Nexstar Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 So bascially we're not being taken over, and one of the two companies that own the club is going into administration? Great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 So bascially we're not being taken over, and one of the two companies that own the club is going into administration? Great. It means that if it comes off we will get away without a points deduction though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 ?? I hope you're not a lawyer. 1) An Administrator could seek remedy against either the purchaser or the Directors if the assets were sold at an undervalue unsder section 238 of the insolvency act. IF THEY WERE SOLD AT UNDERVALUE being key. There is nothing wrong with selling assets if you get fair value for them. Minor side observation, but could that be why the Concourse Sale was scrapped this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Which would be our market cap right? Currently 3 million quid, so very cheap This is starting to look quite interesting. I'm sure trousers will be on it in the morning More like something will be on my trousers in the morning.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 What is undervalue ???? the football club is the PLC s only revenue stream . If they sold it for any less than the share value that would be deemed as undervalue , and if they can sell it for the share pricethen you dont con the share holders. Could this explain why "someone" has been driving down the share price recently? Or so it would seem.... Hmmm..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 The morning? To be honest I'm surprised he isn't here already! FFS....give us a chance....I'm only allowed to spend 17 hours out of every 24 on here....the institution won't tollerate any excess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 There has been a lot of grapevine gossip over the last 72 hours and perhaps IF it is true is why we never went into administration last week. Would now be a good time to switch on my PMs again....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Where does this leave Notts County? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 and the record for most consecutive posts on one thread goes to...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alehouseboys Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 No, technically we dont own St Marys. Aviva can decide what they want to do with it and block the administrators from selling it (Courtesy of clapham saint earlier today). We currently owe them 23 million , they are not going to walk away from that. I know of a club in need of a new stadium, not so far away...quite near their training ground, in fact...£23m?, a snip at today's new stadium prices. It couldn't happen...could it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Anyone else heard anything about an MLT consortium.....just something mentioned to me recently not reliable source. I passed this off as Fulthorpe farce but wondered if aanyone knew different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 as good as a positive change will be, or even the excitement of a decent rumour, got feeling Lowe/Wilde here for at least next 12 months+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Selling assets subject to a fixed charge requires the chargeholder's permission. In our case Barclays and Aviva. If the stadium is not being sold then Aviva's permission might not be neeeded it will depend upon the exact nature of the debture. Well speaking from a business point of view i know if my company wanted to sell they would need to get permission from the bank 1st. If i recall part of the lending agreement states that should business change hands the debt must be cleared or transfered. In fact if i think about it more i recall the Leeds case. Just browsing that i find these lines "'Richard Fleming, Mark Firmin and Howard Smith, of KPMG Restructuring, were today appointed administrators of Leeds United Association Football Club Limited at the request of the club's directors. Shortly after their appointment the joint administrators agreed to sell the business and its assets to a newly formed company called Leeds United Football Club Limited, the directors of which are Ken Bates, Shaun Harvey and Mark Taylor. The sale of the club is subject to approval by its creditors, via a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). This would see creditors forgoing a significant element of their debt, in order to allow the club to continue trading under new ownership. The creditors' meeting, to consider the CVA, will be held before the end of May. The Football League will also need to approve the sale.'" Leeds and Southampton both are similar in that they had been in trouble for sometime. But the key difference is that at this point Leeds had nothing left, the stadium had gone, players had gone and they were £35m in debt. They had been issued a winding up order of £5m by HMRC. If they did not pay it the club would of been liquidated. Point being the creditors knew they would not be getting fook all as there was nothing to sell, no way of making the money back. It was just a dead carcass with nothing but the bones remaining. The football league gave the points deduction out after the admin team agreed to the sale. Saying if they had not agreed the club would of gone under. Now Saints are nowhere near that situation. If we are then we would know about it, players would of been sold for next to nothing, players would of been released and so forth. Seeing as we have even spent money in recent months on signings such as Morgan i doubt we are anywhere near the winding up order. So we would have to convince the creditors that we are doomed and they wont get a penny before they would agree to it. And while we still have some players of worth they will never do that. Just as you wouldn't let it go if someone owed you money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saints Pedro Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Mark Dennis said he was '99% sure' this would happen for what that's worth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Well speaking from a business point of view i know if my company wanted to sell they would need to get permission from the bank 1st. If i recall part of the lending agreement states that should business change hands the debt must be cleared or transfered. In fact if i think about it more i recall the Leeds case. Just browsing that i find these lines "'Richard Fleming, Mark Firmin and Howard Smith, of KPMG Restructuring, were today appointed administrators of Leeds United Association Football Club Limited at the request of the club's directors. Shortly after their appointment the joint administrators agreed to sell the business and its assets to a newly formed company called Leeds United Football Club Limited, the directors of which are Ken Bates, Shaun Harvey and Mark Taylor. The sale of the club is subject to approval by its creditors, via a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA). This would see creditors forgoing a significant element of their debt, in order to allow the club to continue trading under new ownership. The creditors' meeting, to consider the CVA, will be held before the end of May. The Football League will also need to