trousers Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 (edited) My understanding at the time was that it simply came down to a last minute race as to who could give Mark Fry a pledge on the £500 'exclusivity deposit'....but Cortese's words this evening imply (don't they?) that there was some sort of favouritism at play and as such it wasn't an even race....? Am I reading between the lines incorrectly here or was Fry indeed, for some reason, ignoring Liebherr's original bid? Yes, I know this is 'old ground' and that there are those who want to let sleeping dogs lie, but, as FF and others have rightly pointed out before, we will still be seeing the fall out of the takeover 'debacle' in months, perhaps years, to come....yes, it happened in the past but the knock on effect is very much in the 'here and now'.... What really happened? Edited 21 September, 2009 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 MLT I would guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 September, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 September, 2009 MLT I would guess. But MLT is on record as saying that he would have alligned himself to whichever bid the administrator preferred, hasn't he? Chicken and egg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 I have no idea, but I've always wondered whether the administrators were somehow more comfortable with someone called 'Lynam' than 'Liebherr' - locals v foreigners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 But MLT is on record as saying that he would have alligned himself to whichever bid the administrator preferred, hasn't he? Chicken and egg? I would presume it was a judgement call. The administrator was getting desperate and pumped for the one who was hanging out with MLT in the hope that it would happen. He chose the wrong one clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 The administrator was complete numpty in my book, in how he handled the whole situation. Things Cortese has said tonight and in other interviews contradicts a number statements Fry made during administration, yes we were all led up the garden path by Pinnacle but the way Fry handled it was dreadful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 The administrator was complete numpty in my book, in how he handled the whole situation. Things Cortese has said tonight and in other interviews contradicts a number statements Fry made during administration, yes we were all led up the garden path by Pinnacle but the way Fry handled it was dreadful. Phil had some dealing with him I believe and told me at the time what he was getting up to. Cortese has alluded to some of it tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 My understanding at the time was that it simply came down to a last minute race as to who could give Mark Fry a pledge on the £500 'exclusivity deposit'....but Cortese's words this evening imply (don't they?) that there was some sort of favouritism at play and as such it wasn't an even race....? Am I reading between the lines incorrectly here or was Fry indeed, for some reason, ignoring Liebherr's original bid? Yes, I know this is 'old ground' and that there are those who want to let sleeping dogs lie, but, as FF and others have rightly pointed out before, we will still be seeing the fall out of the takeover 'debacle' in months, perhaps years, to come....yes, it happened in the past but the knock on effect is very much in the 'here and now'.... What really happened? He set the bar too low? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 My understanding at the time was that it simply came down to a last minute race as to who could give Mark Fry a pledge on the £500 'exclusivity deposit'....but Cortese's words this evening imply (don't they?) that there was some sort of favouritism at play and as such it wasn't an even race....? Am I reading between the lines incorrectly here or was Fry indeed, for some reason, ignoring Liebherr's original bid? Yes, I know this is 'old ground' and that there are those who want to let sleeping dogs lie, but, as FF and others have rightly pointed out before, we will still be seeing the fall out of the takeover 'debacle' in months, perhaps years, to come....yes, it happened in the past but the knock on effect is very much in the 'here and now'.... What really happened? Only Mr Fry can answer that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 September, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 September, 2009 He set the bar too low? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 The pinnacle bid was greater. Hth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 The pinnacle bid was greater. Hth Do you mean the deposit? If so you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 Do you mean the deposit? If so you are wrong. No. The outline bid made by Pinnacle would have given a greater return to the creditors. Bearsy is ITK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genk Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 Remembering coming on here every day for a month praying for progress haunts me. I think I agree with Verbals point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 No. The outline bid made by Pinnacle would have given a greater return to the creditors. Bearsy is ITK You mean they didn't have a pot to pîss in, but promised the world. Well, it's quite understandable for Fry to have have fallen for that. Not. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 i heard the swiss had the exclusivity money on the tuesday but fry went awol/ignored the swiss until the friday when pinnacle stumped up the cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 21 September, 2009 Share Posted 21 September, 2009 NC/ML didn't arrive until May 22nd by which time alot of water had already passed under the bridge. Its an unfortunate fact that Pinnacle arrived and signalled their interest alot earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 i heard the swiss had the exclusivity money on the tuesday but fry went awol/ignored the swiss until the friday when pinnacle stumped up the cash Thats basically what Cortese said tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 MLT I would guess. Exactly. After the total demoralisation of the club under Lowe the most likely way that the club could bounce back quickly as a going concern was to unite the fans behind a respected and trusted hierarchy. MLT provided that - along with funds - when it was being initially considered. I don't think we should read any more into it. The fact is SLH plc had been a disaster due to leadership, personal ambitions and greed. MLT offered a credible solution to rebuild some faith in the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordswoodsaints Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Pinnacle simply 'appeared' to offer a better deal to the creditors,somebody paid the exclusivity money so they were given a chance. Why fry allowed pinnacle to get that far is a question only he can answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Exactly. After the total demoralisation of the club under Lowe the most likely way that the club could bounce back quickly as a going concern was to unite the fans behind a respected and trusted hierarchy. MLT provided that - along with funds - when it was being initially considered. I don't think we should read any more into it. The fact is SLH plc had been a disaster due to leadership, personal ambitions and greed. MLT offered a credible solution to rebuild some faith in the club. Ye I totally agree hindsight is a wonderful thing we are where we are now and hopefully things will get better However I am not sure why Markus bought the Club and how we are to return to the Premiership in five years with out loads of money being spent on the team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Pinnacle simply 'appeared' to offer a better deal to the creditors,somebody paid the exclusivity money so they were given a chance. Why fry allowed pinnacle to get that far is a question only he can answer. that someone was Leon Crouch who was the only authentic part of Pinnacle. Pinnacle were just a bunch of chancers and to be honest Fry was duped (probably by Crouch's money and MLT's standing). If Fry, LC or MLT had done just a small amount of due diligence then Pinnacle's interest would have been stillborn. No wonder ML and Co are peeved - they have every right to be angry. I shudder to think where we would be now had they walked. Fry is a lucky man imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I happen to know that the Pinnacle bid was accepted because MLT slipped Mark Fry £25k in a brown envelope - but in case the lawyers are reading this he did no such thing . (he did really) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I happen to know that the Pinnacle bid was accepted because MLT slipped Mark Fry £25k in a brown envelope - but in case the lawyers are reading this he did no such thing . (he did really) Only 25k? That wouldn't have any effect it is probably less than his fee for 2 days work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 (edited) I happen to know that the Pinnacle bid was accepted because MLT slipped Mark Fry £25k in a brown envelope - but in case the lawyers are reading this he did no such thing . (he did really) Maybe we are all under estimating Fry! it is not beyond the possible that he was in fact playing a mean hand at poker for high stakes and used a Pinnicale bid he knew was a sham to extract more from the Swiss one? Remember his only obligation was to get a better deal for the creditors! if selling the club to a developer and closing it down was the best option then that is what he would have gone for. Lucky the training ground was under a restrictive covenant and the stadium is not in a prime development area! Edited 22 September, 2009 by Saint Without a Halo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Only 25k? That wouldn't have any effect it is probably less than his fee for 2 days work! Anything more than £25k would have entailed upgrading from an brown envelope to a Jiffy bag - that would have looked suspicious . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Without a Halo Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Anything more than £25k would have entailed upgrading from an brown envelope to a Jiffy bag - that would have looked suspicious . LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Tyer kickers with about £2 and a nintendo DS (you know the rest), or intelligent and level headed swiss billionaires. Fry was ***** I think most fans agreed with Fry at the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 No. The outline bid made by Pinnacle would have given a greater return to the creditors. Bearsy is ITK Agreed. Some people seem to have clearly forgotten that the top remit of an administrator is to recover as much of the debt as possible by getting as much as possible for the assets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brussels Saint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Imagine though had Fry gone for the Swiss first up, how many now would already be complaining about the lack of ambition they show and imagining what a MLT led, Kevin Keegan manager ambitious takeover could of brought! Fry would have been accused of going for the Swiss money for the creditors and not caring about the club. Bizarrely, I think the exposure of Pinnacle has had a positive impact on uniting the fanbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
