dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Jul 18, 2015 16:25:02 GMT
At some point the directors will stop funding the club's losses and the court action. Plus, Wonga need paying. As long as the bulk of the debt is internal and the external debt and liabilities don't exceed the value of assets, admintration would be the maddest decision since Clarke decided to line up with a back 3 against Mansfield. Even more so as administrators take a hefty chunk of any money they raise. So I guess the question is, why would you pay someone to sell property that you own so that you can be paid back out of any money that remains? I think we funded the court action with our Wembley ticket money. If I were Clarke I would be pretty miffed if my playing budget was cut because of that. When we lose the appeal/get told we don't have leave to appeal, Wonga come calling. Assuming the board just lend the club another £2m with interest, the internal debt goes up again. Given that no retail company in their right mind would touch it given our legal history and the NIMBY **** of Bishopston, the value of the Mem as an asset depends on how much a company can purchase it for housing. That's significantly less than the value for a retail development. All it would take is an external creditor to come knocking after that (the brewery, or a former director maybe) and the cards start to fall.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 16:32:06 GMT
at least it will keep all the amateur lawyers on here happy,,,the legal threads get zillions more posts than the piddly football ones What's being played out here is a bit more important than any given 90 minutes of football. is it? do we know if we will be better off 5 years from now if we win or lose the case? also as i said most people including me have no idea of complex legal matters.,,, should we appeal,,none of us know do we?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jul 18, 2015 16:45:28 GMT
None of us really know but the concern is NH originally said the contract was watertight when we now know that was far from the truth. Plus we can all read the Judgement and unless, after weeks of deliberations, unless she got it totally wrong Sainsbury's appeared to have the perfect get out clause.
It seems this is just NH last desperate throw of the dice, in the meantime we face at least an extra season in the run down Mem, possibly years more.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 16:57:36 GMT
Fingers crossed she rescues us from any more of this futile nonsense and turns it down. Won't be her deciding Seth Um, I think it will. I think that's how it works. More to the point, I hope whoever it is does us a favour and kicks it into touch so the board is bounced into doing something more productive. The whole thing is so bizarre that I half wonder whether Higgs wants it to fail. What's his out from this mess: show magnanimity, say the contract wasn't as watertight as he thought, express regret, and tell us what's going to happen next; or, bullishly plod on, be refused right to appeal and then play the vanquished hero and victim of the legal profession, big business, the establishment, and forces of the universe in general? Surely this can't be about more than posturing.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 17:00:54 GMT
As long as the bulk of the debt is internal and the external debt and liabilities don't exceed the value of assets, admintration would be the maddest decision since Clarke decided to line up with a back 3 against Mansfield. Even more so as administrators take a hefty chunk of any money they raise. So I guess the question is, why would you pay someone to sell property that you own so that you can be paid back out of any money that remains? I think we funded the court action with our Wembley ticket money. If I were Clarke I would be pretty miffed if my playing budget was cut because of that. When we lose the appeal/get told we don't have leave to appeal, Wonga come calling. Assuming the board just lend the club another £2m with interest, the internal debt goes up again. Given that no retail company in their right mind would touch it given our legal history and the NIMBY **** of Bishopston, the value of the Mem as an asset depends on how much a company can purchase it for housing. That's significantly less than the value for a retail development. All it would take is an external creditor to come knocking after that (the brewery, or a former director maybe) and the cards start to fall. The brewery loan is paid isn't it? I thought that was part of the debt called in by Barclays and what a big chunk of the Wonga money was used for. How about people turn their frustration towards Barclays, they didn't have to call that loan in and leave Higgs scuttling off to a sub-prime lender. I thought that Geoff's loans were paid and that the only significant external debt was to Wonga. Hard to see anyone sane paying an administrator to fire-sale a £10m asset to settle a £2m debt, and at the same time lose control of the asset that their personal loans are secured against. You are right, Wonga will have a charge on the stadium, if we arrive at a point in time where they need to be paid and the directors can't / won't raise the money then it could get very messy.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 17:03:35 GMT
What's being played out here is a bit more important than any given 90 minutes of football. is it? do we know if we will be better off 5 years from now if we win or lose the case? also as i said most people including me have no idea of complex legal matters.,,, should we appeal,,none of us know do we? Yes, a fully funded stadium (as promised) being debt free (as promised) and the BoD demonstrating that they are in control of the club's destiny is more important than winning or losing any one game.
