Jump to content

Solent -Swiss only bidders left!


SOTONS EAST SIDE
 Share

Recommended Posts

Comment is not a judgement on the Swiss, rather than there only being one bidder left!

 

I share your concern that after apparently being the subject of interest of 4 groups, we are now down to one, but still feel that until we know who this Swiss group are, we might yet be in for a pleasant surprise to come. Having been forced into a position of extreme pessimism by the events of the past several weeks, the fact that only one potential buyer remains does not necessarily mean that they are the worst of the lot, merely that they may have entered the fray later than others who have fallen by the wayside. Even though I do not know who they are, I am encouraged to believe that they might be more serious contenders than the Jackson lot, for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance.

 

When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money.

 

Can't argue with that. As soon as Mark Fialka appeared we all new we were fooked!!!!!!! Didn't come as any surprise that they pulled out a few days after he appeared an all the info that was found out about in

 

As for the Swiss lets just hope they are very interested and not more tyre kickers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance.

 

The league had the same stance with other teams.

 

Quote from the BBC. "Last summer, the League refused to allow Rotherham, Bournemouth and Luton to begin the season unless they accepted points deductions following spells in administration. "

 

Its not the leagues fault. Its standard policy that should have been known to bidders weeks ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the story first broke I would have agreed with you but the longer its gone on the more I think its about that fact that ultimately they simply didn't have the money.

 

Yes I think you are right

 

 

I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for

 

a No Deduction

 

b 10 point Deduction

 

c 20 or more Deduction

 

or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money.

 

 

I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I think you are right

 

 

I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for

 

a No Deduction

 

b 10 point Deduction

 

c 20 or more Deduction

 

or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money.

 

 

I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity

 

I suspect that there bid was based on b with a chance of a. Once they found out it could be substantially more than 10 and the FL license was only to be issued for 2 years, the initial backers walked. Lynam then tried to rescue the bid by getting Fialka on board but that was always going to go pear shaped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I think you are right

 

 

I would have thought they would have had plans and bids to account for

 

a No Deduction

 

b 10 point Deduction

 

c 20 or more Deduction

 

or perhaps the plan for c was to walk but that would not be very clever as they would have wasted time and money.

 

 

I would also have thought that they should have discussed the FL stance before entering exclusivity

 

I really hope they didn't have the backers and are using the excuse of the 10 point deduction/appeal etc. I hope it's not over the alleged 25 point deduction and that that will puit of the Swiss and whoever else. Anyone know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope they didn't have the backers and are using the excuse of the 10 point deduction/appeal etc. I hope it's not over the alleged 25 point deduction and that that will puit of the Swiss and whoever else. Anyone know?

 

We're all guessing here but the club is certainly not worth what Pinnacle had bid, if we are to have a 25 point deduction. The Swiss if they're serious will bid quite a bit less but that may not satisfy the creditors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're all guessing here but the club is certainly not worth what Pinnacle had bid, if we are to have a 25 point deduction. The Swiss if they're serious will bid quite a bit less but that may not satisfy the creditors.

 

I would suggest that at this late hour the creditors will probably take what they can get?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think the money is the issue, its more the leagues stance.

 

 

what league's stance? It's -10 and a CVA. The rest is about doing it properly and have reputable money at your disposal.The way to do it is buying SLH with a CVA (ie paying everybody concerned and not cherry picking) and then sort it out correctly. Fry will have told them that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...