:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waxy
If the yams get to transfer their SPFL share, the loyalist riots of the last two nights would look like a sevco kids christmas party.
Printable View
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waxy
If the yams get to transfer their SPFL share, the loyalist riots of the last two nights would look like a sevco kids christmas party.
That makes absolutely no sense. If its a CVA, it's a CVA. If its a newco, it's liquidation. It can't possibly be bothQuote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
You may as well be speaking Lithuanian for all the sense this makes to me. You say "if a CVA is accepted on a newco" - I don't think this can happen. A CVA means that the oldco continues - it is an agreement by the creditors to voluntarily waive part of their debt in order to allow the oldco to continue in business. It's a CVA OR newco thing. At least, that's how I understand it.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
Was it the case that ukio were asked to confirm by letterQuote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
they would continue to fund hearts in order for hearts to be allowed to start the season a while back?
A guarantor if you like.
How does that requirement sit now with the funding up until Christmas?
Or was that a myth?
Is Hearts payday still the 16th (this Tuesday) will be interesting to see if they receive full pay.
Although they did get an advance & full pay is still half pay in Yam world, it's all terribly confusing. :greengrin
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
You transfer all the assets and creditors to the Newco to unlock the Lithuanian legal tangle. The Newco remains in administration and CVA is agreed which allows the Newco to exit administration. The newco is simply a technical device to unlock the Lithuanian impasse and could be viewed as such by the SPFL member clubs.
There's no reason for a new company to be in administration. The business and assets would simply be sold by the old company to the new company. The old company would then be liquidated with any proceeds going to the creditors.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
Yes, it is possible that the SPFL board (it's their decision now, not the clubs) may view the Hearts situation differently, but the noise you would get from Rangers fans would be deafening. If BDO were confident that the authorities would handle it differently they wouldn't waste their time with CVA proposals.
Simply a technical device to get out of paying 25 million pound worth of debt.the debt they used to win prize money from every other club in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
On a related point have the SPL set a date for sanctions re non payment of June wages (while yams were pre admin cough cough)?Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNoBut
If not any public statement from them on why and if they are waiting for admin / CVA thing to come to conclusion?
I do fear a brushing under the carpet coming especially as IF yams get out if admin they may not want to pinish them with further transfer embargo as this would make relegation a certainty if they did? eg SPFL would want competitive relegation battle?
Think they are up the end of this week (thursday or friday)Quote:
Originally Posted by Col2
I think it's the SFA they face on the 18th for going into administration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waxy
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/h...dministration/
GGTTH
They simply can't be 'gone easy on' as both Rangers and Dunfermline would have grounds to take the SFA / SPFL to court over it. Not to mention all the blow back from other clubs and the fans. The tenuous argument that the league 'needed' Rangers matters even less for Hearts and simply won't wash. The hilarity that Hearts are trotting this crap out a year after they wanted Rangers binned is hilarious.
Also don't forget that 11th place will be a playoff spot, so even if Hearts are down and out for the count, there will still be a battle to avoid 11th.
Plus, the SPFL Board is made up of clubs, not some separate group of people, now that said board is not just top league clubs I see even less sympathy for the Yams plight.
In previous years UBIG (rather than Ukio) have been asked to provide letters confirming they would continue to fund HoMFC for the auditors, but I'm not aware that the football authorities wanted them. UBIG didn't provide the letters of support for the most recent set of accounts, but the auditors saw fit to give an unqualified report subject to the success of a membership scheme and player sales. Subsequent events indicate that the auditors were wrong to give that report.Quote:
Originally Posted by SloopJB
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Especially if BDO can produce a letter from the Ukio. Admin. to the effect that had it been possible to conduct a vote on a CVA the Lith. Admin. would have supported it and it would have been agreed.
If it looks like coming to that, we better have counter arguments ready!
Sevco fans will provide all counter arguments necessary and mindless threatening violence to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone
Every day will indeed be the 12th of July.
My knitting is ripped.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
So, you transfer all assets and liabilities to NewCo. That would create an insolvent company from day 1, which is probably illegal. Unless, of course, you find someone willing to fund it to the tune of £30m.
Who would be the shareholders in the NewCo?