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:00:34 GMT
Joke, why can't they seem to accept defeat. We are not gonna win it Did you say that at Wembley?
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:01:30 GMT
Well thats another year, two years of uncertainty then. Meanwhile nothing will be spent on The Mem as we will be movijg to a new ground/redeveloping soon as we have for a bloody decade. Mr.Higgs pray do tell how we are financing this and how we are planning on.paying wonga by the end of the year Away to Man Utd in the 3rd round of the FA Cup
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:04:23 GMT
Maybe Rovers are giving Sainsbury's a dose of their own medicine and playing for time a bit? Hard to imagine Sainsbury's losing too much sleep over this. No because £30 million is f**k all to the Quatari Investment Association who are Sainsburys biggest share holders
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 18:06:58 GMT
Hard to imagine Sainsbury's losing too much sleep over this. No because £30 million is f all to the Quatari Investment Association who are Sainsburys biggest share holders It won't be £30m because they won't be buying the site. But £30m is just over 2 weeks profits for them, and then they would own a site that they would somehow manage to sell for the bulk of the money. Either way, it's not something that's going to cause their business to collapse.
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:07:47 GMT
This could be catastrophic for the club. How is it going to be funded? Another Wonga loan at exorbitant interest rates? This would be NH using the club to massage his ego that can't take a defeat. First we have to get leave to appeal - on a point of law not that we don't like the outcome - if successful it would then go the court of appeal. When? Perhaps 2017. Will the UWE still be possible by then? If we win Sainsbury's will probably argue that it's all too late to buy the Mem - here's some compo. Which NH would presumably be able to use to pay off his 'investment'. If we lose we will certainly have to pay Sainbury's costs as well as the Wonga loan(s) and probably lose the ground and go into administration. Meanwhile what money will be able to fund that peculiar activity called football? Let's hope the judges chuck it out quickly. Mon Dieu, Nous avons un bon chance
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:10:20 GMT
FFS - And I thought things couldn't get any worse. So we're applying for 'leave to appeal'? I've seen other threads where folk have said the only grounds for appeal is against errors in the process / application of the law? Our grounds to appeal seem to be that the judge said it was only her opinion that sainsburys were within contract to do a half-assed appeal against delivery times and then pull out. They then passed a set time limit for permission to be gained, and so triggered an exit clause. So, I would assume Team Higgs will be arguing that the judge's application of the law was incorrect. If there isn't any legs for that then I would have thought Team Higgs will not get leave to appeal. I would be delighted, one day, to have egg on my face if Team Higgs win and everything is allright, all fine. I will equally be horrified if my fears come true and Team Higgs use this 'ongoing process' as a reason not accept reasonable offers to buy the club for the next 12 months, running up debts that eventually force us to sell the Mem and end up ground sharing with Forest Green. Higgs Out. Blimey you are a doom and gloom merchant. A judge will decide if it is worth appealing, and that costs us 0. Lets get to that bit first
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jul 18, 2015 18:12:54 GMT
Do you know exactly how much the loan was for? Do you know if it definitely secured on the ground? Do you know the repayment schedule? Do you know if the directors will cover it? Do you know if it was the only way to raise the money or just the quickest way to satisfy the courts? Do you know if it's possible to repay this debt by adding to the mortgage? Genuine questions I would like answers too. Well we dont know if the directors have it covered which is what i keep asking, but it was well reported we borrowed a million plus to fund the court case and some other expenses on a short term loan m.bristolpost.co.uk/High-loan-option-continue-Sainsbury-s-battle-says/story-26118985-detail/story.htmlYou believe what is in the Evil Post?
