|
|
Post by polofrance on Feb 27, 2004 13:46:14 GMT
Oh Dear
Poor old Bradford into Admin again !!!! ;D ;D
Who's crying for them this time? nobody I hope
Will this mean a deduction of points and relegation of 2 divisions???
ah well thats 2 down and one to go
Polo
|
|
youthster
Academy Starlet
You gotta stay positive
Posts: 135
|
Post by youthster on Feb 27, 2004 13:51:07 GMT
not too many tears shed for robbo, i'd wager?! anyway, does anyone know if the new penalties for going into admin are up and running yet? i had an idea it was from the end of this season, in which case the timing of this whole episode is somewhat suspicious  |
|
|
|
Post by polofrance on Feb 27, 2004 13:53:54 GMT
I beleive that the penalties do exist in the Nationwide league.
I'ts the premiership who will introduce new legislation in June
Polo
|
|
|
|
Post by Coll40 on Feb 27, 2004 13:57:31 GMT
Why be happy at a football club going in to administration ???
Bradford fans love Bradford as much as we love Stoke.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 27, 2004 14:04:23 GMT
I don't normally like the idea of clubs going into admin. However I like it even less if they manage to write off £20 million (?) as a result - without any penalty being imposed as was the case with Bradford last time.
So, in this case, a second dose of admin pleases me - providing that the proper penalties are imposed.
|
|
|
|
Post by guernseydave on Feb 27, 2004 14:07:26 GMT
Coll40,
To a degree I agree. But while SCFC were desperately to live within their means and still losing money Bradford, like Liecster, gambled heavily with money they didn't have, spent it foolishly and failed. Their response was to choose a loop hole in the law go into admin and leave hundreds of debtors out of pocket thus rendering some companies (run by your average bloke) bust. Bradford will survive but I hope its now int he Third division because thats where they deserve to be. Fúck em. they deserve it
GD
|
|
|
|
Post by Coll40 on Feb 27, 2004 14:11:04 GMT
GD - Never thought of it like that. Sod 'em  |
|
|
|
Post by polofrance on Feb 27, 2004 14:17:06 GMT
I have no gripe what so ever with Bradford fans and I see from their official site that they are expecting a 22,000 sell out for their next home match against Watford
My only problem is that I do not believe that cheats should prosper, and the way they got out of debt last time is nothing more than cheating as was Leicester last season.
I honestly believe that clubs should have their budgets vetted each season to make sure there a no risks of clubs overstretching their finacial limits, to chase the elusive holy grail of the Premiership .
It can be done without breaking the bank, Charlton and Bolton being the prime examples,
Polo
|
|
|
|
Post by Coll40 on Feb 27, 2004 14:18:21 GMT
Yeah - you're right
Sod 'em
|
|
|
|
Post by seth on Feb 27, 2004 14:23:35 GMT
not too many tears shed for robbo, i'd wager?! anyway, does anyone know if the new penalties for going into admin are up and running yet? i had an idea it was from the end of this season, in which case the timing of this whole episode is somewhat suspicious You're right, the penaties have been agreed but won't come into force until next season. |
|
|
|
Post by RobPa on Feb 27, 2004 14:24:51 GMT
so there in division three then
|
|
|
|
Post by baracouda on Feb 27, 2004 14:36:16 GMT
Also worth remembering that no sooner had they shafted their creditors last season, they went straight out and signed half a dozen players.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pricey on Feb 27, 2004 14:51:56 GMT
I heard not so long ago that Bolton are also in pretty big financial trouble, hence Sam Allardyce having to take a pay cut and a number of other restrictions placed upon both the playing and business side of things. I'm sure I heard they were about 30-odd million quid in debt as well, can anyone confirm this or suggest anything to the contrary?
My Ipswich mate also informed me of similar goings on at Portman Road where they were about £60 million in debt and have had much of it wiped out. All of this has meant they can't spend any money on players but without this easy 'get-out' they would have been in the shit big-time.
So thats:
Leicester City
Bradford City
Ipswich Town...all on the black list for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 27, 2004 14:53:29 GMT
GD is 100% right here... too many of these clubs who go into admin end up coming out the other end okay and leave millions in unpaid debts behind them.
