um pahars

I posted this last night which IMHO shows that keeping these businesses would not have made any impact (not least because we already bring in over £1million from events and catering, which wasn't enough to dissaude the League from coming ot their conclusion). And I have seen some people say "if we had kept the radio and insurance arm we might have been alright", well I just don't think that argument holds any water either. The Insurance company took in £150K and delivered minimal profit, whilst the radio station brought in £250k and lost £200k. So the two of them contirbuted nil profit and represented something like 3% of income. By the same token the 2006 accounts show that catering and events made a £1m contribution and the League have ruled that irrelevant. It's the Football Club that has incurred the costs/debt and brought in the vast majority of the income and it is the Football Club where all the problems have stemmed from.

With all due respect, I would rather have a loose cannon spouting off the odd inaccuracy and making honest mistakes, than someone who comes in and rips up what could be a potentially decent management set up and replaces it with a Revolutionary Coaching Set Up!!!! Crouch made mistakes, for sure and he will make some more, but I think I would have needed more than what your suggesting to side with Lowe given his track record in latter years.

Derry, who I understand is close to some of the action through SOS, replied to a post of mine last night indicating that unless a buyer comes in quickly then the Club will cease to exist and go straight into liquidation, effectively missing out administration for the Football Club. This would also appear to be the line coming from Crouch and others, in that we will fold at the end of the season, if no buyer can be found. Others have pointed out that mnay Clubs go into administration and bumble along for a bit, so why will we be so different??? Why are we apparently on course for dong an Aldershot as opposed to a Leeds??? Just what is the situation with the Club and it's finances??? I can understand people's reluctance to help out if they think we haven't reached rock bottom yet and their point throwing money at the situation at the moment is not the done thing as we haven't even gone into "administration" yet. I know some people just think starting again in the Lower Leagues is OK with them (which is fair enough), but I also get the impression that many are holding back for something to happen (i.e. administration of the Football Club or some sort of appeal to come out the other side), but will this be happening or should we be doing something now??? Are we really a fortnight or so away from ceasing to exist????

What Crouch said certainly wasn't clever, but as Benjii explains below, I don't think what he said cam eout well for the following well thought out reasons:

Derry, Can someone please spell out just exactly what this means??? I get the impression the general vibe is that we all imagine without these funds the Football Club will be unable to pay wages etc and will therefore go into administration (no points issue now as we've already been hit with that), but then again haven't loads of clubs done this as well?? What is wrong with the view of "so what if the Club goes into administration as surely we'll come out the other side, everyone else has" and "why not just hold your money back and plough it in post administration??? " I'm just struggling to get my head around what is going on, what we should and shouldn't be doing (and I don't think I'm alone on this).

Here's one example. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/luton_town/7190357.stm Maybe Derry can answer as a result of going along tonight, if we don't appeal what is the difference with the football club going into administration than what is happening now.

That's the part I was always worried about when we thought we could get away with it, i.e. the league rule that basically says "it's our League and if you don't like it then feel free to join another one!!!". Just think they had to send the boys in for a few days just to show they weredoing things properly, but like you I was interested in just what exceeded their brief was all about. I can just see David Jones saying "I don't think you're allowed to count the petty cash tin, give it back".

That's what has happened elsewhere, whereby in exchange for an "exclusive" period, potential bidders agree to stump up some cash to fund the club.

But would you not say that the reason for the forensic accounting was to ensure they were correct in saying "the holding company only exists because of the football club"????? And I have seen some people say "if we had kept the radio and insurance arm we might have been alright", well I just don't think that argument holds any water either. The Insurance company took in £150K and delivered minimal profit, whilst the radio station brought in £250k and lost £200k. So the two of them contirbuted nil profit and represented something like 3% of income. By the same token the 2006 accounts show that catering and events made a £1m contribution and the League have ruled that irrelevant. It's the Football Club that has incurred the costs/debt and brought in the vast majority of the income and it is the Football Club where all the problems have stemmed from.

I have to agree entirely. Crouch's little piece was unecessary and I'm not sure any loose cannons should be talking about these matters (leave it solely to the Administrator), but as you say I think what he said didn't come out the right way (not least for the reasons you have highlighted).

When Derbey went in to admin in Oct 2003 the rules on points deductions didn't apply. Although approved in Sept 2003, they didn't come into effect until the following season (August 2004).

But IMHO although technically/legally they are seperate companies and it is the PLC that is in administration and not the Club, I don't think the "law" applies as clearly as people think here, as ultimately the League is a "member's arrangement" and they can do pretty much as they see fit (within reasons of course).

