saintbletch

Would it have potentially committed the club to legal fees that could not be justified by Fry?

Ahh but you didn't hyphenate the Half and baked. Does that make it a name instead? It must be a clue.

Thanks NSS and a good analogy and I'll respond in kind. If my wife was smitten with the location of the plot of land I would have to make it happen despite any covenants or restrictions. If however it was a business transaction and I was simply looking to turn a profit on the land I'd do my sums and decide if I could still make it work and if not I'd find another location to try to turn a quid. Heart or head - hence why I will sleep better once I know who the money man is.

OK taking this at face value and not the "disparage Pinnacle" thread that it could become. These are things that I think we "know". They have a 5 year plan The basis of the initiative came from a group of property people who approached Tony Lynam. All dropped out bar one. Tony Lynam is Irish They will run the business on it's own two feet They will be able to ask for money of the backer if they feel they need it. David Defty, has or will be advising the board - potential board member. They somehow (not intentionally disparaging) produced a significant deposit to enter into a period of exclusivity. The OS allowed Tony Lynam to post a message on it. Tony Lynam met with the players at Staplewood yesterday. We "know" that today might be an important day for news.

The Farmer, are you speaking from some kind of in-the-knowness on this? i.e. the individual WILL want to remain hidden from public view even after the take over? Or are you simply stating that there are reasons why someone MIGHT want to stay hidden?

Tart!

All good points and good to hear an alternative (potentially accurate given your proximity to TL) viewpoint. But can you clear something up for me? (In your opinion obviously) Are you saying that the Pinnacle consortium is attempting to appeal the -10 to make its business plan work and if that fails it will fall back to plan B which may involve funding the club for longer to get the Premiership? Or are you saying that Pinnacle's bid was contingent on getting the -10 rescinded and that there is no plan B?

Get's my vote or if I was feeling particularly optimistic. July, July! - The Decemberists.

That is an interesting development.

Yes it does FC and I was simply wondering out loud whether the public debate about the 10 point deduction might just be posturing to get the FL to the table to negotiate what you describe in your last paragraph.

I was trying to come up with an explanation for the apparent contradiction of Tony Lynam telling the fans they will definitely buy the club whilst apparently telling the FL that they need to change something before they will buy the club. Why would the FL change it's approach if Pinnacle has publicly stated it is going to buy the club regardless? I therefore thought it must be a red herring of sorts. I follow your argument and I understand that we effectively will have negotiated a CVA with the creditors of the PLC but I thought the FL insists on a CVA as the legal device that clubs must present to avoid the 25 points deduction a la Leeds. Surely IF the FL accepts your above scenario that we don't need a CVA then it tacitly acknowledge that the FC never went into administration? Hence their need to insert the alleged no appeal clause. Surely IF Pinnacle accepts the -10 points but does not produce a CVA then they will need a clause saying that they will be docked further points? Have I misunderstood the workings here FC?

I broadly agree with your point. Perhaps this threatened appeal / court action is a red herring? Perhaps the -10 is not the issue but instead Pinnacle is using the pressure on the FL to ensure that our inability to produce a CVA will not mean more points deductions? i.e. they are happy with -10 but not a potential -25 so they suggest they're ready to go to court over the ability to appeal the -10 and at the eleventh hour they back down and accept the -10 on condition that it is only -10.

A good analysis IMO. What I can't quite understand is the apparent contradiction in TL's public statements. If I was trying to put pressure on the FL in the NEGOTIATIONS over the licence, why would I be publicly issuing a "We will buy the club come what may" type message. How does this help Pinnacle's bargaining position with the FL? It doesn't. If it is true that they will buy the club come what may, why doesn't Pinnacle just accept the position of the FL and buy the club? Unless the delay suits Pinnacle for some reason.

I would phrase the question differently. I am concerned as to the reasons that the new owner doesn't want to have been publicly associated with the bid to buy the club from that start. That's all. And in saying that I fully concede that there may be valid reasons for wanting/needing to stay un-named. But now that Tony has given a cast iron commitment to buy the club - come what may. I think most of the "valid" reasons for wanting to remain anonymous now disappear. I the grand scheme of things, in 3-4 weeks time this moment won't have matter. But given our track record with ownership and executives I am not given to blind faith. Despite the fact that everything I've seen from Pinnacle has been excellent I feel I need to know the details before I can support it 100%.

Gotcha and I take your point, but a cynic would say that he might just be trying to keep other interested parties "interested". Presumably he is looking to enter into another exclusivity period and presumably that could be with someone other than Pinnacle. To be honest I would have been more placated if Fry had issued a statement saying that despite the exclusivity period expiring he was extending it for a couple of days as an act of good will because it was clear to him that this transaction was going to complete. I really hope for some good news tomorrow.

I thought the same thing. I couldn't help feeling that South Today was trying to belittle the Pinnacle bid. Talked of Pinnacle being a 2 man operation established just 2 years ago and working out of a shared office. They showed a shot of a first floor bay window giving the impression it was a small concern. Also referred to Tony Lynam as being "Irish born" - I didn't realise that although you could hear it in his accent.

I thought I'd take a different approach. As I am embarrassed that I couldn't be arsed to get passionate about this when the likes of Luton were being kicked to death by the Football League, I thought it would now be wrong to plead our special case. But I still think the FL has some changes to put in place. Will keep you appraised of any reply I receive.

Part of me will miss this detective work when we finally (hopefully) get to know who the money man is. So given the hint above and the Times' rich list, a few names drop out. This one (I'm assuming Irvine's son James) is interesting because according to this article, they were involved in a scheme to redevelop Fratton park but it has since been put on ice. Irvine and James Sellar worth £165M?

He doesn't appear in the rich list because most of his wealth is tied up in Ineos and it is having problems managing the £6b it has borrowed. Because of this uncertainty The Times was not able to accurately estimate his worth. See here.

David Ross and his connection with Dunstone certainly sounds more likely to me.

...and his business is struggling to manage its £6B debt according to reports. Which sounds pretty familiar too. He went from 10th to 25th to not even making it into the Times Rich List in successive years. As most of his wealth is tied to Ineos which is in a spot of bother they were not able to estimate his wealth. Does he need this distraction?

Bridge is better going forward but Canasta is the better defender.

It's unlikely to be Jim Ratcliffe though isn't it? The Timesonline Rich List for 2009 appears to be offline at the moment but I'm pretty sure that I previously read that he was excluded from the list having previously been 10th one year and then 25th richest person in the UK the next, because given his business' debt problems it wasn't possible to estimate his worth. The Echo covered it here... His worth appears to be tied heavily to that of Ineos and as his own business is in need of a little bit of attention at the moment, would he have the time or long-term stomach to invest in Saints?

I think Tony Lynam should start a Twitter feed for the next 5 days and use it to update us every 15-20 minutes on how things are going. ( he could stop between 11pm and 7:30am ) Perhaps we could tweet guesses as to who the mystery man is and he could respond with "freezing", "cold", "getting warmer", "you got it" type responses? Or he can get on with the job at hand and we'll waste more time on here speculating.