Ken Anderson - Old Owner (Definitely. For Ever ..... )

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

So Sunday's on (cos it's away) but we'll have to see if the coach driver turns up

Then convince the SAG to let us play the Brentford game

Could the Brentford game be played at a neutral ground?

As hosts we'd still be responsible for stewarding etc

[Worthy4England]

Nixon seems to be in overdrive along the lines of not Bassini, quick admin, mystery buyer consortium (which seems to be growing in number by the tweet)....

[TANGODANCER]

Nixon seems to be in overdrive along the lines of not Bassini, quick admin, mystery buyer consortium (which seems to be growing in number by the tweet)....

No doubt K.A will be rubbing his hands delightedly whichever way.

[TonyDomingos]

Nixon seems to be in overdrive along the lines of not Bassini, quick admin, mystery buyer consortium (which seems to be growing in number by the tweet)....

No doubt K.A will be rubbing his hands delightedly whichever way.

He'll be rubbing something and it ain't a magic lamp.

[Athertonian]

If the Players Union have paid the players I doubt the game V Brentford will be allowed spectators. The club would be responsible for Policing and persuading personnel to turn up for duty. Can't see this happening.

Maybe the game will be played behind closed door or as mentioned, a neutral ground willing to undertake such a controversial fixture.

[Bruce Rioja]

Has anyone been paid for April yet?

[TonyDomingos]

Has anyone been paid for April yet?

It doesn't appear so. As I understand it, the PFA has loaned individual players money, but no one on either the playing or non-playing staff has received their salary. For the players, this is the second month without wages. Anderson says he paid the non-playing staff wages for March to enable the Ipswich and Boro games to go ahead.

Iles has just tweeted that Taylor (Andrew) has confirmed the first team will turn out on Sunday. However, the Brentford game is still in doubt - both the players and other staff have yet to commit to enabling the fixture to go ahead. And who can blame them?

[piesrus]

I imagine if the medical staff haven't been paid and refuse to turn out no game can be played. Interestingly, Brentford are thinking of putting out their youth team, if we do the same, as an act of solidariry. Good on 'em.

[TonyDomingos]

I imagine if the medical staff haven't been paid and refuse to turn out no game can be played. Interestingly, Brentford are thinking of putting out their youth team, if we do the same, as an act of solidariry. Good on 'em.

Are Brentford allowed to put out the yoof? I have a feeling teams are required to field their strongest XI.

[piesrus]

You may be right, Tony. Their manager has been vocal in his support for us. I respect that.
Shaun Harvey has been a disgrace throughout this process. The EFL have kicked him out of his job and any disciplinary actions against us need to be mindful of his behaviours.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I imagine if the medical staff haven't been paid and refuse to turn out no game can be played. Interestingly, Brentford are thinking of putting out their youth team, if we do the same, as an act of solidariry. Good on 'em.

Are Brentford allowed to put out the yoof? I have a feeling teams are required to field their strongest XI.

You may be right, Tony. Their manager has been vocal in his support for us. I respect that.

There are, I believe, rules about how drastically you can change an XI from game to game - they came to light when EFL teams were inadvertently "banned" from playing their own youth products against Big Team Academies in the former Sherpa Van Trophy.

As frequently happens with the EFL, those rules are well-intentioned: they protect us fans' consumer rights and also the integrity of the competition. (Imagine, if already-safe Hull picked a kids' XI against Bristol City this weekend, how that would look to Middlesbrough and Derby who are chasing the same final play-off place as the Bristolians.) Well-intentioned but with unintended consequences.

In this case, I think Brentford would be OK. Partly because it wouldn't affect a thing: we're definitely finishing 23rd (assuming we finish the season at all). Brentford are in the mid-table morass but there's no "placement money" in the Champo, and anyway it'd be Brentford's choice, it wouldn't questionably benefit anyone else. Plus it's very unusual circumstances, and a kind offer. If I were Brentford's Simon Marland I'd be seeking EFL permission beforehand to avoid any possible splashback, but this is far from the biggest issue on the EFL agenda this week...

[piesrus]

Quite so; there are hospitality choices to be made for the play-off finals. Vol-au vents or pie and peas.

[bristol_Wanderer3]

Seems Bassini has been on talksport again today lining up reasons (those he wants to give in public) why he might not complete this takeover, one of which is an additional £14m debt he hadn't accounted for.

So if/when we go into admin, KA is voluntarily putting us into admin, which means he appoints the administrator. It will be interesting to see who the administrator is, and what, if any, previous links to the Andersons he has. One can perhaps see why KA might want admin over the option of a solvent sale, which a couple of days ago Nixon was suggesting was the preferred option of the mystery bidder.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I can imagine an extra £14m is difficult to swallow when you plainly can't find the original £20m.

Never thought I'd say this but I'm beginning to think admin might not be so bad. It just needs sorting. Sounds like a Basranless version of Football Ventures might be ready to pick it up quickly - pay off the Moonshift thing and end the Eddie era, pay Ken off and end the Eddie era, Warburton and Mike James still on board (perhaps literally) but maybe we can then look towards a less harum-scarum future.

It would make promotion much less likely next season but so would this clusterf*ck. Looks like nobody is both willing and able to buy us without admin shaving off more in costs (assuming that's the fiscal reason: clear some non-football debts, to innocents like suppliers and medics and probably the council) than admin itself adds on, which somewhat depends on how quickly a solvent buyer is found and ponies up.

