Thetownend.com

Can this be true?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/15/stmodwenproperties-swindon

I thought all this had been sorted ?!?!?


 :yikes:


Lets hope its in hand and that this is nothing more than a 'pay up' tactic or that the debt was the holding companies and not the clubs.

Something does not ring true here.  Seems so 2005.  I actually believe Fitton, Arbib et al have this sorted.  But if not...credibility is really on the line.

Well, we all knew about it. So I'm sure they did!

Oh. Shit.

I thought we were past all of this business. Obviously not.

Provided the article is correct all that has happened is St Modwen's have issued a statutory demand followed by a winding up order. I wouldn't worry too much about all those important sounding words, it just the route St Modwen's have chosen to take to get the money back they claim they are owed.

Anyone can issue a statutory demand, which has to be issued before a winding up order can be issued.

Good chance it is a scare tactic and they're trying it on to get money they might not be entitled to.

Did Fitton mention it in the AGM?

It depends if the new company took all of the liabilities of the Mad Greek Fucktard's company I guess.

As we have been through the Bill Power court case I guess that they did. So on balance Fitton et al must be liable. However you have to say that as they did due diligence on the books before they bought, they must have known about this and should have planned to meet it.

Hopefully.

Hmmmm does one not think that Fitton and Co see this as a debt of the last regime and not themselves? I guess that could be the stumbling block in such an issue. In saying that they would have known about this debt when they took control and to me this doesn't sound accurate.

Is it in the accounts as a liability?

The Guardian seems to be the only news outlet carrying the story according to newsnow.co.uk.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/15/stmodwenproperties-swindon

Will be interesting to see how this is covered elsewhere tomorrow.  (The Adver are running with 'Former Coronation Street Star Relishes Career as Cheesemaker'.)

I haven't seen them.

And if it is true then we can kiss goodbye to any hope of buying a striker in January.

ace, old school finacial problems..I feel a blimp coming on!

 :D

Have the "this is why Morrison went to Southend" rumours started on thisis yet :) ?

There will almost certainly be a communication from the club early tomorrow morning, the wording of which will be key.  I don't plan to lose any sleep over this tonight, but will be reading tomorrow very closely.

My understanding was that Wills underwrote all liabilities, but because the action was taken against the football club as current custodians Fitton et al had to defend the action. I'd imagine the same would happen with this.

Well I trust this board a lot more than the last one so I won't lose too much sleep either. My guess is that they are taking the same stance that they did with the Power issue.

here we go again...

the adver mentioned a bit about the debt in Feb 09

http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/news/4105534.Town_s___1_75million_loss/


2007 Accounts:

So basically the debt is for the current holding compant to pay? Ouch.

Who knows! They know about it, it isn't a surprise* and I'd imagine a plan is in place to deal with it.

* unless St Modwen unexpectedly called it in.

it's not their debt and given their previous stance, i can see them refusing to pay it. how stubborn will they be?

if fitton et al are lookign for a way out, this is it

FFS

So that means; the club owes £2.5m to Shaw Park, with Shaw Park being owned 50/50 by St Modwen and Fitton's holding company. So surely any legal action against the club would have to come from Shaw Park rather than St Modwen.

Sounds like another complicated arrangement that will have to be unravelled in court. Bearing in mind we're talking about a seven figure sum, its possible St Modwen could just be chancing their luck to see what happens.

I can't see there being anything to worry about. Fitton will have known about this all along and I still find it hard to see them walking away when they've come this far.

the debts were inherited when the club was taken over surely?
power was shat on.this could get interesting

I thought things were going a bit too well.

I'd guess so too. I can't remember how the old BP action finished? Did Wills end up actually paying?

I miss all the old finance web stuff. This has god my heart buzzing again. Anybody have Fitton's mobile number?

Shall we have a demonstration?  Outside the back of the arkells.  Just after the usual statement friday?

Well I think we have to wait and see what the trust have to say. There's nothing on their site (http://truststfc.co.uk/), and I can't find a link to their forum. Am I being blind?

A 2 year grace period wouldn't be up in August would it? Didn't Fitton takeover in December/January time?

Who knows what else is inaccurate.

Good point Si (Fitton took over mid-Jan btw). It's perhaps also slightly odd that St Modwen didn't see fit to mention this in their recent interim report
http://www.stmodwen.co.uk/docs/interim_report2009.pdf.