approve the sale.'" Leeds and Southampton both are similar in that they had been in trouble for sometime. But the key difference is that at this point Leeds had nothing left, the stadium had gone, players had gone and they were £35m in debt. They had been issued a winding up order of £5m by HMRC. If they did not pay it the club would of been liquidated. Point being the creditors knew they would not be getting fook all as there was nothing to sell, no way of making the money back. It was just a dead carcass with nothing but the bones remaining. The football league gave the points deduction out after the admin team agreed to the sale. Saying if they had not agreed the club would of gone under. Now Saints are nowhere near that situation. If we are then we would know about it, players would of been sold for next to nothing, players would of been released and so forth. Seeing as we have even spent money in recent months on signings such as Morgan i doubt we are anywhere near the winding up order. So we would have to convince the creditors that we are doomed and they wont get a penny before they would agree to it. And while we still have some players of worth they will never do that. Just as you wouldn't let it go if someone owed you money. Re: the two parts which you pu in bold. 1) The Football League will also need to approve the sale I'm afraid that I know very litle about the league rules and there are posters on here far more enlightened than I am. 2) The sale of the club is subject to approval by its creditors. This is true in the case of a CVA under which the Company will put together proposals as to how much and when they propose to be able to pay creditors, the creditors then vote (which the number of votes depending on how much you are owed) on whether to accept them. The posts on this thread suggest that a sale outside of a formal insolvency process and then an administration order. An administration is a different procedure to a CVA and although creditors will get to vote on some things (such as who is appoined as administrator) they don't get to veto a sale of the Company's assets. As I said earlier if you have given fixed charge security to a lender by law the directors (and in an insolvency process the Administrator/Liquidator/CVA Supervisor) require the permission of the charge holder in order to sell the asset. If consent is "unreasonably witheld" you can apply to court for permission to sell the asset. On a more general note.... although everybody gets understandibly quite worked up and excited trying to peice together what is going on (if anything) it is all just speculation as none of us has access to all of the facts. Most importantly our true financial position, who, if anybody has expressed any interest in making an offer or what the Bank's view is. Chances of us working it out on here are close to zero.:smt017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 St Marco, the difference, however, between Leeds and us is that the Leeds creditors who agreed to the CVA were actually Ken Bates, weren't they? I think, although I can't state for certain without doing some research, that this matter is STILL being investigated because the Bates offer wasn't actually the best one, but was the one the 'creditors' agreed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 Mark Dennis said he was '99% sure' this would happen for what that's worth! Why the 1% doubt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 30 March, 2009 Share Posted 30 March, 2009 St Marco, the difference, however, between Leeds and us is that the Leeds creditors who agreed to the CVA were actually Ken Bates, weren't they? I think, although I can't state for certain without doing some research, that this matter is STILL being investigated because the Bates offer wasn't actually the best one, but was the one the 'creditors' agreed to. I seem to remeber that that was the case too. Wasn't there also an accusation that he had inflated the amount that the books said he was owed to give himself more voting power? (Also no research just what I vaguely recall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Where there's a will there's a way, Lowe knew prior to his return the potential for administration and would have had a contingent in that event, even if that what spouted by Mark Dennis is untrue, the fact, as outlined in this thread, that it can be achieved would no doubt be the course Lowe would take in order he remains in control. I'm sure he could raise the required funds to ensure the assets sold were not sold at "undervalue". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncoboy Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 My cat was told this by the cat over the road, who was told by the dog who is friends of the dog belonging to the person who's taken Saints over. I'm so excited that it looks like this time its finally going to happen. My Dog is useless. She didnt know anything about it. I told her go sniff it out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 My pet mole is on the case but usually makes a mountain out of the proverbial, so no nearer the truth there. My pet beaver was going to be put on the case but I have now decided to keep my pet beaver to myself...The truth will always out... The truth will always out, said my parrott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 My Dog is useless. She didnt know anything about it. I told her go sniff it out My dog's got no nose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 The truth will always out, said my parrott. At least your parrott (sic) can spell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 At least your parrott (sic) can spell... Leave my parrott out of this, teach..he has always had two of each or was it one of my other words?:smt017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Why are there no painkillers in the jungle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Mark Dennis said he was '99% sure' this would happen for what that's worth! I like Mark Dennis, always brings a smile to the face when I see him. But if anyone is passing on hair brained ideas or schemes, it's Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Why are there no painkillers in the jungle? No, pray please tell?:smt017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 So when is this supposed to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I like Mark Dennis, always brings a smile to the face when I see him. But if anyone is passing on hair brained ideas or schemes, it's Mark. similar trait to half the posters on here eh! up and away?:---) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shroppie Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Why are there no painkillers in the jungle? Parrots eat 'em all? (Though I'd answer to save anyone else getting the abuse). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Why are there no painkillers in the jungle? Because this parrot is deceased. HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 No, pray please tell?:smt017 Because Gorilla's drink too much the night before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Because this parrot is deceased. HTH 'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!! Sort of like this rumour I guess.......why do people make this stuff up to cover the boredom of no football?