TSI - The Promises, Policies & Progress Thread

[Nameless]

The $12m question is:- has he paid the final instalment and if not why not and if not why not: now what?

A reliable source has told me that the final instalment has not been paid yet (this was at 5pm last night)

Has your source revealed the now what ?..

The 'now what' is 'wait until it's due !

Realistically why would AZ pay the money before the due date ? Better the interest on 12 million in his bank account than SJMs....

[melonhead]

it just sounds like a great business deal


sell a club for millions. wait a bit, get it back for a quid, for bugger all reason.
whoever drew that contract up/signed it wants shooting

It wouldn't be for bugger all reason though would it? It is quite a common penalty clause, basically you lose your deposit/part payment if you don't make the final payment.

Would you expect the club to give him all his money back?

im simply saying, that from a non business persons perspective it seem utterly mental.
pay xxx million for half a football club
lose the XXX million if you dont buy the other half, and the bloke who pocketed your XXX million gets it all back for a pound
just doesnt sound very ...i dont know...businessy

[Nameless]

It's no different to putting a deposit on a house - fail to complete the deal and you lose your deposit so the vendor keeps the house and keeps your deposit.
If you've got staged payments there has to be some pretty significant penalty if you fail to pay up when you should do.

[melonhead]

im sorry but paying 25 million for half a football club is nothing like a house deposit imo
its not a deposit, he bought half the shares in the company. ie he owns them, and half the company. the idea someone could just say sorry mate, times us, thanks for the 25 million, and my football club back, heres a quid! is mental.
and i still struggle to see any business man signing up to such a clause
but what do i know

[Nameless]

:|
im sorry but paying 25 million for half a football club is nothing like a house deposit imo
and i still struggle to see any business man signing up to such a daft clause
but what do i know

It's only a matter of scale !

But I'd agree that if you had any slight concerns about being able to complete the deal you'd be crazy to go ahead. But then we've had footballer stupid enough to sign contracts that had clauses apparantly giving them new deals if they played a certain number of games which actually meant the complete opposite ! You'd hope AZ had better advisors than the likes of Salako.

[SPARTA]

:|
im sorry but paying 25 million for half a football club is nothing like a house deposit imo

Especially when £25m is for all of the club.

[Green]

It's no different to putting a deposit on a house - fail to complete the deal and you lose your deposit so the vendor keeps the house and keeps your deposit.

Shocking analogy.

The deposit is just the difference between the mortgage and the total value isn't it? Not sure the vendor has any right to it if the deal collapses. I think they can probably sue you for expenses if it falls through after exchange or something but the deposit isn't automatically theirs.

[multisync1830]

It's no different to putting a deposit on a house - fail to complete the deal and you lose your deposit so the vendor keeps the house and keeps your deposit.

Shocking analogy.

The deposit is just the difference between the mortgage and the total value isn't it? Not sure the vendor has any right to it if the deal collapses. I think they can probably sue you for expenses if it falls through after exchange or something but the deposit isn't automatically theirs.

You really shouldn't be calling something a 'shocking analogy' if you really don't know what you are talking about.

The deposit is a sign of intent to buy. Normally 10% of the property value. It has nothing to do with the mortgage.

Exchange of contracts

The final contract between you and the seller is prepared when:-
•the solicitor (or licensed conveyancer) and you are satisfied with the final outcome of all the enquiries
•any surveyor’s report has been received and any necessary action taken
•the formal mortgage offer has been received
•arrangements about the payment of the 10% deposit have been made
•the date of completion has been agreed.

You and the seller each have a copy of the final contract which you must sign. These signed contracts are then exchanged. At exchange of contracts both you and the seller are legally bound by the contract and the sale of the house has to go ahead. If you drop out, you are likely to lose your deposit.

of course the analogy doesn't work exactly as a deposit is not the same as a half share but the basic premise is the same. There was an intent to buy 100% and if the buyer fails to complete he could be deemed in breach of contract. The offer of half for a quid may be seen as bravado if it were there at the beginning or if introduced now a way of stalling for more time to find the remainder

[SPARTA]

You're all still speculating about this when Charlie Watts asked about this and was told the buy-out may edge into next month and that both parties were fine with it. Still, we love a moan, don't we.