This press report has come from St Modwen - the court don't publicise this kind of stuff ahead of time and I'm damn sure the club haven't got on to the Guardian about it. So what we're seeing here is St Modwen taking a shot across the club's bows with some unpleasant publicity - there's certainly more to this. I'm going to wait to see the club's response before panicking but if the club were aware of this a few weeks ago, I'd have thought it might have been germane to mention it at the AGM. But let's see what the whole story is, all we're seeing at the moment is St Modwen's PR machine having a pop - standard tactics (along with the stat demand) to try to force a settlement of a disputed debt.

It's a good job the mongs on Thisisstfc website haven't got wind of thisit would be the end of the world for sure according to them  ;D

What's the betting trhey'll be posts of sack Fitton there not good enough to run the club etc etc.

I'm pretty confident that is something & nothing and St Modwen don't have a leg to stand on. Fitton & Co are shrewd businessmen & didn't get the wealth they have by naivity.

So...Monday morning.  The Guardian article remains the only source reporting this.  Nothing from the club.  Nothing in the Adver.  I'm wondering whether there's a journo out there with his wires crossed.  We'll see.

As Paul stated, this is a disputed debt.

A company cannot be wound up over a disputed debt, end of.

Its posturing. I for one will not be throwing my toys out of the pram until I hear a few more facts

But we all know what the adver is like for reporting stories.

The Adver won't report it until they get something from the club. Apparently unlike the Guardian journo who would seem happy to print any old shit the St Modwen PR machine cares to throw his way.

True.  But it's the complete absence of reporting from any other source that seems odd to me.

http://newsnow.co.uk/h/?JavaScript=1&searchheadlines=&search=swindon

The Adver has picked up on the story now.  The final para claims that the club will be issuing a statement later today.


Swindon Town faces winding-up order
9:23am Monday 16th November 2009

Comments (0)   Have your say »


SWINDON Town fans are watching with bated breath today to see what will happen to their club.

Uncertainty surrounds Town's future following reports in the national press that they are facing administration.

According to the Guardian newspaper, the League One club faces a winding-up order from property company St Modwen over the non-repayment of a £2.45m loan dating back to 2005.

Swindon Town has gone into administration twice before and in 2005 was struggling to pay a VAT bill. It was then that St Modwen lent the club £1.45m to meet their tax demands.

When Andrew Fitton's consortium took over in 2007, a two-year grace period was agreed for the repayment of the loan, but that ran out in August.

Three weeks ago, St Modwen issued a statutory demand for repayment, but has heard nothing from the club. It is claiming the original loan of £1.45m plus £1m in interest.

Swindon Town this morning refused to comment but said they would be issuing a statement later today.

Yay! Statement Friday Monday!

Bloody holding companies !!

Unless they dig out Baghdad Bob to read out the statement, I think we'll be alright.

I see the Adver has now added a question mark to its headline.  (Now reads 'Swindon Town faces winding-up order?')

Oh dear not again :(

A Theory perhaps?: Perhaps STFC were talking to St Modwen about working with them on the new Stadium development as one of the bidders hence why nothing was said as St Modwen perhaps saw a way of getting the money, STFC has since said, they wont go with St Modwen so they kicked off?? I know I will get shot down for talking about theories and bollocks because its me saying it but maybe thats why its been kept quiet?

Fantastic. The Adver's really excelled itself here - reprinted the Guardian's piece pretty much whole, the only thing they've added is two pretty massive inaccuracies (Fitton took over Jan 2008 and the club are facing a winding-up order, not administration). Way to go boys! :D

Shut up Gazza you're talking bollocks ;)

BOOOOO. I was expecting Fred to shoot me down... doesn't feel right someone else doing it. :D

http://www.swindontownfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10341~1876615,00.html

so basically the article is a load of cunt

St modwen obviously wanted to get this shite in the open to try to force the clubs hand, and the guardian needed column space filling!!
Got faith in AF to get us out of this one, as with the Power case.

To paraphrase the Club's comment...

'Please go away.  We really don't want to talk about this.'

Not very reassuring, to tell the truth.

Wasn't the loan to the holding Company same as Bill P's. From what I can recall AF & CO bought shares in STFC from the HOLDING Company. They didn't buy the holding company itself (An invention & concept of Diadamdis)

This always was the big skeleton in the closet.

But it is sensationalist by the Guardian. After all they lent the money to the Swindon Town Holding company, and Mike Diamandis. What were they thinking?

