Rational Rich

The 21 days is a deadline - it could complete now if everyone was happy with the deal. After that it's open to everyone again and pinnacles's advantage would be gone. Wouldve thought that the legal docs would be fairly well progressed, but these things always take longer than you think and issues and negotiating points will crop up right until the deal is finalised.

It's for the assets of SLH, including the club. After the sale, SLH will be left behind as a shell, the funds distributed to its creditors and then wound up.

Whatever criticisms people have of crouch, it seems that if it wasn't for him digging into his pocket we'd be done for by now. Similar thing to what Mr Corbett did previously. I for one won't forget that.

It applies in the situation where there is a possibility of a company going under to stop directors incurring liabilities to creditors which they are unlikely to be able to satisfy when there is a strong possibility that their co will go under. Given that the holding co is in admin and the administrator has said the money will run out soon, you can see why jones and tointon (and before them lowe, wilde etc) have decided not to. Plus there's the commercial point about a new owner having their own ticketing strategy and wanting all of the funds for the future of the club (if SFCL went into admin that cash would go to the creditors).

And could be personally liable for that aspect of the company's debt if it ever does get put into admin

Think jeremy is spot on (would recommend his excellent cult heroes book too if you haven't read it). The thing is, with the FL ignoring the most basic element of company law (ie each co is an independent entity, legally different people), it's impossible to judge what will happen. But, provided that the club stays out of any insolvency proceedings (ie admin, cva etc) the insolvency rules should not apply. As I understand it, the further points deductions for leeds, bournemouth etc have been as a result of not coming out of admin by way of a cva. If the club is not in administration, then how can it be punished for not coming out of it in the right manner? Also, I understood that the points were deducted in order for the FL to approve the transfer of the "golden share" from the company in admin to the company which bought the business and assets of the club. If the new buyers buy the shares of SFCL, the golden share won't need to be transferred anywhere, so again no grounds to deduct points.

Yeah pretty much. Unfortunately the league seem to be a law unto themselves.

I put money on us going up and bought a holland shirt after that game and thought JP was a genius and RL might not be all bad. Shows how wrong you can be.

Absolutely, if can't think of a nicer place to live, love Mudeford. If I ever come back down south, that's where I'm heading.

Bloody hell, just imagine turning up for 5 a side one Tuesday night and that lot are on the other side!

J Phil, there's no such thing as voluntary admin. Just admin. CVA is another form of insolvency proceedings which can be used as an exit from an admin. However, if SFC stay out of admin (whatever the league say, the fact is SFC isn't in admin - it's like being pregnant, you either are or you're not) there will be no need for a CVA so the league shouldn't be able to deduct points. Though that hasn't stopped them so far...

It was also agreed that only the CLub (which according to the rules (and not the FL's current imaginative extension of them) is SFC Limited) going into insolvency proceedings would result in a points penalty. Seems with the Football League that rules decided by the clubs are only to be abided by when they get them to where they want to be.

I think yesterday's result reduces the likelihood of a protracted appeal. The difference in value between a club in League 1 and a club in League 1 with -10 points will be a lot less than the difference in value between a club in the CCC and a club in league 1, IMHO. Still think an initial appeal is essential, as the league's reasoning was nonsense.

Morph, do you happen to know the names of these fellas? Not in the context of any buy-out, obviously, just from a pure identification perspective.

You must be right. Think it's probably the journo putting a spin on a dullish story (from a national perspective), realising the reaction it would have. It would be commercial suicide for the new owners to have RL involved, no matter how close they may be or even if they hold him in high regard. This thread alone shows that.

Probably been discussed loads on here, but I've missed it. How are Lowe and Scott linked? How would him taking over lead to any involvement from RL? Whilst we all know that Lowe seems to be more persistent that pretty much anyone, why the hell would he want to come anywhere near SMS and SFC again now his investment is gone? Surely, just on a personal level, it would be far too much hassle?

What a core of old style hooligans, topped with 15k of premier league glory hunters? I think there're better examples you could have chosen. But I agree, we are where we are, we're there for a reason (and can have no complaints) and we need to get used to the fact that we have to earn our place at the top table back again. It will be long, it will be hard, but it will be worth it in the end.

Try again, I just got through and donated a couple of kids tickets, no problems. Just quote the number on the OS

Time will tell. IMHO, the case is strong, it just comes down to whether it is worthwhile (financially and commercially) to pursue it.

Yeah, sorry, shouldn't be so trigger happy with the post button. When can we start talking about football again? It's nearly Friday already.

Nah, from the statement on their website they are relying on (a) which is why they are stuffed. (f) is to cover insolvency proceedings overseas (it's standard -ish wording you see in banking agreements, etc). Sorry, just seen that Benji's already answered this.

So someone else is still watching as well. Thought I was the only one. I would make Crouch run to the corner flag against Everton rather than having that pathetic shot when it was 2-1. Or stop Lawrie from going to Sunderland.

I think that both the club and the administrators have good lawyers already. The guy from DLA Piper acting for begbies is very well regarded and also used to be chief exec at fulham.

Cheers! By the way, the lawyer acting for the administrators has direct experience of running a football club (I believe he was chief exec at Fulham for a while, according to his online CV) as well as being an insolvency specialist. All I will say is that there is no legislating for the Football League making the wrong decision and that's why I expect an appeal. You can (and I'm sure you will) quote me on that.

It comes down to pounds shillings and pence. A good chance of success, coupled with the chance for more cash from selling the shares in SFC if they win, might be enough to persuade Barclays to chuck a little more good money after bad. Of course, if they can't see the benefit, then there's no chance of them doing it out of pure goodwill.