benjii

How many of those clubs are succesful businesses? Yeah, I expect quite a few of them will - especially if we are doing well.

You really are a bit dense sometimes.

Have you ever DJ'd at Silverspoons?

What I want to know is wtf Patrick Stewart though he was doing at the "Glamour" awards in the first place. Just say, "no", FFS.

FFS. Do you think he hasn't thought about it? He clearly thinks the current structure will be more profitable. Otherwise we would not be doing it.

That might be the case. Good sensible business planning.

No - as a secured creditor Chanrai would have priority over the sale proceeds. There is a provision in the insolvency act for ring-fencing of a small part of the pot but Chanrai would get the lion's share and the other creditors would get next to nothing. This, of course, assumes that Chanrai's security is not challenged by the liquidator.

I hope Cortese tells them to get stuffed. The prices are reasonable. If you can't afford one, buy a ticket as and when you want to go. If you can't afford to pay up front but want one then use a credit card or some other form of personal finance. The club doesn't owe you a finance package or any other type of installment package. We are not "other clubs" - there are very few in our position. The timing and handling of the announcement could have been better but that alone is hardly reason for an "outcry". In short, shut up please Saints Trust.

And even if they get a CVA there is likely to be a ban on signing anyone other than frees.

The football creditors rule has no formal legal status. In a liquidation it could be ignored. Football creditors would rank alongside HMRC and all the local suppliers. That said, even a dividend of 20p is probably more than unsecured creditors would get in a liquidation. I would imagine that the parachute payments are not payable to a liquidated company (although who knows whether the authorities have the appropriate contractual documentation in place). That leaves the only cash pot as being the proceeds of sale of Krap Nottarf (as players would leave for free). That would probably not even pay Chanrai back so unsecured creditors would get zip.

AA says some odd things. Obviously, a CVA involving a 1p dividend is more attractive to potential purchasers than a CVA involving a 65p dividend. Whatever. That's not the purpose of administration. I really don't understand why he keeps making public statements that back up allegations that have been made against him. If he just kept quiet and got it with it there would be much less smoke - even if he offered a hopeless CVA. I would like someone to ask him why promotion to the PL would only increase the dividend by 5p. Promotion would be a guaranteed £100m+ in extra revenue. There is absolutely no reason why promotion couldn't lead to a dividend at 80p +.

It's not difficult is it? You have a history of buying things you can't afford and abusing the credit of others. You are insolvent - fact. You have massively negative assets - fact. You are relying on the goodwill of a creditor to service your day-to-day running costs - fact. You enjoyed relative success off the back of this credit abuse - fact. You have, presently, a stronger squad than many of your divisional rivals as a result of this. You want to spend money on players to gain a further advantage over teams who are not insolvent and operate within the spirit of fair play - get stuffed. It really hasn't sunk in yet to a lot of skates that footballing decline is inevitable. To be fair, AA hasn't helped by spouting off about forming a decent squad of high qulity frees etc...

Don't ban Wilts! He's the only thing worth reading Wiltsy, turn it down a bit old bean, we'd hate to lose you.

at UHY saying the Griffin's proposal would "send out the wrong message" to football clubs and encourage profligacy. They need to work a bit harder on their propoganda.

+1. What would have been annoying is if they had escaped a points deduciotn and come out of this witha compromise which allows them to maintain a decent playing squad. This intervention by Griffins and HMRC confirming that AA's CVA is unaaceptable should hopefully ensure that the well-deserved reality of their predicament bites: years of being run on a shoestring and existing primarily to service debt rather than seek footballing success.

I see now - I have the poster of that link on ignore so didn't realise until someone quoted it. This is not news though. Stockport were in admin when last season started weren't they? In fact, are they still? They will be due a deduction this season if that's the case. Ouch - non-league time for them!

Everything alright, dear?

Yep, so a tad under £10k a week for a top player/club & team captain.

Nah. In 2006 the average wage of a CCC player was just under £200k p.a. So under £4k per week. It's probably more now but not a lot more. It will also be skewed hugely by players from teams like Newcastle, West Brom etc.. who will pay a lot more to their top earners than the likes of Blackpool and Barnsley do. £10k per week would put you in the top-earner bracket in the CCC easily. £15k per wek for an average squad player is utter rubbish.

Corden is, it seems, a dalendless shid.

LMAO ho ho ho. Clearly the club does not believe an installment plan will gain it maximum revenue in the long term. If it did, it would offer one.

You have to be able to pay your debts as they fall due, not based on an aggregation of your next five years' revenue and a unilaterally imposed installment plan!

Indeed. The Griffin plan actually assumes the skates suffer consecutive relegations in the next two years to League Two. If they stay in the Champ there will be an additional seven or eight million of tv money fir the creditors not currently accounted for in the plan.

With a central midfielder at right back! ****ing mental.

In fairness to that guy, he clearly doesn't understand.