Batch
Not a Batch
 Offline
Posts: 57758
|
 |
« Reply #75 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:21:26 » |
|
as macca says, the key phrase is "up to nine months". "Up to nine months" will surely mean 9 months though, unless it is a stipulation of the CVA variance that if the takeover happens payment needs to be made within N days.... It wouldn't make financial sense to pay it straight away if an unconditional variance was agreed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WorcesterRed
Offline
Posts: 186
|
|
« Reply #76 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:23:57 » |
|
To wait nine month to possibly be paid a debt is not acceptable. If it was cast iron guaranteed then I suppose you could argue the case of the board, but with it being "reasonably likely" that they can pay the debt, surely the council have no choice but to refuse the kind offer from the bopards. Seems to me that this tactic can be used again and again.....May 2008 - we haven't got the money so give us another 9 months or you won't get anything.....9 months later....we haven't got the money so give us another 9 months or you won't get anything.....9 months later....we haven't got the money so give us another 9 months or you won't get anything..... :nono: |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
larwood
The girl least likely to.
Offline
Posts: 4653
|
|
« Reply #77 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:25:38 » |
|
The whole thing just beggers belief,the gall of them to think they can keep putting it off,i'm just amazed by it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I was a small, fat child in a welfare house
There was only one thing I ever dreamed about
And fate has just
Handed it to me - whoopee
|
|
|
WorcesterRed
Offline
Posts: 186
|
|
« Reply #78 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:27:13 » |
|
as macca says, the key phrase is "up to nine months". "Up to nine months" will surely mean 9 months though, unless it is a stipulation of the CVA variance that if the takeover happens payment needs to be made within N days.... It wouldn't make financial sense to pay it straight away if an unconditional variance was agreed. But what damage could an unconditional variance bring? - future of the club in doubt? - 10 points reduction? - expulsion from the League OK, maybe scare-mongering but it's not as simple as just saying 'let's renegotiate the CVA regardless as to who is in charge' and everything will be OK afterwards'. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fatbury
|
|
« Reply #79 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:30:19 » |
|
hands up if you are seriously worried about the future of the club ... I noticed Leeds may be refused entry into League 1 ... is our entry ratified yet or are we in danger too I wonder??
I still think its Nigerian investors btw ... Taribo West ...
(My dad jokingly said he reckons its the Jacksons ... Jermaine and Tito were in Swindon recently and attended a match (tho apparently no one noticed) and with Michaels backing intend to take over the club as they love "soccer!)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sonic youth
|
|
« Reply #80 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:31:42 » |
|
I still think its Nigerian investors btw ... Taribo West ... i still think you're full of shit |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stfctownenda
Offline
Posts: 1818
|
|
« Reply #81 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:35:11 » |
|
hands up if you are seriously worried about the future of the club ... I noticed Leeds may be refused entry into League 1 ... is our entry ratified yet or are we in danger too I wonder??
I still think its Nigerian investors btw ... Taribo West ...
(My dad jokingly said he reckons its the Jacksons ... Jermaine and Tito were in Swindon recently and attended a match (tho apparently no one noticed) and with Michaels backing intend to take over the club as they love "soccer!)  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Phil_S
Offline
Posts: 1534
Who changed my Avatar ?!
|
|
« Reply #82 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:46:14 » |
|
Dunwoody is not a succesful company by anyones standards, it does not trade and its new shell company is in a CVA itself.
We have not gone away folks...watch this space. That's the best thing I've heard in weeks. This latest debacle is ludicrous. Scarborough renegotiated their CVA, & are now out of business. I know, it wasn't the football league, but I can't see the league traeting us any differently, particaularly as they are now fuming about Leeds doing a Bristol 1982 with no real penalty. I also can't see the creditors wearing it. They will know of the fans Consortiums bid. If this new "Investor" is committed, why does it take 9 months anyway. I think 9 weeks is too bloody long. A cheque takes 3 days to clear, so even passing through 3 different holding companies, 9 days is about right. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
From the Dark Side
|
|
|
|
McLovin
|
|
« Reply #83 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 13:51:37 » |
|
Am i the only one tired of this "wait and see..." malarkey that we get either from the board, or the trust consortium? I'm bored of hearing vague utterings and false promises of action...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
random_five
Offline
Posts: 537
Downton, Wiltshire
|
|
« Reply #84 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 15:11:06 » |
|
Am i the only one tired of this "wait and see..." malarkey that we get either from the board, or the trust consortium? I'm bored of hearing vague utterings and false promises of action... No David, you are far from being the only one. The onus on the Board is to give us a little more info on what's going on, rather than a simple "trust us" plea from a statement that is now a week old. We are being treated like shit. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dazzza
Offline
Posts: 8265
|
|
« Reply #85 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 15:18:12 » |
|
Can I just add I was the first to pull Taribo West out of my arse - just in case anything comes from it.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Power to people
Offline
Posts: 6582
|
|
« Reply #86 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 16:04:50 » |
|
Can I add in then Sam Hammam then in case it him !!!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #87 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 16:05:24 » |
|
We've known for some years that the Board couldn't meet this final CVA payment without a new ground....we've also known that this likelihood would endanger the future of the club.
So now we find ourselves right here....the main difference to a few years back, is that whereas SBC could be seen as being anti club, there are now numbers who feel they should pull the plug, in order for us to move forward.
Another obvious, was that the mystery investor talk, was likely to be a tactic to gain some extra time for paying the CVA.
Surely from a PR standpoint any viable investor would wish to reassure the fans that matters were in hand, in order to be seen in a good light....the appointment of the no-mark scummer Brevitt further confirming the lack of substance involved in this ruse.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jimmy_onions
Offline
Posts: 1165
|
|
« Reply #88 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 16:18:21 » |
|
Mostly agree Reg, but PS has alledgely met said investors, i.e. they are bona fide - if it wasnt for that small technicality I would agree with you 100% - however, that is the one thing I cant reconcile....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
StrattonBornetc
Offline
Posts: 9
|
|
« Reply #89 on: Friday, July 13, 2007, 16:47:21 » |
|
Can Swindon B.C & HMRC, the 2 largest creditors, and Bill Power
who is owed money, go over Andronikou's head to whoever appointed him to control the CVA and have him removed.
It is obvious to most people that there is an unhealthy alliance between him & the current board.
If someone has stated publicly that they will make certain financial provisions to buy the club and pay the CVA surely he is obliged to investigate and report back ?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