I seem to be out of line here, but I have to say this came as no surprise, nor do I think it is unjust. The idea that the Football Club is solvent is clearly not true and the PLC is no more than a shell for the real entity, the Football Club. Substance over form for me, and using that definition the Football Club is the sole and dominant player. The fact that a 100% owned subsidiary is supposedly still trading yet the Holding Company has no income and yet has gone into administration doesn't stack up. The only positive about today is that hopefully it may mean things can start moving as people know just what they're going to buy (hopefully there are people wanting to buy us!!!!!).

Plus paying for Poortvliet to come and go needs to go in there The idea that we were already consigned to administration (and relegation) is fanciful. Lowe and Wilde didn't come back to preside over a funeral and to be the ones left at the helm when it all went tts up. They believed there was a chance we could turn this around, and as tough as it was going to be, we did have a chnace to do just that. Problem was Lowe and co blew it with some disastrous decisions right from the off. A successful manager and some good results might have put 4,000 on the gate (an average of 20,000 isn't asking for too much) and circa £2,000,000 in the bank which would may well have kept the Club ticking over.

The way I read the League statement was that they have ruled that the Club & PLC are one and the same (as I feared they have applied substance over form ruling here) and that they effectively deem the Club to also be in administration. Therefore the line "The other provisions of The League's insolvency policy also become effective" means that if we don't come out of this "administration" (i.e the PLC's administration) without an agreed CVA, then we start to have additional points deducted. The main hurdle to agreeing a CVA will be the opposition of HMRC, although they may not be alone in opposing a CVA, and as someone had pointed out, as long as HMRC don't have 25% of the voting rights at a creditors meeting then we may have a chance, (or as long as HMRC and others who oppose it don't account for more than 25% of the creditors). I would therefore suggest that if we're not out of the bottom 3 come the end of the Forest game, then we will start next season in Division 3 initially with -10 and then any further deduction of -15 is up for grabs depending on whether or not we can agree a CVA (which is not an impossibility).

Points deductins were never on the radar when Leicester and other clubs started going in to administration and walking away from their debts. Derby on the other hand went into administration in October 2003 and whilst the League had announced that points would be deducted a month earlier, it was to be introduced in from the following season onwards (i.e. only applicable if teams went into administration in the 2004/5 season and onwards). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article1163199.ece It was 148 BTW, I don't make those mistakes;)

For the 148th time on here, when Derby went in to administration it was before the League introduced the points deduction (and it was a fair few years before they knocked us out in the play offs).

They did not. They set out their stall back in September and we simply failed to live within their parameters. As for the OP, spot on. Something I said on numerous occasions this season was the inability to engender a spirit of unity and togetherness.

So they would have stuck £6m in and got what in return??? Maybe nothing, maybe some new shares increasing their stakes, I don't think it's ever been made clear just how the deal would pan out, so would be very interested to see the bit saying it will be a donation. At the very least he would have maintained his 10%, whereas £2m now guarantees absolutely nothing in return!! Cheap shot IMHO.

He's doing a "Lowe" as it's now called in footballing circles!!! i.e. Taking a pay off only to come back again later, LOL, twas only a joke before people get all het up;)

We only had it on rental from these people!!!!!!! http://www.bobsspaceracers.com/whac-a-mole/html-index.htm

Didn't Solskear score a shedload at Forest the season they went down (and sure he came on as a sub). Also sure Cole scored 4 against Ipswich or Norwich? And didn't Henry do it as well?

Somewhat cheap IMHO. For that £2m he would have wanted some degree of control and quite rightly something in return for it. It was never going to be donation to the cause. And giving money now is purely a donation and receiving nothing in return (apart from maybe a warm glow inside), so to suggest he should donate £2m is below the belt.

I'll meet you halfway on 6 (and that probably includes 2 on a wind up). And as with that poll, there's a world of difference between saying "fck it, we'll have to face it sooner or later, so let's get this sht over and done with and start again with a clean slate" and saying "I can't wait for administration, I think it will be brilliant and I would put up with anything just to get Lowe out!!!!". As I say, told you so's aimed at 3,4,5 or even 6 people serves no prupose whatsoever.

But seriously, it's really boring to keep hearing you (and a few others) trotting out the line, "well you wanted it", "be careful what you wsh for" and "I thought you said administration was going to be great". I don't really get what "told you so's" are going to achieve, not least when the target audience is only 3 or 4 strong!!!!