once_bitterne Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I think you have answered your own question. The club was literally on the brink of ceasing to exist. The 500k was needed to pay bills and keep it afloat so the administrator did exaclty the right thing to accept the deposit for exclusivity from whomever stumped up the cash first even be it from a Rose West/Gary Glitter consortium. It would have been very interesting to see what had happened if Pinnacle's backers hadn't have pulled out and they had managed to beg, borrow or steal to get the amount needed to buy the club. With KK as manager and MLT as chairman I have a sneaky feeling the 'feelgood' factor may have been even stronger and we wouldn't still be on -ve points. Yes, ML has the billions, but to date he has only paid a transfer fee for a single player and although he has paid good wages for the loans/frees/Out of contracts it is not totally unrealistic to think that Pinancle could have spent a similar amount thanks to the healthy gates we are getting and the fact that whomever the new owner was they would not have to pay a single penny in mortgage payments which was costing us several million £ a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Imagine though had Fry gone for the Swiss first up, how many now would already be complaining about the lack of ambition they show and imagining what a MLT led, Kevin Keegan manager ambitious takeover could of brought! Fry would have been accused of going for the Swiss money for the creditors and not caring about the club. Bizarrely, I think the exposure of Pinnacle has had a positive impact on uniting the fanbase. Fair point well made, let's hope that we are over the worst of the fallout now and move onwards and upwards with style ! Ps. which part of Bru are you in ? I worked there for 13 years ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 My understanding at the time was that it simply came down to a last minute race as to who could give Mark Fry a pledge on the £500 'exclusivity deposit'....but Cortese's words this evening imply (don't they?) that there was some sort of favouritism at play and as such it wasn't an even race....? Am I reading between the lines incorrectly here or was Fry indeed, for some reason, ignoring Liebherr's original bid? Yes, I know this is 'old ground' and that there are those who want to let sleeping dogs lie, but, as FF and others have rightly pointed out before, we will still be seeing the fall out of the takeover 'debacle' in months, perhaps years, to come....yes, it happened in the past but the knock on effect is very much in the 'here and now'.... What really happened? Trousers can you give me an idea what this knock on effect will be? I understand the months (no pre season etc etc) but years? Oh and to the original question - Players needed paying etc and Pinnacle managed to get the money in front of Fry quicker than NC - it could have been a matter of minutes or hours but they got it in front first - Fry IMHO had to take it as the whole club would have been wound up without it. Promises are one thing - actions are another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I happen to know that the Pinnacle bid was accepted because MLT slipped Mark Fry £25k in a brown envelope - but in case the lawyers are reading this he did no such thing . (he did really) LOL - Is that why his blogg and opinions have been removed from Sky's website? Perhaps that's because of another scam we've yet to find out about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopkins Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I don't know alot about business and administrator but a few things I can understand from there point of view which could have made the pinnacle bid more attractive. 1) MLT 2) Pinnacle offer = more money than the Swiss one. More money for creditors. 3) The longer it takes the more Fry gets paid right? I don't blame him for preferring the Pinnacle bid to start with. We all did. It seemed like the better deal at the time and it would have given a club hero the chairmans role. The administrator would have been lynced if he'd had sided with another bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I think you have answered your own question. The club was literally on the brink of ceasing to exist. The 500k was needed to pay bills and keep it afloat so the administrator did exaclty the right thing to accept the deposit for exclusivity from whomever stumped up the cash first even be it from a Rose West/Gary Glitter consortium. It would have been very interesting to see what had happened if Pinnacle's backers hadn't have pulled out and they had managed to beg, borrow or steal to get the amount needed