saintbletch

Respect on two fronts. Firstly for being able to have sex for two hours...my forearm usually cramps up after 45 minutes and secondly for making a wonderful apology that is so complete in its contrition that you can only win which ever way the Pinnacle story unfolds. Clever. :smt041

Yep I follow all that saintjay77 and I broadly agree with your argument but the bit I emboldened in your post said that: I don't see how buying SLH (with the caveats we've both agreed) would mean the extra -15. In my opinion from the little I've read on here it would the only way to avoid the punishment the League meters out for not coming out of admin with a CVA.

Tony if you're real. Stop posting on this forum. Every time you commit something to black and white you will be hounded on the literal meaning. You have created a trail of completely contradictory posts on here about the size, shape and substance of the takeover. Between you, The Farmer and MLT we are seeing apparent splits and contradictions. This is coming across as very unprofessional. Go about your business in private. Talk to one or two media outlets and keep things vague until you complete the takeover or go back to being whatever it is you did before you got caught up in this. Otherwise despite what might have been the best of intentions you could start to look like some sort of self-serving fantasist. Good luck.

Hmm? Not sure how the fans will have been appeased by the naming of MF. I'm interested in how quickly the Echo had this information. I'm inclined to believe that the Echo had collected this information prior to this morning's paper and were going to go public. This then prompted Tony Lynam to name Fialka yesterday. I can't see why else Tony Lynam would have thought it beneficial to name Michael Fialka yesterday otherwise. I suppose it could be that Fialka was named to protect someone with more significant wealth. I suppose it could be that Tony Lynam didn't know the "extent" of Fialka's apparent wealth. Either way Pinnacle's media handling has been a case study in how not to do it IMO.

I think the answer to your question above is that if the Plc were to come out of administration and produce a CVA then my understanding under the sporting sanctions malarkey is that we would not face a potential further -15 points. Therefore if you were to "buy" the Plc you might guarantee starting on -10. Whether that would be possible or worth the potential additional cost, agro and delay is moot. How did you reach the conclusion in bold above?

I think this is a sound observation and it would appear to get around some of the problems that we think exist with the FL. How do you go about buying a distressed Plc whose shares have been suspended? Is it just a matter of negotiating a disposal value with Fry? Do you then go about de-listing the Plc? Will any of the purchase price be returned to the shareholders? Or will the creditors get first pick?

Concerned but hopeful. +ve - if this happens we will have a club -ve - concerned that it won't happen +ve - pleased we now know who is behind the bid. I can now put all new information into context. -ve - disappointed that he might not be in the hundreds of millions net worth category +ve - pleased that this man appears to be a "football" man - that is important ? concerned that Pinnacle may have been misleading us with the several hundred million worth comment - although I'm sure there is more to learn.

My understanding from what I have read on here is that SLH will not exit adminstration with a CVA because it will fold. HOWEVER the conditions to satisfy a CVA (think I saw it was >50% of creditors or debt value paid) will have been met with the deal the administrator is lining up. Therefore SLH won't get a CVA. SFC has never been in adminstration.

So going back to the first communication we had it appears that 4 money men approached Tony Lynam who then approached MLT. In answer to your general question about experience. What if you considered it a transaction principally about property with the added bonus of a getting football team that you could let some others play with? Then you might approach a property consultant to handle the acquisition. This of course we can neither confirm or deny because we don't know the money man or his motivation.

Was mid-afternoon yesterday. I like the new avatar BTW. Don't the Iranians make chocolate?

Dutch connection? Bob Poortvliet - Jan's billionaire brother? ...or is de Haan a Dutch name? I thought it was Belgian/Flemish. ...or is there another Dutch link?

Just got an email from a mate who asked a pertinent question. (Paraphrasing) Following Tony Lynam's statement that Pinnacle will definitely be buying the club, why didn't he put the money in to pay the wages?

I think this is a key statement. IF the CVA and the threatened additional points deductions is the stumbling block then it will not be a trivial matter for the Football League to get around. If they make an exception for us then I would imagine all future clubs going into administration will look to exploit it. Not to mention the potential of clubs who previously went through the administration/CVA process looking to re-examine their cases. Again, IF that is the issue then the best way out for the FA (assuming they feel any pressure to do anything) is to actually acknowledge that the Football Club was not is administration but for Pinnacle to accept the -10 penalty. This would presumably have to be swiftly followed by a change in their rules to stop the parent/holding company confusion.

Hmm. But to demand two CVAs would be to acknowledge that the two companies were not "inextricably linked" surely. :smt102

-->

...yep and I can imagine someone at the FL being completely understanding of Pinnacle's unique and difficult position whilst simultaneously being completely reluctant to set a precedent by allowing a non-CVA exit of administration. Think of the clubs that follow us through admin. They would be looking to exploit any exceptions the FL makes now. If this speculation is true, then this is not a trivial matter for the FL to resolve now.

There has been speculation that Pnnacle might be looking for assurances that the league would deduct no further points (in addition to the -10). Clubs coming out of administration that unable to produce a CVA will be deducted -15. We may not be able to produce a CVA for SFC as it was SLH that went and got the creditors angry. Don't know if this is what TL is talking about though.

You gotta love this guy haven't you. He certainly knows how to treat people. Is this a dig at Marc Jackson? Is this a reference to the possibility of further sanction if the CVA is not produced?

The Farmer I believe.

You gotta love this guy haven't you. He certainly knows how to treat people. Is this a dig at Marc Jackson? Is this a reference to the possibility of further sanction if the CVA is not produced?

Agreed. You know the way a psychologist would tell you that first the brain has to construct the image before it can consciously deal with it? As in if I were to say "Don't think of a Pink Elephant" you would momentarily and unconsciously visualise a pink elephant. Well I've got this image of Alpine (or at least the mask image avatar he uses) on a toilet (my toilet in fact) sunk up to his nuts into Mrs Alpine. For the avoidance of doubt I should point out that I do not know what Mrs Alpine looks like except that she is wearing the same avatar mask with long hair. Thanks Alpine.

Titanic?

or caveat venditor perhaps?

True but is it right for the administrator to gamble with the creditor's money on this? As I think we've seen from the FL's position, Fry would have lost the creditor's money on this. But as Trousers said below, if possible without incurring significant expense, I would have been inclined to have at least kept the door open by going through the first stage of paperwork.

Thought he came across well and particularly liked the human touch - in that he cared about the impact of all this on the players and staff and wanted to put their minds at rest (as best he could).