xxxxxx Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Just now, Escobarp said: Nonsense utter horseshit in fact explain how you come to that conclusion? Who allowed us to get this twat in charge? It seems the EFL don't do their homework regarding certain owners. We've seen it many times. The EFL need to be looked at. Also, it just seems like the administrators have been fucking around from the start. They have kept saying the deal is close and it just keeps going on and on.
Lt. Aldo Raine Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Escobarp said: Rubins are not at fault here despite the conspiracy theories that are starting to surface. They are not in cahoots with anyone and are doing the job correctly. They could be accused of having too much faith in FV completing I guess but FV have done what they have been asked to do as I understand it and nobody has made a formal offer for the club other than Bassini since FV were awarded preferred bidder status and as we know Bassini hasn’t been taken seriously Is it right that FV having preferred bidder status wouldn't prevent other interested parties making an offer?
Chris Custodiet Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 (edited) 47 minutes ago, wakey said: Cheers. If it's Mrs Ken, can't see the logic of redacting. Could be another Ken entity, but as you point out would have to be registered to same address as Ken (that said, we don't know if the redacted address is Ken's personal address). This isn't my field of expertise but the redacted person is one of the borrowers but not the owner, or one of the owners, of ICIL 'the chargor'. Those shares are owned by Ken alone so the redaction on the filed charge document makes sense But lets put it this way, if you were lending £5m to a married person on the security of jointly owned matrimonial assets would you be content to have security granted by just one of them? Aside from the requirements of matrimonial property law, couldn't the one you'd lent the money to switch ownership of the assets to their spouse and leave you hanging dry? I don't think Eddie or his lawyers would have left it that open. And remember where you didn't read any of this. Edited August 26, 2019 by Chris Custodiet
radcliffe white Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Meant to be some statement from Anderson’s solicitor soon
Casino Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, radcliffewhite1 said: Meant to be some statement from Anderson’s solicitor soon It sure as fcuk won't be done deal Much more dragging out to be done
Escobarp Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, xxxxxx said: Who allowed us to get this twat in charge? It seems the EFL don't do their homework regarding certain owners. We've seen it many times. The EFL need to be looked at. Also, it just seems like the administrators have been fucking around from the start. They have kept saying the deal is close and it just keeps going on and on. I share your pain and views on ken but much like FV are now he was the only show in town at that time. the deal has been close a number of times but it isn’t through any fault of the admins that this hasn’t completed. You will need t trust me on that but it’s absolutely true.
leadfrog1 Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Casino said: It sure as fcuk won't be done deal Much more dragging out to be done Suspect it'll be done at the last possible minute if at all.
Escobarp Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 10 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said: This isn't my field of expertise but the redacted person is one of the borrowers but not the owner, or one of the owners, of ICIL 'the chargor'. Those shares are owned by Ken alone so the redaction on the filed charge document makes sense But lets put it this way, if you were lending £5m to a married person on the security of jointly owned matrimonial assets would you be content to have security granted by just one of them? Aside from the requirements of matrimonial property law, couldn't the one you'd lent the money to switch ownership of the assets to their spouse and leave you hanging dry? I don't think Eddie or his lawyers would have left it that open. And remember where you didn't read any of this. Under law unless his wife has agreed to the granting of security of jointly owned assets you can only go after 50% of the value. So unless she’s signed some form of PG and very importantly had Independent legal advice then she won’t be on the hook
Spider Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 All brinkmanship. Anderson having his last day of fun watching the fans squirm. He wants his last day. but it’ll be reet for sure this time.
Chris Custodiet Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Escobarp said: Under law unless his wife has agreed to the granting of security of jointly owned assets you can only go after 50% of the value. So unless she’s signed some form of PG and very importantly had Independent legal advice then she won’t be on the hook You can't get away from the fact that someone else is named as one of the borrowers. I suspect she is on the hook and that Eddie would not have lent the money without covering all the possibilities of non-repayment. Would you have? In any event, if EDT get their money back from Ken its going to have to come out of the matrimonial coffers one way or another. How much do you reckon the apartment in Monaco is worth net of any mortgage on it? Edited August 26, 2019 by Chris Custodiet
Benny The Ball Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, Escobarp said: the deal has been close a number of times but it isn’t through any fault of the admins that this hasn’t completed. You will need t trust me on that but it’s absolutely true. Well maybe maybe not A conditional offer was accepted by Appleton - dependant on Quantuma accepting his bidders bid for the hotel If at 5.01pm tomorrow no deal is done , Quantuma will presumably accept another offer for the Hotel and Appleton might face a few awkward questions The structure of this arrangement has invited the participants not to do a deal , to exploit the situation and to rack up administrators costs in the process and thereby put a football club in jeopardy
Escobarp Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Benny The Ball said: Well maybe maybe not A conditional offer was accepted by Appleton - dependant on Quantuma accepting his bidders bid for the hotel If at 5.01pm tomorrow no deal is done , Quantuma will presumably accept another offer for the Hotel and Appleton might face a few awkward questions The structure of this arrangement has invited the participants not to do a deal , to exploit the situation and to rack up administrators costs in the process and thereby put a football club in jeopardy Let me spell this out Benny. FV were the only bidder at the time they invited offers that fulfilled what was required. Remainder were deemed window shoppers/tyre kickers or just not offering anything like enough to get any of the secured creditors on board. That’s crucially important to note here! Now FV offer to one side nobody else other than Laurence Bassini has made an offer for the club since that acceptance. Nobody. Nil. Zero. As I think you know anybody can make an offer whilst an agreement is signed for the sale of the club anyone can make an offer and impart significant pressure and the admins would have then brought the FV purchase to a head sooner and forced them to complete or walk away So what do you perceive the admins have done wrong? I really would be interested to know what it is you think they have done.