I agree with Gazza's theory!!

I guess they are in negotiation about the amount and the replayment plan. You can't shoot yourself in the foot at a delicate stage.

It would be nice to be told the status of the WUP, assuming there is one.

You cant issue a WUP against a disputed debt Batchy old boy

that statement is kind of pathetic.

As I remember it, the debt is and has always been shown in the accounts as an amount owed to Shaw Park Developments - and St Modwen's accounts show the same.  Shaw Park Developments is a seperate company, not the holding Co of the Diamandis concept, used by Wills and St Modwen to channel the future development of the clubs ground through - it may also have an interest in the company that did some work in Hungerford for Wills.

I would presume the dispute here would be around how any takeover was completed in terms of how this was then owed by the holding company and whether any debt was undertaken by the football club - The Holding Co having gone into Admin since then, which avoided them having to pay power.

It's pretty clear the money was used to keep the football club afloat, and assets of the club are held as security for the loan IIRC.  It's all going to be down to how that debt was accounted for in the split from the Football club (now majority owned by a new holding co), the old Holding Co and it's liabilities to Shaw Park Developments.  Could be a tad worrying.

If the dates are correct, then it seems the negotiation of a delay in full repayment was completed around the time of the Portuguese proposals.  Would not seem the delay was negotiated by the new owners, more likely they inherited a tangled mess including this possible debt (possible in spo far as who owes it and who to, the fact it exists can;t be in question)

What do you expect them to say then ?

"Come over here and say that. We'll fucking do you". :)

I'll get loads of abuse for this but fuck it, racking my brains I can't really think of any time when this current board have actually been proactive rather than reactive - I'm not suprised, and am starting to think Fitton and co mean well but are incompetant... That statement is a load of gash as well, it doesn't even begin to really address the issue.

I'm worried.

I'm not worried at all,  it's all a load of bollocks tbh and St Modwen have showed just how unprofessional they are by spouting this crap through the National Tabloids

Reaks of desperation and i think St Modwen are clutching at straws.

Even if the club have to pay out, the board took out an indemnity which means the debt will be passed onto the Wills Family

i concluded a while ago that the current board are trying to avoid paying certain inherited debts.the power case was evidence of this and i see nothing different with st mowden.

From what Rob's saying it does sound messy.

I suppose it boils down to whether the £1.45 million was loaned to the club or to the old holding co. If the latter then it's not a problem, if it's the former then I'm slightly worried.

Unless St Modwen got personal guarantees at the time (which seems unlikely as its never been mentioned), then them loaning the money to the club was extremely high risk. The only real chance of them getting the money back was if the re-development went ahead and it generated a high level of profits, and there was never much of a chance of their proposed development plan happening.

So I don't have much sympathy for them. Especially as they've waited until there is someone with money in control of the club, who they feel they've got a chance of hitting up for the money.

Why should you pay anything that you don't need to?

If you moved house and a few days later after moving you received an electricity bill for the previous tenant for a couple of hundred quid, would you pay it ? Of course not.

The Power case was down to the previous boards holding co. and who says that the new board have found that the St Modwen money was paid to the old holding co. and not the club directly, and therefore the debt belongs to the old holding co. which has gone under.

if they haven't inherited the debt then they shouldn't.time will tell if they have or not

I'm with arriba. The new board are trying to worm their way out of as much debt as possible.

And why not, I say. You don't get rich by paying other people's debts.

And St. Modwen shouldn't have been stupid enough to do business with a certain Greek. I'm sure they smelt a good deal and they got greedy, without checking who they were doing business with.

Let's take a look at some of the recent headlines involving St Modwen...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/6176440/St-Modwen-chairman-Anthony-Glossop-approved-MG-Rover-bribe.html

http://www.birminghampost.net/birmingham-business/birmingham-business-news/automotive-business/2009/09/14/developer-st-modwen-defends-100-000-payout-to-mg-rover-director-65233-24679471/

Total speculation on my part, but the boys on the board didn't get rich by missing details of this size. This is what due diligence is for. So it's a play by St Modwen. You only go to the press if you're in a weak position, so my guess would be that they are trying some legals and some bad PR to try and screw a better deal out of Fitton and co.

The fact that it only went to one paper suggests it was a direct leak and the fact it went to the Guardian (neither really a business paper or a sport paper) suggests that someone in St Modwen has called a mate rather than thought through a proper PR campaign.

