Sonny Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 44 minutes ago, Veredisquo said: 21 points is worse than 9- it’s all hypothetical at this stage anyway It is indeed, and bearing in mind the punishment Birmingham got it looks like we’re already looking at much more than 9. Rolling over and just accepting the charge as you suggest will likely get the thing you’re hoping we avoid. Plus, you know, why should we if we feel we aren’t guilty of misconduct. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debram Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Sonny said: It is indeed, and bearing in mind the punishment Birmingham got it looks like we’re already looking at much more than 9. Rolling over and just accepting the charge as you suggest will likely get the thing you’re hoping we avoid. Plus, you know, why should we if we feel we aren’t guilty of misconduct. You have to accept the EFL rules, Guilty until proven Guilty. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 6 minutes ago, hugeowl said: Using that formula , how many clubs in the Championship are technically Insolvent ? Randomly I quickly looked at Bristol City and Barnsley - net assets of 6 and 9 million respectively. A position that could disintegrate with losses. But like I said I am interested in Wednesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazowl55 Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 7 minutes ago, hugeowl said: Using that formula , how many clubs in the Championship are technically Insolvent ? Virtually every club in the entire league if there chairman walked away and demanded there money back would be in trouble I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEnchanter Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Everythings fine! Just logged on to check if everythings still fine and we the club is being run sustainably and to the letter of the law. Turns out everythings still fine. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellbeaten-the-owl Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 19 minutes ago, Hookowl said: That's not clear cut at all. Section 21 of the new Companies Act 71 of 2008 provides for an exception to the rule that a person cannot bind a non-existent principal, which determines that a person may act as an agent for a company to be formed. The Act states in section 21(1) that a person may enter into a written agreement in the name of, or purport to act in the name of, or on behalf of, an entity that is contemplated to be incorporated in terms of this Act, but does not yet exist at the time. I remember when football was fun... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 19 minutes ago, hugeowl said: Using that formula , how many clubs in the Championship are technically Insolvent ? Blackburn had net liabilities of £94m! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Proud of our chairman? Aye, everything is just wonderful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roscoe P. Coltrane Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Bulgaria said: Proud of our chairman? Aye, everything is just wonderful. I'm proud he's a very successful businessman.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jack Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 IF DC can afford a top lawyer and he has evidence from the EFL that is misleading in their advice. One thing we do know is that the clubs soft embargo was lifted and that there was a dialogue going on between both parties. We will soon see if DC lodges a legal case and whether this ends up in court, if the evidence is strong against the EFL then I would expect them to back of.We can only wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevthelodgemoorowl Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 4 hours ago, Hookowl said: That's not clear cut at all. Section 21 of the new Companies Act 71 of 2008 provides for an exception to the rule that a person cannot bind a non-existent principal, which determines that a person may act as an agent for a company to be formed. The Act states in section 21(1) that a person may enter into a written agreement in the name of, or purport to act in the name of, or on behalf of, an entity that is contemplated to be incorporated in terms of this Act, but does not yet exist at the time. You tell him Hookowl and you could explain for his benefit the concept of deals done on a Handshake or gentleman's agreement for the paperwork to be completed at a later date. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 28 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said: You tell him Hookowl and you could explain for his benefit the concept of deals done on a Handshake or gentleman's agreement for the paperwork to be completed at a later date. Who did he shake hands with? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevthelodgemoorowl Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 12 minutes ago, rickygoo said: Who did he shake hands with? it was the seed of an idea that was threaded through a tiny loop hole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 5 hours ago, rickygoo said: Like I said no point rowing about accounting semantics -we'll just go round in circles. It wasn't flagrant misuse. It was an interpretation of the balance sheet as reflected in the accounts. So if your reply wasn't about the accounts it wasn't about the specifics of my comment - it was about how you chose to interpret it. Creative interpretation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue and white Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 4 hours ago, Big Jack said: IF DC can afford a top lawyer and he has evidence from the EFL that is misleading in their advice. One thing we do know is that the clubs soft embargo was lifted and that there was a dialogue going on between both parties. We will soon see if DC lodges a legal case and whether this ends up in court, if the evidence is strong against the EFL then I would expect them to back of.We can only wait and see. At the rate I'm buying John West tuna at $6 a can I could pay for one myself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roscoe P. Coltrane Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 58 minutes ago, rickygoo said: Who did he shake hands with? Himself... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nut Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 5 hours ago, Hookowl said: That's not clear cut at all. Section 21 of the new Companies Act 71 of 2008 provides for an exception to the rule that a person cannot bind a non-existent principal, which determines that a person may act as an agent for a company to be formed. The Act states in section 21(1) that a person may enter into a written agreement in the name of, or purport to act in the name of, or on behalf of, an entity that is contemplated to be incorporated in terms of this Act, but does not yet exist at the time. Also, a business doesnt have to be incorporated in order to exist and trade. He could have set the business up as a sole trader or partnership. Pretty unlikely but still possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick_Turpin Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 41 minutes ago, Royal_D said: Creative interpretation Totally the opposite. Taking the figures at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socialist_Owl Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 On 04/12/2019 at 12:04, SallyCinnamon said: Proud? We really do accept poo as a fanbase don't we. I'm not the EFL's biggest fan, but it's terrible we are even in this position in the first place. It could easily have been avoidable if the football club was ran sustainably and properly. What club in the EFL is run "sustainably". I'll wait, because they are none. The system is rigged. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archieswfc Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 On 04/12/2019 at 19:26, HOOTIE AND THE poo TU said: I'm not sure How can a system that rewards failure (parachute payments) but doesn't allow rich chairmen to invest money, be ligit Go Dejphon. Exactly. And how can the same EFL that didn't protect Bury, Bolton or Blackpool claim that this is for the right reasons. Rules are rules, I know, but DC wants to invest with potentially no returns. The systems foooked. They weren't sticking their noses on when "Sir" Dave Richards was foookin the job up here. 1 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