One question may be what the Supporters' Trust does - whether they stick their oar in, again perhaps well-meaningly, but probably ultimately pointlessly and merely stopping us getting the f*ck on with things like appointing a manager, finding players before the best ones are called for, etc.

What a draining season this has been.

[BWFC_Insane]

Seems Bassini has been on talksport again today lining up reasons (those he wants to give in public) why he might not complete this takeover, one of which is an additional £14m debt he hadn't accounted for.

So if/when we go into admin, KA is voluntarily putting us into admin, which means he appoints the administrator. It will be interesting to see who the administrator is, and what, if any, previous links to the Andersons he has. One can perhaps see why KA might want admin over the option of a solvent sale, which a couple of days ago Nixon was suggesting was the preferred option of the mystery bidder.

That isn't how it works. The administrator has to work on behalf of all creditors and it doesn't matter who is appointed they have a "public duty". Nixon has been saying the reason it will go to admin is down to the buyers saving money. Bassini also alleges that its possible that Anderson has previously triggered a disciplinary incident that could lead to a 12 point penalty by trying to put the club into admin. This might be why Nixon's buyers went from "wanting a solvent deal" to "there is a reason why they'll wait for admin".

[BWFC_Insane]

I can imagine an extra £14m is difficult to swallow when you plainly can't find the original £20m.

Never thought I'd say this but I'm beginning to think admin might not be so bad. It just needs sorting. Sounds like a Basranless version of Football Ventures might be ready to pick it up quickly - pay off the Moonshift thing and end the Eddie era, pay Ken off and end the Eddie era, Warburton and Mike James still on board (perhaps literally) but maybe we can then look towards a less harum-scarum future.

It would make promotion much less likely next season but so would this clusterf*ck. Looks like nobody is both willing and able to buy us without admin shaving off more in costs (assuming that's the fiscal reason: clear some non-football debts, to innocents like suppliers and medics and probably the council) than admin itself adds on, which somewhat depends on how quickly a solvent buyer is found and ponies up.

One question may be what the Supporters' Trust does - whether they stick their oar in, again perhaps well-meaningly, but probably ultimately pointlessly and merely stopping us getting the f*ck on with things like appointing a manager, finding players before the best ones are called for, etc.

What a draining season this has been.

Seems this way. Of course the risk is that there is lots of "talk" of people wanting to buy from admin but there has been lots of talk of people buying out of admin. Talk is cheap. The worry is if we go into admin and the talk fizzles into little action....things are very very bleak. Could you imagine being in admin in mid June without any contracted players on the books?

[bristol_Wanderer3]

Seems Bassini has been on talksport again today lining up reasons (those he wants to give in public) why he might not complete this takeover, one of which is an additional £14m debt he hadn't accounted for.

So if/when we go into admin, KA is voluntarily putting us into admin, which means he appoints the administrator. It will be interesting to see who the administrator is, and what, if any, previous links to the Andersons he has. One can perhaps see why KA might want admin over the option of a solvent sale, which a couple of days ago Nixon was suggesting was the preferred option of the mystery bidder.

That isn't how it works. The administrator has to work on behalf of all creditors and it doesn't matter who is appointed they have a "public duty". Nixon has been saying the reason it will go to admin is down to the buyers saving money. Bassini also alleges that its possible that Anderson has previously triggered a disciplinary incident that could lead to a 12 point penalty by trying to put the club into admin. This might be why Nixon's buyers went from "wanting a solvent deal" to "there is a reason why they'll wait for admin".

I understand how it is supposed to work. At the end of the day, this is a process conducted by humans, and Ken is a secured creditor and so in theory would have to be a party to any agreement. And if Ken appoints one of his old Vantis PLC friends, then, sure, "public duty"

Is there an EFL rule that refers to a "disciplinary incident"? I thought the 12 point penalty kicked in when an "Insolvency Event", as defined by the Insolvency Act 1986 occurs i.e. when the administrator is officially appointed?

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/ef ... he-league/

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I understand how it is supposed to work. At the end of the day, this is a process conducted by humans, and Ken is a secured creditor and so in theory would have to be a party to any agreement. And if Ken appoints one of his old Vantis PLC friends, then, sure, "public duty"

Iles this morning: “It has been strongly suggested that administration could be on the cards, with David Rubin and Partners poised to move in should the Bassini bid be completely ruled out.”

[bristol_Wanderer3]

I understand how it is supposed to work. At the end of the day, this is a process conducted by humans, and Ken is a secured creditor and so in theory would have to be a party to any agreement. And if Ken appoints one of his old Vantis PLC friends, then, sure, "public duty"

Iles this morning: “It has been strongly suggested that administration could be on the cards, with David Rubin and Partners poised to move in should the Bassini bid be completely ruled out.”

Thanks. At first google, they seem legit, involved as receivers at Blackpool.

Bassini audio is here: https://twitter.com/talkSPORT/status/11 ... 7626644480

And written version from Iles: https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/17 ... n-bassini/

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I understand how it is supposed to work. At the end of the day, this is a process conducted by humans, and Ken is a secured creditor and so in theory would have to be a party to any agreement. And if Ken appoints one of his old Vantis PLC friends, then, sure, "public duty"

Iles this morning: “It has been strongly suggested that administration could be on the cards, with David Rubin and Partners poised to move in should the Bassini bid be completely ruled out.”

Thanks. At first google, they seem legit, involved as receivers at Blackpool.

Bassini audio is here: https://twitter.com/talkSPORT/status/11 ... 7626644480

And written version from Iles: https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/17 ... n-bassini/

Ta. Aye, I've posted those quotes on the other thread.