Clapham Saint

Enough to hurt if I lost it.:smt117

FWIW I'd put money on us being taken over. There's nothing in it for Fry to not do a deal (pretty much anyway). Lets just hope I'm not proved wrong....:cool:

True... :grin:

Nobody has a clue. HTH

If it gets to 5 and they are close I expect that they will carry on until what ever time is necessary. If it is clearly going to not be resolved in a few hours but agreement looks likely they'll pick it up tomorrow (deadlines can always be slightly flexible if a deal is close).

It only turned out to be a non-runner becuase (fingers crossed) a deal is now there to be done with one of two parties. Had there been no bids at all then there is an outside chance that it would have gathered enough momentum. More likely (should it have been needed) it could have been used to top up funds for a bidder that would otherwise have fallen short of having enough funds. IMO take p would have been significantly higher had we all thought that it was the only way of saving the club. Again, at least he did something.

If there had been no bids I'm sure it would have gathered a lot more momentum. What can you (or I) say we did to organise a last ditch bid if the worst were to come to the worst? I think credit has to go to derry for being so proactive.

Lol!

The liquidation will not finish until after the shares have been sold. Liquidation is a process similar to Administrations and takes time to complete.

No he won't be. The shares would be sold as part of the liquidation process.

Imagine the You Tube video apology....

Disagree on that... All parties have some pretty outrageous claims. However IMO having a large second home and claiming to have the moat cleaned, although clearly not appropriate and an abuse of the system, is different to actively managing your properties to be able to claim second home allowance to have them refurbished but then claiming the same property is actually your primary residence (and so exempt from capital gains tax) when it comes to sell it a few months later. The first is claiming for something that clearly isn't an expense incurred as a result of being a member of parliament, the second (IMO of course) is making a conscious choice to actively defraud the expenses/taxation systems. Similar is claiming second home allowance on 3 different properties in a year as I just don't believe that the MP is question could have been actively using all of the homes being claimed for at the times claimed.

I don't understand why everyone is speculating without sorting that out as a basic need to know. :smt102

Love it.:cool:

I'm with NickG. Everybody just needs to calm down a bit (possibly easier said than done). From the publically available information I can understand the concern however if everything was completely dead and burried then Mr. Fry would say so and start the wind down process. I firmly believe that the continued negotiations are because a deal is there to be done. As much as anything else Mr. Fry will have a lot of explaining to do to Barclays if, having taken this long, he fails to complete a deal. To suggest that Mr. Fry is simply dragging things out to increase his fee is just silly (IMO). I've never met him personally but I would be amazed if he was that unprofessional. (Although I am aware of GM's views of IPs as a whole).

Have we established where they are on the scale yet? http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=13034 ;-)

Lol

I'd say "prepare for the worst, hope for the best" is the best approach right now. If you don't want to go totally nuts anyway.

True, but I really believe that the value of the assets split up is very low indeed (relatively speaking). Aside from the stadium there isn't a lot to sell and even that would be worth considerably less with no team to play in it. Jackson's farm can be sold sparately to the club anyway and so doesn't enter the equation. Edit: for mongish speeeling (again)

Lol! Love it. :cool:

No reason not to take orders, just as long as they don't take the cash.

I don't have the exact wording of the legislation to hand, however when a company is insolvent (or of doubtful solvency as SFC Limited is should no buyer be found), its directors have a duty to consider the interests of creditors above those of shareholders. Under the Insolvency Act 1986, directors will be held personally liable for wrongful trading if a subsequently appointed liquidator can establish that, under the board’s direction, the company continued to trade and incurred credit when the board knew or should have known that there was no reasonable prospect that the company would avoid insolvent liquidation. The bit about "no reasonable prospect" is going to get some posters panicking and I can hear the "we're all doomed" cries already but please don't. Although I'm not at all ITK it is usual that directors (and the accountants and solicitors that advise them) will always look to avoid risk where ever possible. This generally means that if there is even a small chance of liquidation then deposits won't be taken "just in case" because the risk to the directors personally is not something that they are prepared to take on, even if the chances of them being liable are very very small. It could be argued that once they were confident that a deal was close to being done then they could take the deposits (the treatment of which could then be included somewhere in the sale agreement). However any purchaser would usually prefer to take the deposits themselves and use them as working capital and so there is no reason to take the deposits by that point. If a deal can't be done then the directors won't take deposits because they will be personally liable. If a deal can be done then the directors won't take deposits because the purchaser will want to take them themselves. Either way (and FWIW I think we are looking at the latter) season tickets won't be on sale until this is all resolved. EDIT: not sure how I *****ed up the font there... oops.

+1 :cool:

2+2 = whatever you can dream up. Don't you just love wild speculation? :smt115

http://bean-counter.mybrute.com/fight/154921004 Get in. Hairy nut sack is my b***ch!