MACCA Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Been on a good few forums to see what the reaction is throughout the league... it’s safe to say that we are seriously disliked in the main!!
Eddie Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 13 minutes ago, Spider said: All brinkmanship. Anderson having his last day of fun watching the fans squirm. He wants his last day. but it’ll be reet for sure this time. Agree with this. None of the parties want this deal to fall over, even Ken. I get what people are saying about Ken ultimately getting his cash back from a liquidation scenario but how long does that take. The whole liquidation process, the sale of a ground etc., it would be far easier for him to get his money through this current deal. The problem is that he still has power, still has time (although not much now) and ultimately can play the hard faced “I don’t care about the club so will let it liquidate” card in negotiations when he knows that the other parties care too much to let that happen. I’m still of the belief that it will all be reet, it will drag to the last possible minute but it will be done!
radcliffe white Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, MACCA said: Been on a good few forums to see what the reaction is throughout the league... it’s safe to say that we are seriously disliked in the main!! Leeds fans fucking hate us on various Facebook pages
Okocha10 Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 1 hour ago, Chrisj said: So it between 12.30 and 1
Razaldo9 Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 From iles latest article "It is understood the club’s administrators have made contact with the BooHoo group since the FV bid stalled on Friday night but, at time of writing, had received nothing back."
Benny The Ball Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Escobarp said: Let me spell this out Benny. FV were the only bidder at the time they invited offers that fulfilled what was required. Remainder were deemed window shoppers/tyre kickers or just not offering anything like enough to get any of the secured creditors on board. That’s crucially important to note here! Now FV offer to one side nobody else other than Laurence Bassini has made an offer for the club since that acceptance. Nobody. Nil. Zero. As I think you know anybody can make an offer whilst an agreement is signed for the sale of the club anyone can make an offer and impart significant pressure and the admins would have then brought the FV purchase to a head sooner and forced them to complete or walk away So what do you perceive the admins have done wrong? I really would be interested to know what it is you think they have done. Well as I have this to hand from earlier lets start with what was required Best and final offers were received from five parties by the 4pm deadline on Wednesday and, after careful consideration, it was clear the preferred bid met every criteria laid down by the Joint Administrators. These included, but were not limited to; - The highest bid for the club - Proof and source of significant funding - Ability to fund the club for a minimum of two years - Ability to satisfy secured, football and unsecured creditors - EFL approval The preferred bidder has also agreed to inject £1million into the club in order to fund the immediate running of the club and the rebuilding of the playing squad ahead of the new season. Taking each of these in turn - The highest bid for the club - DEPENDENT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - Proof and source of significant funding - DEPENDENT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - Ability to fund the club for a minimum of two years - DEPENDENT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - Ability to satisfy secured, football and unsecured creditors - DEPENDENT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - EFL approval - fine with that So 4 of the 5 main criteria they themselves set were not in their gift and you ask me what have they done wrong ! These criteria were not fulfilled as you suggest Little wonder we are in the position we are Edited August 26, 2019 by Benny The Ball
MalcolmW Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Dependent not dependant, which is quite different.
Sluffy Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 11 minutes ago, Benny The Ball said: Well as I have this to hand from earlier lets start with what was required Best and final offers were received from five parties by the 4pm deadline on Wednesday and, after careful consideration, it was clear the preferred bid met every criteria laid down by the Joint Administrators. These included, but were not limited to; - The highest bid for the club - Proof and source of significant funding - Ability to fund the club for a minimum of two years - Ability to satisfy secured, football and unsecured creditors - EFL approval The preferred bidder has also agreed to inject £1million into the club in order to fund the immediate running of the club and the rebuilding of the playing squad ahead of the new season. Taking each of these in turn - The highest bid for the club - DEPENDANT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN ThEIR CONTROL - Proof and source of significant funding - DEPENDANT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - Ability to fund the club for a minimum of two years - DEPENDANT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - Ability to satisfy secured, football and unsecured creditors - DEPENDANT UPON ACQUIRING ANOTHER BUSINESS NOT WITHIN THEIR CONTROL - EFL approval - fine with that So 4 of the 5 main criteria they themselves set were not in their gift and you ask me what have they done wrong ! These criteria were not fulfilled as you suggest Little wonder we are in the position we are Just to be the Devil's Advocate for a moment, if the Administrator had already indicated that BWFAC Ltd could not be saved and needed to be liquidated once the football club could be sold off and they had undertaken the sale process for the club and determined that FV along with the others were unable to meet their criteria for sale, wouldn't that mean they had no other realistic option (they had already tested the market) but to liquidate at that point? Maybe they believed (reasonably) that this was the only option that prevented that happening and with PBP's head claim on the hotel (and James linked to both PBP and LV) was entirely feasible to conclude in a sale.
leadfrog1 Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Just now, MalcolmW said: Dependent not dependant, which is quite different. fuck off
Guest Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 33 minutes ago, radcliffewhite1 said: Leeds fans fucking hate us on various Facebook pages Which is nice
MalcolmW Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, leadfrog1 said: fuck off Dependent - contingent upon. Dependant - someone relying upon another for financial support. And a Merry Christmas to your good self.
Tonge moor green jacket Posted August 26, 2019 Posted August 26, 2019 Dunno why other fans get so excercised. Kinell, it only affects us as fans of bwfc, and there is naff all we can do about it. It's not even 'the club' that is at fault anymore. It's under the control of others.
Recommended Posts