Why not just enter voluntary administration?

[BWFC_Insane]

I put this in another thread but would like some more expert people to theorise on this if possible.

We are apparently selling off physical and player assets in January. This is to pay outstanding bills including wages.

We are essentially at the mercy of these deals in order to raise money ahead of the high court appearance.

Considering that it is likely that some of our better players will leave in January and that they will not be replaced, relegation under these circumstances seems an almost certainty anyway

Now, if we went into voluntary Administration we would have to sell some assets and lose 12 points. But we would wipe off the debts in the process. Selling off assets to keep going short term does not to me have an end point.

So the only reason I can think of is if they really believe a takeover is close.

Beyond that, why wouldn't we just enter administration and get on with it? Any other theories?

[Enoch]

I think we'll have a much better idea of what's happening, end of January.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Firstly, you don't wipe off the debts. This is a common mistake when people talk about bankruptcy/insolvency. The debt still exists, but the 'court' distributes said debt on an 'equitable' basis with percentage returns to creditors. If there are assets to be disposed of, they Will be disposed: the business can't pick and choose.
All of which inevitably leads to more pain than your OP implies.

[BWFC_Insane]

Firstly, you don't wipe off the debts. This is a common mistake when people talk about bankruptcy/insolvency. The debt still exists, but the 'court' distributes said debt on an 'equitable' basis with percentage returns to creditors. If there are assets to be disposed of, they Will be disposed: the business can't pick and choose.
All of which inevitably leads to more pain than your OP implies.

I understand that. But administration is full of pain but at the very least if the business manages to come out of it it does so debt free.

Typically football clubs who have gone into administration have only paid fractions of the amounts owed. And then if new owners found have had that clean slate.

My question was if we are selling off assets anyway just to pay ongoing costs, that can't be an advantage over administration unless we can guarantee avoiding admin in a month or two or three time?

[bobo the clown]

"Why not just enter voluntary administration?"

Honestly ??

Really ???


I give up.

[BWFC_Insane]

"Why not just enter voluntary administration?"

Honestly ??

Really ???


I give up.

What is the answer to the question then? Either way we look like losing assets. Either way we look like going down.

If there is a genuine takeover on the cards that changes things. If not, administration is surely inevitable anyway?

[bobo the clown]

I must have posted 150 items on this point. Look them up.

[TANGODANCER]

Surely this could have gone under the debt thread ?

[Enoch]

Surely this could have gone under the debt thread ?

One assumes it still could?

[Bruce Rioja]

Surely this could have gone under the debt thread ?

One assumes it still could?

In which the OP will find the answers to his question being discussed to death if he could be arsed looking.

[jonnycooper]

Makes no logical sense! If (bwfc)/Eddie didn't own all our assets and just leased/rented them,then yes there maybe a call to it! But administration is very rarely a sensible option with a beneficial outcome..

[boltonboris]

If we go into Administration, I assume we wave goodbye to any takeover(??) as there's fvck all left for somebody to purchase

[BWFC_Insane]

If we go into Administration, I assume we wave goodbye to any takeover(??) as there's fvck all left for somebody to purchase

It is a balance of selling off some assets to pay off running costs and bills whilst thr underlying debt remains unchanged, vs selling off assets to pay off a smallish percentage of debts at the end of which you have a business that should still be at least operational but now debt free.

Plenty of clubs have come out of admin. I'd rather avoid it, but I'm yet to be convinced that a short term asset sell off to raise cash to pay immediate bills puts us in a stronger position.

Time will tell I guess.

[thebish]

If we go into Administration, I assume we wave goodbye to any takeover(??) as there's fvck all left for somebody to purchase

It is a balance of selling off some assets to pay off running costs and bills whilst thr underlying debt remains unchanged, vs selling off assets to pay off a smallish percentage of debts at the end of which you have a business that should still be at least operational but now debt free.

Plenty of clubs have come out of admin. I'd rather avoid it, but I'm yet to be convinced that a short term asset sell off to raise cash to pay immediate bills puts us in a stronger position.

Time will tell I guess.

no it won't - cos we will only do one thing - we won't go into administration and also not go into administration - so it will always be possible for someone to claim that doing the other thing would have been better.

[Lord Kangana]

"Why not just enter voluntary administration?"

Honestly ??

Really ???


I give up.

For a refreshing change, me and the clown are in 100% agreement.

Administration would f*ck us in more ways than the Kama Sutra.

[bobo the clown]

"Why not just enter voluntary administration?"

Honestly ??

Really ???


I give up.

For a refreshing change, me and the clown are in 100% agreement.

Administration would f*ck us in more ways than the Kama Sutra.

Bezzies for a day !

[BWFC_Insane]

"Why not just enter voluntary administration?"

Honestly ??

Really ???


I give up.

For a refreshing change, me and the clown are in 100% agreement.

Administration would f*ck us in more ways than the Kama Sutra.

Like it did, Bournemouth for example?

I'm not saying it won't be painful. I'm asking if the alternative might actually be worse. We are at the point of selling assets off. One way we have more control but no end game. The other we have little control but would end up debt free and potentially more enticing to a takeover from that point.

If a takeover is a strong possibility then the path the club are taking is probably right. But if not we could well end up selling off our assets to pay bills before entering administration eventually with a rescued portfolio of assets to sell off for creditors.

[LeverEnd]

Would we not be more attractive to buyers post-administration in League 1 with a sensible wage bill but most of the infrastructure intact and the potential to rebuild? The alternative being to flush the first £20 million or so of your investment down the toilet, get relegated anyway and then be in League 1 with the same squad and still haemorraging shit loads of cash.
I really don't know, it's a genuine question.

[Whookam]

post-administration in League 1 with a sensible wage bill but most of the infrastructure intact

I'm pretty sure the first and last parts of that sentence are contradictory.

[LeverEnd]

post-administration in League 1 with a sensible wage bill but most of the infrastructure intact

I'm pretty sure the first and last parts of that sentence are contradictory.

Possibly, that's why I'm asing. Does admin not allow you to reduce debts and therefore sell off less? The other option also involves selling off assets doesn't it? It seems to me that no-one can/will buy us in our current state and there is nothing to suggest that will change anytime soon.