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jul 18, 2015 18:13:07 GMT
None of us really know but the concern is NH originally said the contract was watertight when we now know that was far from the truth. Plus we can all read the Judgement and unless, after weeks of deliberations, unless she got it totally wrong Sainsbury's appeared to have the perfect get out clause. It seems this is just NH last desperate throw of the dice, in the meantime we face at least an extra season in the run down Mem, possibly years more. and if Nick Higgs never got involved in trying to improve us with a new stadium, we would still be in this sh*t tip of a ground
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2015 18:22:28 GMT
If think we can safely say that there is not, and never has been, a Plan B. Or C, D, E, F... completely Wrong Why not quit talking s**te now Henbury it's been going on for too long and it's winding up more and more proper rovers fans.
|
|
|
Post by thecyclist on Jul 18, 2015 18:30:48 GMT
None of us really know but the concern is NH originally said the contract was watertight when we now know that was far from the truth. Plus we can all read the Judgement and unless, after weeks of deliberations, unless she got it totally wrong Sainsbury's appeared to have the perfect get out clause. It seems this is just NH last desperate throw of the dice, in the meantime we face at least an extra season in the run down Mem, possibly years more. and if Nick Higgs never got involved in trying to improve us with a new stadium, we would still be in this sh*t tip of a ground Errrrrrrrrrrrrr......This afternoon's fixture took place at the Memorial Stadium?
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Briggs on Jul 18, 2015 18:45:55 GMT
This could be catastrophic for the club. How is it going to be funded? Another Wonga loan at exorbitant interest rates? This would be NH using the club to massage his ego that can't take a defeat. First we have to get leave to appeal - on a point of law not that we don't like the outcome - if successful it would then go the court of appeal. When? Perhaps 2017. Will the UWE still be possible by then? If we win Sainsbury's will probably argue that it's all too late to buy the Mem - here's some compo. Which NH would presumably be able to use to pay off his 'investment'. If we lose we will certainly have to pay Sainbury's costs as well as the Wonga loan(s) and probably lose the ground and go into administration. Meanwhile what money will be able to fund that peculiar activity called football? Let's hope the judges chuck it out quickly. Mon Dieu, Nous avons un bon chance We might be utterly f***ed, but that`s no excuse for such shocking grammar. Nous avons une belle chance.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jul 18, 2015 18:46:56 GMT
When we lose the appeal/get told we don't have leave to appeal, Wonga come calling. Assuming the board just lend the club another £2m with interest, the internal debt goes up again. Given that no retail company in their right mind would touch it given our legal history and the NIMBY **** of Bishopston, the value of the Mem as an asset depends on how much a company can purchase it for housing. That's significantly less than the value for a retail development. All it would take is an external creditor to come knocking after that (the brewery, or a former director maybe) and the cards start to fall. The brewery loan is paid isn't it? I thought that was part of the debt called in by Barclays and what a big chunk of the Wonga money was used for. How about people turn their frustration towards Barclays, they didn't have to call that loan in and leave Higgs scuttling off to a sub-prime lender. I thought that Geoff's loans were paid and that the only significant external debt was to Wonga. Hard to see anyone sane paying an administrator to fire-sale a £10m asset to settle a £2m debt, and at the same time lose control of the asset that their personal loans are secured against. You are right, Wonga will have a charge on the stadium, if we arrive at a point in time where they need to be paid and the directors can't / won't raise the money then it could get very messy. Did Barclays call in the loan or simply get nervous when NH suggested he wanted to double it? Perhaps they saw the legal advice and thought NH was mad to take on Sainsbury's when he was bound to lose? Regardless Barclays aren't a charity and they can decide who and what they want to loan. The big problem will come when we have to pay off the Wonga loan given it's unlikely our Appeal will have been heard by then, does NH extend it further and so incurr more interest or admit we can't afford to repay it?
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Jul 18, 2015 18:50:54 GMT
Just goes to show how little people know about the legal system, me included. What I do know is the following:- No one on here knows how much of a chance we have. No one on here knows how much the appeal will cost. No one on here knows how long it will take. Opinions are fine, unfounded criticism based on no knowledge is bad form. If the hearing is listed before October 2016 I'll donate £20 to the FFSC. If the matter is finalised before July 2017 I'll donate another £20.
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Jul 18, 2015 18:53:58 GMT
Looking forward to the daily "it's not tomorrow" posts from billy ocean! This could easily be the longest thread in the history of the IF!
|
|