And I love the Adver article. Utterly useless reporting. Do they even know anyone at the club?

The opening sentence:
"SWINDON Town fans are watching with bated breath today to see what will happen to their club. "

should have read:
"SWINDON Advertiser journalists are watching with bated breath today to see what will happen to their club."

St Modwen was on Fitton's radar prior to taking over but it wasn't seen as a major issue...

http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/archive/2007/12/03/STFC+News+Headlines+(swindon_news_headlines)/1874982.___Power____glitch/

http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/archive/2007/12/07/STFC+News+Headlines+(swindon_news_headlines)/1887963._Two_late_amendments_killed_deal___Fitton/

fair point. the statement doesn't actually say anything, it's all a bit bob holt...

I see iot as purely some jouno trying to make a story & a property Co desparate to get some money back that they lent to a dodgy guy who once ran our football club.
The electricity bill is the best analogy & is the way I see it. If I recall the Holding company or one of its OTHER subsidaries was lent the money. IT was NOT lent to the football club, as Diamndis & cO wanted to retain all rights etc over any redevelopment & profits. (Remember they saw a pot of gold eminating from massive housing developments & wanted that to belong to them not the club).
As we know the same thing was adjudged to happen with Bill Powers money (although he thought he'd lent it to the Football Club).
AF & CO bought 75% of the shares in the FOOTBALL CLub, FROM the holding company which was then put into admin etc.
So, whilst their may be some dispute, because no one lets that sort of money go without a fight, I am comfortable that AF & co have it sussed. St Modwen is just another victim of a "scam" by a guy well known to us all.

Of course it doesn't. When there's a court action in progress, even if you think it's a complete crock of shit, only a fool would release a statement that did actually address the issue in concrete terms. Which is why Holt/Diamandis often did precisely that. What you should do is play a straight bat and let the lawyers sort it out. Which is what this is. They couldn't do anything else under the circumstances

Yes, but to be fair Phil you don't know the ins and outs of the club's/holding co's historical financial transactions.

Given that the club have pointed out in their statement that it's in the Football Club's accounts as a disputed debt, it shows that they're not entirely sure who's debt it is either. I don't doubt for a minute that the board won't challenge this, but I'm certainly not resting on any laurels that it's cut and dried that the old holding co owe this money.

I'd put money on the fact that it wasn't lent to the football club. The old lot would not have wanted the money going directly into the club. If my memory serves me corrctly (& it might not of course), the money went to some Canal redevelopment thingy which was a joint venture between Wills & St Modwen. Was this company was called Shaw Park developments ? (Or Park Hampers ?:))

No, that was separate. Shaw Park was the joint venture between the old Holding Co and St Modwen. And St Modwen pumped a load of cash into it, some of which supposedly found it's way into the club. That's the money under dispute here.

Separate to that St Modwen did a joint venture directly with the Wills to develop the Old Piggery (no, really) into Hungerford Marina. They also pumped money into that. God alone knows what happened to that but I'd guess it's gone, proving you can't make a silk marina out of a pig's ear. That money isn't under dispute here. (It may be under dispute but it's not part of this case)

Blimey I've just got back from holiday thinking have I missed much and I feel I've just traveled back in time.

Im not sure why but this is making me laugh -  ALOT!

Re-reading some of the stuff around this, I suspect it's not so much the board trying to get out of paying the money altogether, more they're trying to delay payment (or do it in stages) whereas if the Grauniad story is to be believed St Modwen seem want payment in full now, relying on this "2-year" agreement, negotiated in Aug 2007. If that is the case, that would have been before Fitton and Co came on the scene (that was when we were being lined up for the Portugeezers) so the dispute may actually be about whether the payment schedule agreed then is actually valid or not. ie about when the money is owed rather than whether.

I've not seen the accounts. Is the sum shown as a liability, or does it show in the notes to the accounts as a potential liability due to it's disputed nature ?

Which ones? :) According to the club statement today, it's shown as disputed in the 09 accounts but no-one's seen them yet as they haven't been released publicly. Prior to that, it was shown as a liability, but those accounts were heavily qualified in the notes as "quite likely to be utter crap because we had to base them on some post-it notes we found in a shoebox under Sandy's desk" so I don't know you could hold them to that.

In St Modwens accounts it was listed as a debt owed by Shaw Park Developments with a sub note describing this as a joint venture.