to buy the club. With KK as manager and MLT as chairman I have a sneaky feeling the 'feelgood' factor may have been even stronger and we wouldn't still be on -ve points. Yes, ML has the billions, but to date he has only paid a transfer fee for a single player and although he has paid good wages for the loans/frees/Out of contracts it is not totally unrealistic to think that Pinancle could have spent a similar amount thanks to the healthy gates we are getting and the fact that whomever the new owner was they would not have to pay a single penny in mortgage payments which was costing us several million £ a year. Please, we would have been into administration partII within weeks, if Pinnacle had managed to find the money down the back of the sofa. KK was not coming to Saints, he turned us down from the beginning. So Pinnacle would not be paying any mortgage payments? only to be substituted by the interest on the loans to pay off the mortgage, brilliant. And to add to that, because of the risk that interest would be even higher than our mortgage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I think most fans agreed with Fry at the time No they didn't. The fans had no idea who the swiss lot were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I'm sure there were no underhand dealings to favour Pinnacle, dodgy practice in high-finance would be as likely as an F1 driver crashing deliberately so I am sure we can discount that as an allegation. As for Mr Fry, did he win the award he was nominated for re our speedy and trouble-free takeover? If so I think we still owe Rupert and Barclays some thanks for their choice of administrator, which is like saying that Fred West wasn't all bad, he was great at converting cellars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brussels Saint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Fair point well made, let's hope that we are over the worst of the fallout now and move onwards and upwards with style ! Ps. which part of Bru are you in ? I worked there for 13 years ! Ixelles, down by the Flagey ponds. Been here 9 years and love it. Costs me a fortune to watch the Saints though. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Fry's job was to get the creditors as much money as possible, not to make sure SFC had a decent pre-season. We were facing extinction and ended up with a billionaire - it's hard to criticise Fry. Lynam on the other hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Fry's job was to get the creditors as much money as possible, not to make sure SFC had a decent pre-season. We were facing extinction and ended up with a billionaire - it's hard to criticise Fry. Lynam on the other hand... Cortese was pretty scathing of Fry last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 LOL - Is that why his blogg and opinions have been removed from Sky's website? Perhaps that's because of another scam we've yet to find out about.Stop antagonising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leehoudini Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 The administrator was complete numpty in my book, in how he handled the whole situation. Things Cortese has said tonight and in other interviews contradicts a number statements Fry made during administration, yes we were all led up the garden path by Pinnacle but the way Fry handled it was dreadful.[/QUOTE] Was it? With Fry saying very little other than the public gloss which inevitably needed to be said, how do we really know how it was handled. Whilst your opinion may be that it was handled dreadfully, it doesn't necessarily mean that it was. Fry had no loyalty to the club, fans, players or anyone don't forget, apart from to those who were owed money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Mockles Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 My understanding at the time was that it simply came down to a last minute race as to who could give Mark Fry a pledge on the £500 'exclusivity deposit'....but Cortese's words this evening imply (don't they?) that there was some sort of favouritism at play and as such it wasn't an even race....? Am I reading between the lines incorrectly here or was Fry indeed, for some reason, ignoring Liebherr's original bid? Yes, I know this is 'old ground' and that there are those who want to let sleeping dogs lie, but, as FF and others have rightly pointed out before, we will still be seeing the fall out of the takeover 'debacle' in months, perhaps years, to come....yes, it happened in the past but the knock on effect is very much in the 'here and now'.... What really happened? ZZZZZZZZZZZz Old news. MOVE ON!! Even if you're told some 'apparent' home truths, the real truth won't ever some out so you're wasting your time and energy. Huge smacks of suspicious & surreptitious wrong doings and certainly more than meets the eye but I'm sure the truth won't ever see the light of day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 I think you have answered your own question. The club was literally on the brink of ceasing to exist. The 500k was needed to pay bills and keep it afloat so the administrator did exaclty the right thing to accept the deposit for exclusivity from whomever stumped up the cash first even be it from a Rose West/Gary Glitter consortium. It would have been very interesting to see what had happened if Pinnacle's backers hadn't have pulled out and they had managed to beg, borrow