Jump to content

THE EFL HEARING THREAD


Recommended Posts

Guest Grandad
10 hours ago, kirksandallowl said:


But he would be chased by the administrator for the £60m he owes for the ground (less any payments he may or may not have made in this regard)

That depends

 

He could potentially demonstrate that the funds he's put into the club are payments towards the purchase of the ground

 

Who knows how this has been structured

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, cs462772 said:

Seem to remember we never got paid for Lee Chapman back in the day

That was one of the dodgiest transfers of all time. Made the George Hirst transfer services fair

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
30 minutes ago, Grandad said:

That depends

 

He could potentially demonstrate that the funds he's put into the club are payments towards the purchase of the ground

 

Who knows how this has been structured

 

I am just going from personal experience here of a client where we were asked to justify a similar offset transaction that had happened in fact several years before the administration event.

 

In the event of administration there will be a look back to see where any director that is a creditor to the company has appeared to favour himself over others. 

 

So even though DC is owed more than any one else by the company if he was to pay himself back say 80% and this leaves 0% for all the other creditors it would be seriiously questioned.

 

Got to be remembered the debt for the stadium sale is Sheffield 5 Limited, not DC personally. You can't say just because he owns that company it does not count.

 

I am not an insolvency expert but this is just based on real life examples of cases where similar scenarios existed albeit at 1% of the figures here and the pre discussions with an insolvency expert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Triple O said:

Sorry if this has already been posted from Alex Miller on Twitter

 

 

3h

Spoke to the EFL earlier: still no update. Told any decision could in theory arrive over the weekend - it's not a case that they shut up shop until Monday - but they haven't yet been given an indication of time frame. Still all in the hands of the independent commission. #SWFC

Still don’t believe that. 5 weeks to decide? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
1 hour ago, mkowl said:

 

I am just going from personal experience here of a client where we were asked to justify a similar offset transaction that had happened in fact several years before the administration event.

 

In the event of administration there will be a look back to see where any director that is a creditor to the company has appeared to favour himself over others. 

 

So even though DC is owed more than any one else by the company if he was to pay himself back say 80% and this leaves 0% for all the other creditors it would be seriiously questioned.

 

Got to be remembered the debt for the stadium sale is Sheffield 5 Limited, not DC personally. You can't say just because he owns that company it does not count.

 

I am not an insolvency expert but this is just based on real life examples of cases where similar scenarios existed albeit at 1% of the figures here and the pre discussions with an insolvency expert

I'm talking about the personal cash injections he's making on a regular basis

 

If they can be demonstrated as payments against the purchase it would make sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
6 minutes ago, Grandad said:

I'm talking about the personal cash injections he's making on a regular basis

 

If they can be demonstrated as payments against the purchase it would make sense

 

I am sure this is what he is doing in a more roundabout way. So personal money goes into Sheffield 5, that then repays the instalment on the stadium debt to SWFC.

 

Either way his personal shareholder loan in SWFC is not increasing.

 

What would be more tricky is novating the entire residual debt for the stadium against his personal shareholder loan and then putting the company into admin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
6 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

I am sure this is what he is doing in a more roundabout way. So personal money goes into Sheffield 5, that then repays the instalment on the stadium debt to SWFC.

 

Either way his personal shareholder loan in SWFC is not increasing.

 

What would be more tricky is novating the entire residual debt for the stadium against his personal shareholder loan and then putting the company into admin

I still don't think there's a snowballs chance in hell of that happening

 

But it is feasible, especially if he can do so while remaining owner of the stadium and restructuring the debt to mean he has to pay no more for Hillsborough

 

Indemnifies him a little

 

It's certainly what I'd be doing in his position

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, steelowl said:

regardless of whether we get punished for this ground manoeuvre

 

is there anyone thinks that it's ever a good idea ?

 

I view it as a form of “tax” evasion.  Normally I’d be very much against it.

 

However, given the “tax” has not been reviewed alongside rising costs since 2014 and that the Premier clubs coming back down are like the Starbucks and Amazons of this world then fuckem!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

I view it as a form of “tax” evasion.  Normally I’d be very much against it.

 

However, given the “tax” has not been reviewed alongside rising costs since 2014 and that the Premier clubs coming back down are like the Starbucks and Amazons of this world then fuckem!

yes you have a point  so it needs changing  before separating clubs from their grounds leads to nightmare scenarios like Coventry 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
36 minutes ago, Grandad said:

I still don't think there's a snowballs chance in hell of that happening

 

But it is feasible, especially if he can do so while remaining owner of the stadium and restructuring the debt to mean he has to pay no more for Hillsborough

 

Indemnifies him a little

 

It's certainly what I'd be doing in his position

 

The point is if you did that and subsequently the Club went in to admin it would be a transaction that would be heavily reviewed. Admin is often seemed to be an easy option but its not always the case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Grandad
3 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

The point is if you did that and subsequently the Club went in to admin it would be a transaction that would be heavily reviewed. Admin is often seemed to be an easy option but its not always the case

Completely agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
14 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

I view it as a form of “tax” evasion.  Normally I’d be very much against it.

 

However, given the “tax” has not been reviewed alongside rising costs since 2014 and that the Premier clubs coming back down are like the Starbucks and Amazons of this world then fuckem!

 

I am not sure where the tax evasion is - groups of companies often re-organise to keep property assets ring-fenced in one entity. 

 

And given most football clubs run at massive losses then there isn't much avoiding of corporate taxes going on 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

I am not sure where the tax evasion is - groups of companies often re-organise to keep property assets ring-fenced in one entity. 

 

And given most football clubs run at massive losses then there isn't much avoiding of corporate taxes going on 

 

I’m relating FFP rules to tax rules if that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
1 hour ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

I’m relating FFP rules to tax rules if that makes sense.

 

Yes I get where you are coming from, if there is room for interpretation then there will be interpretation 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...