I might be off the mark, been a while since I perused them, but I'm sure a commercial rate of interest was being charged.

The problem is that it all gets a bit murky between the football club and Shaw Park, but club assets were listed as security as far as I remember - may be the lease on the ground, or it could be what remaining stands we owned.

Both. And IIRC there was a third charge/mortgage as well over the "fixtures and fittings", although quite what they'd be above and beyond the South Stand, I don't know. But presumably St Modwen had a team of bailiffs on standby ready to pounce and seize the programme sellers' stands and the two mugs and a pencil case we had in the club shop at the time

We (The Trust) dont know any more about this than has been reported in the press really, except to say that this has not come out of the blue. It is an issue that Fitton has been dealing with ever since the takeover.

It dates back to the tangled web of companies that surrounded the club prior to the takeover and is possibly quite similar to the Power/Emmell case in as much as its a pain in the ass but not the imminent threat to the club`s survival the Adver headline might lead you to believe.

Sounds to me like the Board don't want to release a statement which implicates them in any way, hence the vagueness.

Doesn't reassure the fans though.

Monday statements are crap though....I think there should be a "restore statements to Friday" campaign.

So basically on onereally has a clue what is going on. Great. One thing I will say though is that the board did a very good job with the Power/Emmell case and I turst them to do the same here.

I'm a bit confused as to why they didn't apply to get the statutory demand set aside (there seems to be a few good grounds they could have used) which would have meant no winding up order. Unless Fitton wants a court case to get it resolved once and for all.

There's your blimp, yeo (Sorry Reg, couldn't resist)

T shirts would be a good idea....fB could design a campaign logo, give him something to do with his insomnia.

Just to say the money wasnt wasted because we had a bloody good season that year!  ;D

You're assuming of course that it actually went into the club. Large chunks of Bill Power's money didn't

St Modwen gave the club a loan on the understanding the club went forward with them on ground improvements etc...the club pulled out of this deal which in the eyes of SM was a breach of contract regarding the loan,its up to people in high places to decide if Town are liable or not...in the meantime my feeling is that Fitton will make an offer so both sides come out of it with something.....i agree with Aribba that the new board are trying to clear alot of past debt on the cheap by saying ware new owners and its not our fault etc......nothing wrong with that in my opinion but at least let us know whats going on....i for one want the hiding of facts days behind us.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/6176440/St-Modwen-chairman-Anthony-Glossop-approved-MG-Rover-bribe.html

Now I know why SM were willing to work with our general manager.

It was a legitimate business deal.

Fuck me, this brings back some memories!

My take is that SM are just trying it on. I'm sure Fitton and the board could do without shit PR of this kind when they are trying to do a redevelopment deal with the council, but they cant be held responsible for the actions of SM.

The major difference between a headline like this popping up when Diamandis, Holt and Grey were around, and now, is that Fitton's bunch know just how to see off cunt outfits like SM.

Gazza probably has it right; the Brummie wankers probably got pissed off when they found out that Fitton isn't going to redevelop the CG with them.

We'll never know if SM's money 'saved' the club all those years ago when Donegan and Blachley first brought them in, but any company willing to deal with an odious prick like Diamandis deserves everything they get.

'Business is business' as they say. I aint losing any fucking sleep over it.

Possibly, SM's money payed for the helicopter hire and bottles of plonk.

Sorry Johnny but no WUP has been served.

Stat Demand yes, WUP no

Those prats at the Sun has said in today's paper that we will have to go into Admin for a third time.

Maybe someone should tell them that the judge, who allowed us to go into admin for the 2nd time, said we will not be allowed to go into admin again.

If that is the case, why the fuck is this thread called "winding up order"?

I checked the original article and its not really clear about where things are.

Because the article said we had been issued with one maybe?

2009 Accounts now on the club web site. The bit relating to this loan states :-


(my emphasis)

So it seems that there is some doubt over how much of this money actually found its way into the club.

But really, where else could it possibly have gone?

But it didnt did it

The thread is called 'Winding Up Order' because that's what I called it on Sunday evening when I started the thread.  The Guardian link on the first post opens with the following paragraph...

'Swindon Town, the League One football club, faces a winding-up order from the quoted property company St Modwen tomorrow over the non-repayment of a £2.45m loan dating back to 2005.'

That's why I chose the title 'Winding Up Order'.

Like I said..it is heavy handed posturing trying to force our position.