or steal to get the amount needed to buy the club. With KK as manager and MLT as chairman I have a sneaky feeling the 'feelgood' factor may have been even stronger and we wouldn't still be on -ve points. Yes, ML has the billions, but to date he has only paid a transfer fee for a single player and although he has paid good wages for the loans/frees/Out of contracts it is not totally unrealistic to think that Pinancle could have spent a similar amount thanks to the healthy gates we are getting and the fact that whomever the new owner was they would not have to pay a single penny in mortgage payments which was costing us several million £ a year. Please, we would have been into administration partII within weeks, if Pinnacle had managed to find the money down the back of the sofa. KK was not coming to Saints, he turned us down from the beginning. So Pinnacle would not be paying any mortgage payments? only to be substituted by the interest on the loans to pay off the mortgage, brilliant. And to add to that, because of the risk that interest would be even higher than our mortgage. OB, All that Up and Away said plus two other little facts that you ignored/got wrong: 1. Cortese said yesterday that ML was ready with the 500k deposit 3 days before Pinnacle paid theirs. 2. We have bought (signed for a transfer fee) 2 players - Lambert and Hammond; as well as re-signing Kelvin and Fish Mills and paying the signing on fees and wages for Harding, Murty and Jaidi, and the loan fees and wages for Trotman, Mellis and Waigo. I honestly don't think even an (unlikely) MLT/KK duo would have brought better players in (especially as we would have had a lot less money to spend, what with paying back a HUGE loan an' all). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 What the hell did Pinnacle think they we're going to do with the club, they had no money and the potential for a huge back lash from the fans when we realised they were a bunch of numpties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 Ixelles, down by the Flagey ponds. Been here 9 years and love it. Costs me a fortune to watch the Saints though. ;-) I know Ixelles but I lived in Overijse and then in Woluwe St Pierre, am now back living on the IoW. My son (alright_dave, on here) lives near Vilvoorde, so if Saints are ever on live TV again you can contact him and maybe watch it in one of the pubs in the Schuman area (he knows them all !). Ps. I don't even want to think about what I spent over the years watching Saints !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BridgnorthSaint Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 The administrator was complete numpty in my book, in how he handled the whole situation. Things Cortese has said tonight and in other interviews contradicts a number statements Fry made during administration, yes we were all led up the garden path by Pinnacle but the way Fry handled it was dreadful. I think that given the desperate situation we were in that Mark Fry managed to pull the club out of the flames at the last momment, so to speak and in my opinion everything turned out well in the finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 It was never clear hpow much Pinnacle paid for exclusivity.Fry Pinnacle etc only alluded to a dposit paid,never did they say it was 500k. I believe it is human nature to dwell if it means that the earnings will be higher if you do so. Fry got lucky by ML keeping his interest, I doubt there would be many fawning to him on here if he had kept Pinnacle and we had no club now. Fry had a duty to get the best he could for hiscreditors BUT he nearly ****ed that up. I would love ot know his fees, they would be eye watering. he will be toasting us yet again when his bonusses come in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 22 September, 2009 Share Posted 22 September, 2009 ....... It would have been very interesting to see what had happened if Pinnacle's backers hadn't have pulled out and they had managed to beg, borrow or steal to get the amount needed to buy the club. With KK as manager and MLT as chairman I have a sneaky feeling the 'feelgood' factor may have been even stronger and we wouldn't still be on -ve points. Yes, ML has the billions, but to date he has only paid a transfer fee for a single player and although he has paid good wages for the loans/frees/Out of contracts it is not totally unrealistic to think that Pinancle could have spent a similar amount thanks to the healthy gates we are getting and the fact that whomever the new owner was they would not have to pay a single penny in mortgage payments which was costing us several million £ a year. You're assuming that Pinnacle ever really had any backers. Lynam's public statements on here were self-contradictory ... a consortium ,1 wealthy backer, the bloke from the London semi, a consortium again... Try reading his posts again. They're quite amusing in a sort of gallows humour, Walter Mitty, sort of way It seems very likely that, whoever they were, Pinnacle would in effect have been borrowing to buy us, so in effect the club would have been still pretty heavily in debt, as Pinnacle would have had to extract from club income enough 'profit' to cover their debt re-payments. So no mortgage as such , but loan repayments instead, albeit for a lesser amount than the old club debts allowing for the cheap purchase price. K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now