3 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

The EFL regulations leave it open (by my reading) that dispensation could be sought in these circumstances....section 43.2.4...."If agreed by the league" - basically leaves the decision open ended. 

 

43.2

Subject always to the provisions of Regulation 43.3, after the expiry of each Transfer Window (and/or in the Extended Period, if applicable) in each Season registrations of Players and transfers of registrations will, except as permitted in Regulation 55, be declined or will only be approved:

43.2.1

where the Player is transferred on a Temporary Loan Transfer during the Extended Period (as defined in Regulation 42.2.2);

43.2.2

where the Player is an Out of Registration Player;

43.2.3

where the Player was last registered as or is being registered as a Scholar or Academy Player (subject to such conditions by which the Club making the application and the Player shall be bound); and/or

43.2.4

if agreed by The League (including where the Player was last registered with a Club (or club) which has ceased to trade, including during the Closed Period) subject to such conditions as determined by The League and by which the Club making the application and the Player shall be bound.

Yes, ceased to trade is liquidation, not just failure to pay.

9 minutes ago, Ani said:

All players wages are guaranteed by the PFA so they will sit there and get paid eventually. 

If true then why the concern?

8 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Basran wouldn't be bothering at all without a plan. Brett W, Michael James and Paul Heathcote are all BWFC supporters.  All have a financial stake,  at least two of them know Basran and they all know each other. I'd say that was a good start but still a lot to play for.

Heathcote has issued two winding up petitions, business owner first, fan second.

1 minute ago, Howardroark said:

Yes, ceased to trade is liquidation, not just failure to pay.

Read carefully - it does not say that is the only scenario - merely that is ONE scenario where the league could "agree". 

1 minute ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Read carefully - it does not say that is the only scenario - merely that is ONE scenario where the league could "agree". 

The ‘conditions as determined by the league’ part is ambiguous I agree, but if wages are underwritten/guaranteed by the PFA why would they walk anyway?

2 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

If true then why the concern?

Are you saying not true ? 

Concern for most will available cash to pay bills till money lands. 

Just now, Ani said:

Are you saying not true ? 

Concern for most will available cash to pay bills till money lands. 

Are the PFA compelled to pay players? I'm not sure they are. They are the players union - they will "help" but I don't think that means necessarily directly pay their wages...

2 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Same could be said of Holdsworth and Anderson....

Tell me more.

Holdsworth and Anderson were lifelong BWFC supporters with a financial stake in the club before they spent 50p each.

You do know that this site is Wanderersways not the Beeno?

.

2 minutes ago, Ani said:

Are you saying not true ? 

Concern for most will available cash to pay bills till money lands. 

No I’m saying why would it be such a sticking point.

1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Tell me more.

Holdsworth and Anderson were lifelong BWFC supporters with a financial stake in the club before they spent 50p each.

You do know that this site is Wanderersways not the Beeno?

.

I mean that they wouldn't be bothering without a plan - without investor backing etc...when everyone wondered where the money was beyond the dodgy loan that was a phrase often used "they/Deano must have a plan". At least at the start.....

1 minute ago, bwfcfan5 said:

I mean that they wouldn't be bothering without a plan - without investor backing etc...when everyone wondered where the money was beyond the dodgy loan that was a phrase often used "they/Deano must have a plan". At least at the start.....

Isn’t everybody wondering where Basran’s money is coming from too?

6 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Heathcote has issued two winding up petitions, business owner first, fan second.

His company also just happens to employ a large number of people who don't get paid if the company doesn't get paid. You seem better than that, Howard, so lets stay away from this first/second nonsense shall we?

I reckon Howard is actually Malc with an iOS upgrade.

1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said:

His company also just happens to employ a large number of people who don't get paid if the company doesn't get paid. You seem better than that, Howard, so lets stay away from this first/second nonsense shall we?

Indeed. Being a fan doesn't mean you give away hundreds of thousands of pounds of produce and labour - that is a nonsense. You can be a fan and still ultimately have to press matters to survive. 