[melonhead]

who said anything about the pound bollox in the first place?
is it someone i need to be trusting or listening to in any way?

The deposit is a sign of intent to buy. Normally 10% of the property value. It has nothing to do with the mortgage.

does have something to do with it tbf
& if i put a 30k deposit down on a house, but the deal falls through, they really aint keeping it

[Green]

It's no different to putting a deposit on a house - fail to complete the deal and you lose your deposit so the vendor keeps the house and keeps your deposit.

Shocking analogy.

The deposit is just the difference between the mortgage and the total value isn't it? Not sure the vendor has any right to it if the deal collapses. I think they can probably sue you for expenses if it falls through after exchange or something but the deposit isn't automatically theirs.

You really shouldn't be calling something a 'shocking analogy' if you really don't know what you are talking about.

The deposit is a sign of intent to buy. Normally 10% of the property value. It has nothing to do with the mortgage.

OK but confirm for me this - in an event of the deal falling through, the deposit is not automatically transferred to the vendor?

"In most cases," Moody says, "if the buyers followed the contract and stayed within their contingency rights, they'll get their deposit back without any fight. If the sellers try to put up a fight, they have to make sure there's a good valid reason for it. What you put in writing and how it's stated is always very important."

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/mortgages/home-sale-fails.aspx#ixzz2fvKE6DcZ

As for shocking analogy, I absolutely stand by that. You'd think the onus of understanding would fall on you as the one who brought it up.

[Royal Rother]

What a magnificently huge load of bollocks there is on this thread.

Priceless.

[multisync1830]

who said anything about the pound bollox in the first place?
is it someone i need to be trusting or listening to in any way?

it ill all become clear in the fullness of time and I will revisit the thread for when it does and man o man it will shock some people here.

The deposit is a sign of intent to buy. Normally 10% of the property value. It has nothing to do with the mortgage.

does have something to do with it tbf

what happens if you are a cash buyer. You still put a deposit down so it has nothing to do with a mortgage.

& if i put a 30k deposit down on a house, but the deal falls through, they really aint keeping it

Once contracts have been exchanged you can kiss your deposit goodbye.

http://www.home.co.uk/guides/buying/con ... ng_two.htm

[Nameless]

Agreed with Rotherham hat this is alias of speculative nonsense !

In terms of a deposit though , of course you lose your deposit if you fail to go through with a purchase for no good reason. It has to be your fault, but what do you think is the point of the deposit if you can just take it back ?
It's a perfectly reasonable analogy, although not a perfect one but the contract is probably not written in this way and there seems no evidence that Az is going to default.

[Uke]

If you pay a deposit, you signal intent to buy, you own nothing

If you've bought 51% of shares you own 51% of shares

Even in the ridiculous scenario that you may allow someone an option to buy for £1, you don't have to sell

Let's just focus on the facts, such as overpromising and that all Russians are pcunts

[Nameless]

It's not an 'option to buy' , it's a penalty clause....

Obviously in a situation where a buyer fails to complete the purchase there is going to be some kind of penalty involved.

But it's hypothetical and of no relevance to RFC so let's go back to slagging off Blackman becasue he 'looked at us a bit funny'.....

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Again, not an ideal analogy, but in some ways it's like the penalty clauses in contracts for construction, road repairs and some software contracts. If you don't complete the specified activity by the stated time then you are penalised financially - often very heavily. Otherwise there's often no way to incentivise the contractor to deliver on time, which may be something you need to happen.

That's assuming such a clause does exist, of course.....

[Green]

What a magnificently huge load of bollocks there is on this thread.

Priceless.

Yep. Time to close the whole board I think this'll never be topped.

[Uke]

Even in the ridiculous scenario that you may allow someone an option to buy for £1, you don't have to sell

Yours is the only post I've read in this thread (thank God). This is wrong. If you sell an option, it's fully enforceable.

OK,

If you pay a deposit, you signal intent to buy, you own nothing

If you've bought 51% of shares you own 51% of shares

Even in the ridiculous scenario that you may allow someone an opportunity to buy for £1 (as opposed to selling them options), you don't have to sell

Let's just focus on the facts, such as overpromising and that all Russians are pcunts

Last clause remains valid though

[Royal Lady]

Has he paid yet?