A few simple facts ;

It is a disputed debt, you cannot by law be wound up over a disputed debt.

A petitioner, by law, cannot advertise the serving of a WUP for a 14 day period, only then is it published in the London Gazzette.

AF and Co have had this on the radar for quite some time and I am sure have responded to the SD in the correct way.

I trust them, and as with the BP/PE situation it will be resolved in the correct way.

Like I said, its all heavy handed threats based on fragile ground

I have full faith in the Fitton & the board and prett sure this will be resolved in due course.

The only thing that worries me is whehter the Football League will intervene and put an embargo on the club re transfer matters.  I would hope not you just never know

Don't see why they would, it's a disputed debt and not a debt to another football club. Don't see them being interested.

Worth pointing out that statutory demands are more often than not, worth less than a sheet of toilet paper. Anyone can serve one and they are often used purely to fire a shot across the bow, with no intent of taking things any further. Issuing one is a prerequisite for filing a winding up order though.

There is no need for the FL to get involved as there is no WUP or court action looming, just STM trying to get a bit of press on this to put it into the public realm to try and hurry stfc into paying the owed debt

They'll probably hit us with a ban on appealing against sending offs.

i saw this too

As the debt is disputed all we need to do is apply to have the statutory demand set aside. Then they cannot proceed with a winding up.

I find Bart talking about winding up particularly amusing.

Good to see the adver trying to unsettle the players by asking them what they think of the winding up order (that doesn't exist) etc........ Wankers

How to make a drama, out of no crisis...by the Adver !!

If i was AF i'd be on the phone to them, and the Sun pretty sharpish, unless....

Completely agree


Total wankers

And of all the players to ask, they go for Lee Peacock - the biggest primadonna in the squad :)

They always go for Peacock because he gives them good inches

 :)

It's not that bad from the adver, they've done worse with some of their recent bizarre quote twisting efforts.

Be fair guys, I'm sure it didn't come as news to the players - they'd have known about it already and the Adver lobbing a Lee P a couple of tame "So will the off-field stuff affect you?" questions he can bounce back with a standard "Nah, we just focus on our job on the pitch" is pretty standard reassurance stuff.

To be fair though it is standard journo stuff making a story out of something that does not exist

National newspapers announcing our doom, and only a rather tame statement from the board is a story though.

If the same thing had happened under the old board and all we'd got from the adver was a probing question about Peacock's mental blocking skills then we'd have all been going mental.

how dare the local paper ask players about the club.

Too true under the old regime the adver had to be looking at the death of the club before daring to print anything. They were scared of the Diamandis bullying tactics

Bullying, no, persuasion yes.

On a slightly related note, a certain Mr M Diamandis is working in the design industry in Newbury again. Obviously his alleged jollys in Cyprus weren't permanent.

Is he hiring? I don't have any experience, but I'm easily kept on side if he gives me a daughter or two to marry.

I left my neck in Cyprus.

Resolved now:

http://www.swindontownfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10341~1887196,00.html

Great news, now onwards and upwards!!!

I have a sneaking suspicion that it was argued that if this went to court, the judge would have told the plaintiff to fuck off and contact the old regime.

Great news. Well done Fitton and Co. It's been a very good few days here in North Wiltshire.

Everything go right for Town at long last? What's going on?

Very well done Mr Fitton! This has been a very enjoyable week for all Town fans,let's end it
in style with a good Cup win at Wrexham please.

We have been transported into a parallel universe, this is our new reality.

I haven't done the lottery for years, i will this week, cast iron cert i'll win something.

we've sold Austin to Huddersfield to pay the bill.

Nah, Macca to Norwich.

Excellent news (that an agreement has been reached, not macca to Norwich - tha would be wank).

Great news.  Macca leaving is disappointing, but we knew the squad needing reshaping in January.  This could simply be the first step in that process.

Great news all round, Austin scores, We beat a great team, Macca goes and our winding up order worries are gone! WE ARE GOING UP!

That is terrific news - lets concertrate on the football

For Six Million Dollars.

(got it right this time)

Great news, due to the relatively quick time of resolution since the Guardian article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/15/stmodwenproperties-swindon), do I assume correctly that Mr Fitton has told St Modwen to go fuck 'em selves?

Could be that they found some documentation to prove the loan was owed to the old holding company and not the club. Or they could have just paid it. Who knows?

tbh it doesnt matter why were not paying it, at least its been resolved