1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said:

His company also just happens to employ a large number of people who don't get paid if the company doesn't get paid. You seem better than that, Howard, so lets stay away from this first/second nonsense shall we?

I would be surprised if Paul Heathcote or Brett Warburton were doing anything simply because they are fans. 

You know as well as I do that in any business there is an unwritten creditor preference list and as you quite rightly say, Heathcote has a lot riding on being paid in full and on time.

1 minute ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Indeed. Being a fan doesn't mean you give away hundreds of thousands of pounds of produce and labour - that is a nonsense. You can be a fan and still ultimately have to press matters to survive. 

Eddie gave away £200M because he was simply a fan.

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

I mean that they wouldn't be bothering without a plan - without investor backing etc...when everyone wondered where the money was beyond the dodgy loan that was a phrase often used "they/Deano must have a plan". At least at the start.....

Holdsworth had a plan alright. A plan to start milking the club as soon as poss.

Anderson had a plan too. Get shut of Holdsworth, employ people capable of running it and try to sell it on at  a profit when it was stabilised

Edited March 11, 20197 yr by Chris Custodiet

1 minute ago, Howardroark said:

Eddie gave away £200M because he was simply a fan.

How is owner of the club investing money he's made from other businesses even remotely equivalent to a chef who is a fan operating a catering company in a contract with the club and employing people on the back of it? Are you saying because Heathcote is a "fan" he should just write off hundreds of thousands of pounds?

Hang on Chris, not sure Ken went big on employing folk to run the club!

1 minute ago, bwfcfan5 said:

How is owner of the club investing money he's made from other businesses even remotely equivalent to a chef who is a fan operating a catering company in a contract with the club and employing people on the back of it? Are you saying because Heathcote is a "fan" he should just write off hundreds of thousands of pounds?

Not at all, I’m saying IF he was part of the consortium (something that is being linked through his work with Basran family business) then it’ll be for business reasons, not personal. Case in point- his decision to lodge the winding up orders.

7 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Not at all, I’m saying IF he was part of the consortium (something that is being linked through his work with Basran family business) then it’ll be for business reasons, not personal. Case in point- his decision to lodge the winding up orders.

No not true.

The deal with BWFC is his business , the investment (potentially) into the club is his own wealth.

He runs a business and from that people rely on him for their monthly income, what he does with his personal income is not the same.

 

Unless you are him you have no idea why he might want to make a personal investment in something.

Edited March 11, 20197 yr by Ani
added bit at the end

20 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

No I’m saying why would it be such a sticking point.

For someone who is claiming to understand a lot of the ins and outs of this that is a pretty basic question.

The PFA paying the wages does not mean the club no longer owes the money and the PFA will not pay it anytime soon so players out of pocket untill paid.

2 minutes ago, Ani said:

No not true.

The deal with BWFC is his business , the investment (potentially) into the club is his own wealth.

He runs a business and from that people rely on him for their monthly income, what he does with his personal income is not the same.

And I’m saying that investing protects his business, control from within etc.

Just now, Ani said:

For someone who is claiming to understand a lot of the ins and outs of this that is a pretty basic question.

The PFA paying the wages does not mean the club no longer owes the money and the PFA will not pay it anytime soon so players out of pocket untill paid.

Ok I’m questioning the validity of the statement and referencing the uproar at not being paid as context for why I’m questioning it. 

I understood the PFA to be able to make a statutory payment amount to each member in the event of a default, not the full wages.

4 minutes ago, Howardroark said:

Eddie gave away £200M because he was simply a fan.

Eddie Davies spent money on BWFC because at first he could afford it and wanted to use some of his money and his expertise to get BWFC back into the top tier and make it financially sustainable. It worked for a while but Big Sam didn't understand financial stability at all. It wasn't on his agenda and so there was conflict which eventually resulted in Sam walking out.

Most of Eddie's money was spent trying to prevent the slide that followed until in 2014 he could do it no longer but he wouldn't have spent so much without being a fan.