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Why are there no painkillers in the jungle? 'cos Anadin Skywalker turned to the dark side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!! Sort of like this rumour I guess.......why do people make this stuff up to cover the boredom of no football?? BBB plese repeat and then move onto the second verse. By the way what is this football you talk of?:smt017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 31 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Sort of like this rumour I guess.......why do people make this stuff up to cover the boredom of no football?? What bits been made up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 What bits been made up? The 99% Seems like we get one of these 'Saints going into Admin' stories every week now. And when the friday deadline goes by we get another, more convoluted, one. If we're going into Admin why do we have to do it on a Friday? Why can't it be done now!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StInky Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 'e's not pinin'! 'e's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'e's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'e's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'e's off the twig! 'e's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! This is an ex-parrot!! Sort of like this rumour i guess.......why do people make this stuff up to cover the boredom of no football?? a polygon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 31 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 31 March, 2009 The 99% Seems like we get one of these 'Saints going into Admin' stories every week now. And when the friday deadline goes by we get another, more convoluted, one. If we're going into Admin why do we have to do it on a Friday? Why can't it be done now!! Can't seem to remember anything mentioned Friday, but there you go. Do i think it will happen, no probably not, but i only posted what was said, by an ex player, from a ex company of the PLC, that is still closely aligned to the club and from what he claimed was "A Massive source", on a public radio station and heard by many more fans than just me......surely that's gotta to be posting on a fans forum :confused: So not sure if you are having a pop at me or Mark Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 Can't seem to remember anything mentioned Friday, but there you go. Do i think it will happen, no probably not, but i only posted what was said, by an ex player, from a ex company of the PLC, that is still closely aligned to the club and from what he claimed was "A Massive source", on a public radio station and heard by many more fans than just me......surely that's gotta to be posting on a fans forum :confused: So not sure if you are having a pop at me or Mark Dennis Gosh, wasn't a pop, more a go at the rumour mill in general. Friday was reference to the recent spate of Admin rumours that we've had going around. "A Massive Source" could also be someone in the background ****e stirring!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 My dog's got no nose. How does he smell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 31 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 31 March, 2009 "A Massive Source" could also be someone in the background ****e stirring!! I completely agree and infact, NickG pointed out that their source for Surman being sold,turned out to be someone that had rung the show! So i'm not not waiting with baited breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 It's not the 1st until Wednesday. I wonder what witty joke SFC will run with this year. Who can forget the "Blue home kit"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I heard a take over rumour last Friday and had a good laugh at it. As I had just gone over the 100 post mark (which was declared last year as the absolute minimum for repeating such guff!) I thought about sharing, but decided to spare myself the abuse. I then heard it again at Eastleigh's game on Saturday, from an entirely different source with contacts closer to the club. I am assured this has nothing todo with Jonathan Falsehope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 How does he smell? It can't. He has no nose. Pay attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I heard a take over rumour last Friday and had a good laugh at it. As I had just gone over the 100 post mark (which was declared last year as the absolute minimum for repeating such guff!) I thought about sharing, but decided to spare myself the abuse. I then heard it again at Eastleigh's game on Saturday, from an entirely different source with contacts closer to the club. I am assured this has nothing to do with Jonathan Falsehope. Write the details here in light grey so that no-one else sees them. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I heard a take over rumour last Friday and had a good laugh at it. As I had just gone over the 100 post mark (which was declared last year as the absolute minimum for repeating such guff!) I thought about sharing, but decided to spare myself the abuse. I then heard it again at Eastleigh's game on Saturday, from an entirely different source with contacts closer to the club. I am assured this has nothing todo with Jonathan Falsehope. I heard one recently too but it sounded like a mix of all the previous rumours that hae been going around. I asked someone via PM if there could possibly be anything behind it but unfortunatly it goes down as just another rumour that gets no-where. This latest thing from MD doesnt even sound like its something to get excited about as it sounds like someone is trying to pull a fast one and come next season the FA will slap a 17 point deduction on us for taking the P. Thats if it has more lgs than any of the previous rumours of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I heard a take over rumour last Friday and had a good laugh at it. As I had just gone over the 100 post mark (which was declared last year as the absolute minimum for repeating such guff!) I thought about sharing, but decided to spare myself the abuse. I then heard it again at Eastleigh's game on Saturday, from an entirely different source with contacts closer to the club. I am assured this has nothing todo with Jonathan Falsehope. Come on then, lets be having you!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I think I'm colourblind where's the damned light grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 31 March, 2009 Share Posted 31 March, 2009 I seem to remeber that that was the case too. Wasn't there also an accusation that he had inflated the amount that the books said he was owed to give himself more voting power? (Also no research just what I vaguely recall) Yes - he also convened the creditors' meeting at very short notice and was particularly obtrusive towards each of the many interested parties who wanted to carry out due dilligence on the company's accounts - hence while there were parties who were believed to be willing to offer much more than Bates was offering, they refused to register an offer without having conducted due dilligence, so Bates' offer was the only one on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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