himself that if necessary he can take them to court and force them to accept the best deal on offer. Well, it's the only deal on offer.

 

Then there are the players and the compromise agreements. Well, all those compromise agreements were negotiated by Birch with Portpin in mind. Well, their offer is off the table so those agreements are gone. I for one don't believe for a minute that Portpin allowed Birch to spend £9m on compromise agreements. It is far more likely to be 50% of that at best. Even so, there is going to have to be some renegotiation, because like Portpin's lost money, there is no-one around to pay it, and all those agreements were made conditional on a Portpin takeover as I understand it.

 

Portpin and our former players are rather like the Arabs in George McDonald-Fraser's excellent post-war memoirs, hanging on to a treasure chest full of pre-war Italian lira, not having heard the news that all the security and football creditor rules in the world are worthless without someone prepared to pay the sum assured to the bearer.

 

Which brings us to liquidation. Portpin do not own Fratton Park. In the event of liquidation, the money in the bank goes to PKF and Gaydamak. The player contracts are all cancelled. All football, creditors become unsecured. The one remaining asset, Fratton Park, is sold by the liquidator to the highest bidder and the money goes to Portpin as secured creditor.

 

As discussed, Fratton Park is independently valued at £2m, and a substantial proportion of that value is based on renting it to a football club that no longer exists. As there could be no football played and no rent earned, the value is substantially reduced. In any case, it comes back to what someone is prepared to pay for it. The development brief, approved by government, means Fratton Park is subject to compulsory purchase and severe planning restrictions. No developer is going to buy it, for the same reason no-one has bought the Gaydamak land. It's worthless. Even if you could get planning permission it is for light industrial units, not retail or residential, so you would be lucky to even get your money back, let alone make a profit. Industrial units in Fratton aren't exactly priceless.

 

In other words, in a liquidation scenario we are back to the same buyer, Pompey Supporters Trust, but they would be prepared to pay even less for the stadium. The current pledges would have to be returned to fans and business and the money raising effort would have to start again for a non-league Pompey. The chances are substantially less would be raised.

 

So the situation is only complicated by people's unrealistic expectations. In reality it's very simple: one club, one buyer, one amount of money. Birch needs to get people round a table and try to thrash out a deal - fast. If Portpin won't take the offer, get into court and make them. If the players won't, well they can have nothing instead.

 

PKF, the players and Portpin all came to Pompey to make a lot of money. Time to wake up and smell the coffee. Money's gone. All that's left of Pompey is the fans, a fine young manager and some young braves preparing to do the football equivalent of the Charge of the Light Brigade.

 

It's time you all got real and took your leave. The fans have got a long road in front of them whether the club survives or is liquidated and reborn. Hit the road, and let us get on with rebuilding our club. Starting at Fratton Park against Bournemouth.

 

So now it's "£4m in the bank"...that's a pretty heft interest rate they've got over there....up £1m in 24 hours! I'd like to know who they bank with to get that kinda rate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedg

pedg

Posted
Posted
Probably an obvious point, but The News appears to be claiming here that Birch will only find out how many of the £100 pledges will convert to actual tangible £1000 cash AFTER he's agreed that the Trust can take over.

 

You'd expect he'd be doing some digging for himself to try and get an accurate conversion rate, but I suppose it's only when it's definitely happening you get a realistic response to this. I wonder if there are any previous examples of pledges to Trust clubs and their return rate ?

 

As I have said before I would not be surprised if one or more of their high net worth individuals had agreed to underwrite the difference between what they get and what they need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Minty

Minty

Posted
Posted
Probably an obvious point, but The News appears to be claiming here that Birch will only find out how many of the £100 pledges will convert to actual tangible £1000 cash AFTER he's agreed that the Trust can take over.

 

You'd expect he'd be doing some digging for himself to try and get an accurate conversion rate, but I suppose it's only when it's definitely happening you get a realistic response to this. I wonder if there are any previous examples of pledges to Trust clubs and their return rate ?

 

Indeed, surely, like with any other bid for a club, the Administrator has to be happy that the bid is credible, which means knowing how much money they will have before approving said bid. We see it time and again - if a club is in administration and a formal bid is lodged, the one thing that is always mentioned is 'proof of funds'... how do the Trust satisfy that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted (edited)
As I have said before I would not be surprised if one or more of their high net worth individuals had agreed to underwrite the difference between what they get and what they need.

 

Indeed, surely, like with any other bid for a club, the Administrator has to be happy that the bid is credible, which means knowing how much money they will have before approving said bid. We see it time and again - if a club is in administration and a formal bid is lodged, the one thing that is always mentioned is 'proof of funds'... how do the Trust satisfy that?

 

Guessing one answers the other here... assuming of course that the guarantee exists, and isn't from a made up sheikh or something.

Edited by The9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

March 2013....a busy commuter train....

 

where did you holiday last year Mr Trousers?

Oh, we had a nice fortnight in Italy, the weather was good, we visited museums and vineyards, it was very civilised.

Where are you holidaying this year?

 

 

Holiday? HOLIDAY?? I haven't got time, I'm still trying to catch up from the 180 pages I missed last August, so shut the feck up and leave me with my laptop...I've only got to December.....apparently Whittingham has praised his plucky young braves after their 4-0 home defeat, and the Trust reckon they nearly have enough funds to pay some of the September wagebill...:scared:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...