And the unravelling of the shareholding in the OldCo would have no relevance to the NewCo whatsoever.
It's times like this that one should revert to the basics of what an administration actually is. BDO could not do as you suggest and fulfil their statutory purposes.
These are set out at Paragraph 3 to schedule B1 of The Insolvency Act 1986. Those provisions came into force and apply to all Administrations after 15th September 2003.
The three Administration statutory purposes (or required outcomes) are:
- Rescuing the company as a going concern. (Note: this purpose is to rescue the company as opposed to rescuing the business undertaken by the company.)
- Or, achieving a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company were wound up (without first being in administration).
- Or, realising property to make a distribution to one or or more secured or preferential creditors.
Perhaps 50 years down the line, when there is no more yams. Someone on this site will have the username "Cropleywasgodwasgod"?
this is not my suggestion but BDO's to over come the log jam in Lithuania. If Ukio and the other creditors agree to it it will happen and if there is an upfront offer comparable with liquidation (£4m -£5m). Remember there is no rule that a club drops out of the SPFL if it becomes a newco. It is up to the clubs to decide on that and they will likely see the newco as a technical move to untangle the Lithuanian knot and vote to keep HMFC in the SPFL. It will be effectively viewed as a CVA. This is my last comment on the matter. See my previous posts for further explanations. We will all just have to wait and see what unfolds which won't in any senario be very good for the Yams.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Where did BDO say this?Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
And I don't see, in your previous posts, any answers to my (reasonable) questions about the scenario you're suggesting.
I'm not God. I'm just a very naughty boy. :cbQuote:
Originally Posted by Waxy
It is not the Clubs who vote on where a NewCo Club begins its life in the football leagues. That decision will be made by the SPFL management committee.Quote:
Originally Posted by desantos0773
But they have to reflect the views of the clubs and the precedents that have been set including Rangers and Livingston.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
The chairpersons of the club then. The point is it is discretionary.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18703183
Sent from my iPhone
Am I right in thinking that if they went down the newco route then they would have to change their badge from 1874 to 2013!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperTortolano
No, they would buy the badge for a couple of quid.
As it was for Rangers : two possibilities - to recognise that the share has transferred from HMFC to sevilleco
To allow the sevilleco to enter the lowest ring of the SPFL
So no voting out of sevilleco from the SPL as per sevco only allowing direct entry into the SPFL of a company with no financial history ....
Having been stepped over to let sevco enter last time , if you were the chairman of Forres Mechanics or Spartans, would you let a homeless sevilleco with no season ticket holders shut off your chances so readily this time ?
If that was the case they would have dodged the bullet twice! How do you think their big brother Sevco would feel about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Waxy
If the Yams pull off the great escape by agreeing a CVA and remaining in the SPL -albeit with a 15pt pen- then IMHO this becomes a potential business model for other clubs. In effect they would have had funding of c £50m over an 8yr period for 10% of the cost, retaining their place in top flight football, retaining their main assets (ground & brand) and retaining the trophies they won during this period. Yes, they're going through a lot if upheaval and Vlads tenure was rocky to say the least, but effectively someone will end up owning a debt free club for less than Celtic paid for Scott Brown.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
There is no motivation or reason for the authorities to let them off with it.
Keeping a Hearts newco in the top league, regardless of technicalities causes only trouble.
Rangers will sue. The moronic element in their support will go to war.
The same views other clubs fans held about Rangers last year will return. If the clubs were happy to deny sevco entry, a club they made genuine money from why on earth would they feel the need to bend the knee for what would still be a crippled Hearts?
It's a nonsensical non-starter. Newco should be in Division 3, if not the Lowland League. Assuming such a team would be ready in time, which I doubt.
And there are other clubs with debts they would love to dump. Could set a very awkward precedent for the newly formed SPFL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
There is no reason the authorities will let them off with it, rather than incompetence and procrastination. I think that's what Hearts are relying on. Their sole hope seems to be that they struggle into the season before liquidation, them cause as much chaos as possible, making the league's problem rather than their own.
It's the 'Scottish football is ****ed, we need to sort it out' approach. I think that Scottish football is likely to say 'no, you're ****ed, sort yourself out.'