[i believe] In the real world we would be an unsecured creditor and have a vote on the CVA but because it is a footballing debt we are required, by PL/FA/FL rules, to receive 100 pence in the pound, therefore no need to vote either way.
Why would they owe us anything for the FA Cup game? They got 40% of the net gate receipts. A much larger value than the gross receipts of the 4,000 they sold.
You're presuming that all of the other creditors are going to vote yes! Why should they accept a fifth of what they're owed! Bet Sol Campbell doesn't, I bet Grosvenor Estates don't either and KES will want 100% or they will evict the Skates from Wellington IMO.
159-0 now. Carberry has his century and Adams has passed 50. You wouldn't expect Chester-le-Street to be batsman friendly in April but Essex got over 480 and we could be looking at something similar.
I like Resolution No.5:
"In the event that a CVA is not approved that the Administrators be able to exit via CVL or a Compulsory Liquidation or dissolution whichever is appropriate."
I presume that is a standard statement in these cases but still sounds good!
Agreed. Whoever misses out in this season's play-offs will be strong, as will Sheffield Wednesday or Palace (if they can hold on to their players) but I would expect us to be one of the two fighting it out for automatic promotion.
It's a case of "we haven't got a buyer, we have no assets, we're haemorrhaging several million pounds a month. I propose we pay you a penny in the pound over a period of the next 50 years." "What do you mean, you're not signing?!"
Lens have done this for their own and the player's benefit and not P*mpey's. They want him to be match fit for the World Cup and therefore will get potentially more money for him in the closed season.
You could ask is "Rickie Lambert within a million miles of MLT?" The answer would still be NO! RLSGM is still a fine, fine player at this level, all the same!