Snowflake Royal but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.
Did I, I don't remember saying that......
by Wycombe Royal » 29 Feb 2024 14:19
Snowflake Royal but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.
by Wycombe Royal » 29 Feb 2024 14:21
Greatwesternline Wycombe is wrong
by Stranded » 29 Feb 2024 14:28
The Royal ForesterOLLIE KEARNSStranded
Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.
We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.
To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.
I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.
by Snowflake Royal » 29 Feb 2024 14:50
Wycombe RoyalSnowflake Royal but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.
Did I, I don't remember saying that......
by tmesis » 29 Feb 2024 16:47
The Royal ForesterOLLIE KEARNSStranded
Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.
We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.
To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.
I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.
by WestYorksRoyal » 29 Feb 2024 16:50
by Pepe the Horseman » 29 Feb 2024 16:51
Snowflake RoyalWycombe RoyalSnowflake Royal but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.
Did I, I don't remember saying that......
either it was someone else (likely) or I misunderstood (less likely)
by WestYorksRoyal » 29 Feb 2024 18:26
by Snowflake Royal » 29 Feb 2024 18:32
Pepe the HorsemanSnowflake RoyalWycombe Royal Did I, I don't remember saying that......
either it was someone else (likely) or I misunderstood (less likely)
Lol
by karbota » 29 Feb 2024 18:45
WestYorksRoyal Anybody else feel like everyone is being rescued except us? Since this started out, Southend, Scunthorpe, WBA and now Rochdale have seen their hellscape end. Yet our cnut refuses to fcuk off.
by Hendo » 29 Feb 2024 19:15
WestYorksRoyal Anybody else feel like everyone is being rescued except us? Since this started out, Southend, Scunthorpe, WBA and now Rochdale have seen their hellscape end. Yet our cnut refuses to fcuk off.
by Ascotexgunner » 29 Feb 2024 19:47
WestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
by Ascotexgunner » 29 Feb 2024 19:47
WestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
by Ascotexgunner » 29 Feb 2024 19:47
WestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
by Hendo » 29 Feb 2024 19:50
by tmesis » 29 Feb 2024 20:25
AscotexgunnerWestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
Bolton's overheads are way lower than ours. I don't see how we can afford to exist with our infrastructure in League 2. I doubt those three transfers would be keeping us going for more than a few months.
by Sutekh » 01 Mar 2024 09:02
tmesisThe Royal ForesterOLLIE KEARNS
To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.
I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.
I think the league would want to avoid a situation where we are in July/August without a squad of players, and no obvious ability to finance the season.
I also think they'd rather avoid having 23 teams in a division for a season, and the other clubs would rather have 23 games bringing in income rather than 22.
Kicking us out early would also give any club reprieved from relegation a chance to prepare properly.
by WestYorksRoyal » 01 Mar 2024 09:16
by Ten Bobsworth » 01 Mar 2024 09:51
AscotexgunnerWestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
Bolton's overheads are way lower than ours. I don't see how we can afford to exist with our infrastructure in League 2. I doubt those three transfers would be keeping us going for more than a few months.
by NathStPaul » 01 Mar 2024 09:58
Ten BobsworthAscotexgunnerWestYorksRoyal Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.
Bolton's overheads are way lower than ours. I don't see how we can afford to exist with our infrastructure in League 2. I doubt those three transfers would be keeping us going for more than a few months.
'Bolton's overheads are way lower than ours', are they?
Do you have the figures? I don't but I should know how much Bolton overspent last season by the end of this month. I can tell you that it didn't survive in League 2 on its income and is unlikely to be surviving in League 1 on its income either. Bolton are still reliant on regular injections of capital and are still in significant debt.
They call it 'sustainable' but its only sustainable as long as you can continue to find folk willing to make up the shortfall. Reading are in the same boat except that they don't have anyone willing to make up the shortfall any longer and folks like that are not always easy to find.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], MartinRdg and 206 guests