Jump to content

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Grandad said:

 

Yeah soz.

 

I just don't see how we can value Hillsborough at £60m just 2 years after DC bought the club (including Hillsborough) for £35m, then backdate it in the accounts to a time before the company that bought it was formed, with no transfer at the Land Registry until 2 years after the sale - without it looking dodgy

 

Regardless of whether weve got an email from someone at the EFL saying "Yeah - go for it"

 

I'd say its AT LEAST what Birmingham got with some extra thrown in for good measure. Applied this season.

2 years? I thought it was in the accounts in 2018 and on the land Registry in 2019?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grandad said:

 

If you didnt want to guess you could have just read and moved on though?

Don't you ever speculate about anything? 

 

It might rain tomorrow? Wednesday might win tomorrow? 

No black balloons to blow up

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bladeshater said:

But true

 

History hasn't really been kind to all those sheep who slated the Black Balloon thing has it?

Supporting that chairman at that time now looks to have been foolish to say the least

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, striker said:

For those proposing a points deduction, what rule have we broken?

 

We've not been charged with breaching p&s, because we haven't (yet), therefore difficult to apply the penalty tariff widely referenced.

 

The misconduct charge covers issues not in the explicit rules and in our case relates to the timing and payment terms of the stadium transaction. 

 

EFL may not like it, and I agree its morally suspect  but, not an uncommon method of accounting for such transactions and perfectly lawful. The club had permission from EFL and the accounts signed off by auditors and the EFL (initially, when removing the enbargo).

 

If the EFL tried to bring this case in court, in the real world, it would get thrown out.

 

Misconduct covers a variety of sins, therefore the punishment similarly wide reaching. As the charges against individuals dropped, unlikely to prove any deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

The EFL have an awful lot to prove, in order to make any charge stick, against a club owner who won't roll over and be bullied. 

 


very good post. All makes sense but why is it taking so bloody long? EFL trying to save face? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said:


very good post. All makes sense but why is it taking so bloody long? EFL trying to save face? 

Who knows!

 

IMO the EFL are grossly incompetent, so nothing surprises me when they are involved.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, striker said:

For those proposing a points deduction, what rule have we broken?

 

We've not been charged with breaching p&s, because we haven't (yet), therefore difficult to apply the penalty tariff widely referenced.

 

The misconduct charge covers issues not in the explicit rules and in our case relates to the timing and payment terms of the stadium transaction. 

 

EFL may not like it, and I agree its morally suspect  but, not an uncommon method of accounting for such transactions and perfectly lawful. The club had permission from EFL and the accounts signed off by auditors and the EFL (initially, when removing the enbargo).

 

If the EFL tried to bring this case in court, in the real world, it would get thrown out.

 

Misconduct covers a variety of sins, therefore the punishment similarly wide reaching. As the charges against individuals dropped, unlikely to prove any deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

The EFL have an awful lot to prove, in order to make any charge stick, against a club owner who won't roll over and be bullied. 

 

Fingers crossed your right. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ever the pessimist said:

The Athletic saying there are concerns it won’t be sorted before next season is due to start.

It will go to appeal no matter what and itll drag over until next season I reckon anyway

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only think we're guilty of breaking the rules, but we have this smoking gun which is written permission from an EFL employee or representative to do what we did. The argument thus being, we only broke the rules because you said we could, so can you punish us proportionally for that? All conjecture of course but this must be what isn't easy to give a verdict and appropriate punishment on. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

History hasn't really been kind to all those sheep who slated the Black Balloon thing has it?

Supporting that chairman at that time now looks to have been foolish to say the least

Done a great job at Chezzy

  • Haha 5

"The best poster on Owlstalk by far" - Kaven Walker

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...