Leicester City are a classic example but Bradford did it also. And never, EVER, let Vale fans take any moral high ground ever again about stadium fundings, councils, etc... just ask them how much their club got off with in unpaid bills to Staffs Police... bills which now have to be met by the good ratepaying people of Stoke-on-Trent!
Sorry for Bradford fans, and I hope their club survives okay, but it is their own actions which have brought them to where they are!
Smudge
|
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Feb 27, 2004 15:20:25 GMT
And never, EVER, let Vale fans take any moral high ground ever again about stadium fundings, councils, etc... just ask them how much their club got off with in unpaid bills to Staffs Police... bills which now have to be met by the good ratepaying people of Stoke-on-Trent! Yes, but don't forget that it was the horrible worrible Stokies on the City Council that shut down their lucrative market. They'd never have gone into admin if it wasn't for them.  |
|
|
|
Post by polofrance on Feb 27, 2004 15:28:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by GlennA on Feb 27, 2004 15:40:27 GMT
What amuses me whenever this debate crops up is that deep down, we all know that if it were Stoke City in receivership (and it’s really only a quirk of the debt composition that’s kept us out of it) EVERY SINGLE ONE of us, including me, would be urging the identification and exploitation of as many loopholes as humanly possible.
EVERY SINGLE ONE of us, including me, would be urging the butcher, the baker and the candlestick-maker to settle for 10p in the pound, and getting indignant when they told us to fuck off.
Because when it comes to losing something as special as a football club, that’s the kind of thing you do.
Whether it’s ‘right’ or not is simply a matter of which side of the fence you’re on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 27, 2004 15:47:45 GMT
Your comment about a quirk of the composition of the debt isn't quite accurate is it Glenn? Its only about 15 months since Phil rawlins offered to take the club off the board's hands and ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL THE DEBT.
That wasn't acceptable to the board as they still held out hope for a profit but, if the debt had all been commercial debt instead of mostly directors' loans) then the creditors would have forced the directors to accept Phil's offer (or something like it) given that according to last year's accounts the club was unable to pay the interest on the director's loans.
The club would then have gone into technical administration only for so long as it took the transfer to take place, there would have been no debt default and no penalties under football league rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlennA on Feb 27, 2004 15:56:23 GMT
If you say so. Presumably you wouldn't disagree that the club's finances look rather perilous, debt being debt.
In any case, it's not got much to do with the point of my post. I was speaking hypothetically. Let's hope it stays that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pricey on Feb 27, 2004 16:00:07 GMT
No comment.   |
|
|
|
Post by kajshdfsiuf on Feb 28, 2004 0:07:29 GMT
I agree with glenna that we are being hipocrits in bichin all the other clubs. if it was us we wouldn't mind going into admin and coming out debt free, robbing innocent people of money. guilt is a price worth payin for a footy club
|
|
|
|
Post by kajshdfsiuf on Feb 28, 2004 0:09:07 GMT
Good-nite people. a 14 year old needs his beauty sleep b4 a big (lol lol lol) day
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 28, 2004 9:32:00 GMT
Sorry, Glenn, I don't agree our finances look perilous. Yes debt is debt but if most of that debt is owed to yourself then it isn't the same as owing it to the banck.
The board had two choices as to how it put money into the club. It could have gifted the money at the outset or it could drip feed it in in the form of directors' loan stock. It chose to do the latter. Alongside that money it took on about £3 million of commercial debt.
Next November some of that convertible loan stock reaches its conversion date. That means it either gets repaid to the directors, gets converted into shares (in which case that part of the debt is written off) or the club decides it doesn't want to take either of those options and takes on board other investors which could be corporate share holders or fan shareholders. It could try to convert the loans into commercial debt or bonds but it is unlikely in the present climate that it would be successful - so the existing commercial debt (which is the risky debt) is likely to remain at £3 million which is very low by the standards of most clubs in Div 1 or the Premiership.
Finally, remember they have already turned down an offer from Phil to take over ALL the debt - they had to be pretty confident in the future soundness of the finances to do that. Whether that offer would still be open next November I don't know but the fact is that Stoke is (compared to many clubs) a far less risky investment than most.
|
|
