This thing at Garrison on Tuesday...

Bossman is taking the minutes!

 

I keep reading this, that the owners would willingly put us into admin in order to facilitate an exit, but someone will need to explain to me how that aligns with our supreme benefactors goal of making a profit on our club.

I just don't get it.

 

Bring some tins of tuna and a can of special brew.

 

They'd not be doing it to facilitate an exit. It's the inevitable option available to them when they don't want to adopt any of the alternatives.

They will only make a profit if they run the club in a profitable way or if someone is prepared to pay them an amount that provides them with one. Both appear unlikely at present. Having a goal of doing so won't suffice in isolation.

The other alternative, which is one I fear, is that they make their profit via means of arranging finance on punitive terms for the football club, either through themselves or one which they 'facilitate'. Ultimately, that will mean the same outcome for BFC, but they potentially would benefit from it.

 

If there's a legal dispute about the ownership of the club, can they even sell up? If the Crynes are owed £2.75m and the owners make a profit on the club, can the Crynes claim a percentage of that profit over and above the 20% they're entitled to?

 

Yes, in my head it feels like if they were to sell the club, it would be like selling a car you have HP on before you've settled the debt. I'm sure there would be a way of wrangling it, but all parties would have to agree to it and it would, like you say, be extremely messy.

 

I still find it hard to believe there are credible investors waiting in the wings. I see this simply and if a proper process is followed it wouldn't need any covert / revolutionary / protest group.

1. Ask if they want to sell and what would they accept.
2. make an offer
3. Negotiate
4. Agree on a deal or not
5. Agree how to proceed - EFL etc

Of course solicitors, NDAs. Advisors, due diligence, etc would all be part of the process but the key steps ain't really that complicated. Having been involved in several large and small M&A’s the main steps ain't complex. Of course in the detail there are complex topics but seems this group aren't at that stage. If they were we wouldn't know - maybe just like the discussions currently underway (speculative scenario for illustration purposes only ;-))

 

I don't see how the majority share option is feasible. The owners would have to willingly diminish their own majority control to achieve this, and there's no logic as to why they'd want to do so and retain any sort of interest in the club afterwards.

 

From a strictly contractual perspective there's nothing to prevent this. The dispute wouldn't impact their ability to dispose of their shares in the same way as it doesn't impact their ability to run (or should that be mis-run?) the club in the meantime.

In the event of a sale, the existing dispute over the previous payment terms remains in place and would continue in isolation.

Internally, it might be more difficult to overcome this if there was a way for the Cryne's to use their 20% shareholding in the investment company to block a sale, but that all boils down to the internal decision making processes within that company, which we know very little about.

 

There was no pseudo intellectual rubbish on that thread, just one (ish) guy spouting conspiracy theory nonsense and everyone else pointing and laughing.

It was about as far away from ‘pseudo intellectual’ as you’re likely to find.

Re your ‘the owners should leave, then someone else can take over’ though, you do understand that’s not how it works, and you just rushed that out.

And the simple answer to that is that the current owners have stated publicly they’re open to offers. Which is precisely them doing as you wish (but in an adult fashion without the drama).

Now it’s up to the prospective new owners to start behaving like adults and put an offer on the table, and if they do exist, and they’re serious, to make a statement distancing themselves from the appalling behaviour at the weekend.

All this ‘behaving like grownups’ is quite straightforward and simple really.

 

Thanks for that. Yours is the second post that says the Owners have stated publicly that they are open to offers. I've missed that so could you just send me the source/clip? I'm aware the CEO touched on the issue in his last Q& A but I don't recall a public statement from the owners. Many thanks.

 

I think it's the latter. Conway's PR, in relation to the Group, has been all about models, synergies etc. to the wider media. It would be a difficult climbdown to have administration as a marketable exit event. Much better to borrow, claim some nonsensical IRR return on their financial interest and then bail looking like it was all part of the plan.

 

They’re definitely going to want to recoup the money they paid upfront, + enough to pay the balance they owe- I’m guessing they’ll want to save face with their investors too so will want to return them at least some profit- so £10m upwards - when In fact it’s worth less than what they paid as they’ve less cash on the balance sheet.

 

I think the best chance is the Crynes + someone else, IF the council would be willing to give its share of the ground and land back to the Crynes (does anyone know if anything was actually paid for it, or was it just transferred) - then at least there is some value in the club after the transaction? I guess the price would be 20% less too.

 

1) Rules of buuming club
2) Repeat of rules of buuming club for the daft lads.
3) Buuming
4) AOB (Any Other Buuming).

 

You’ve forgot signing of NDA agreements………