Administration and recovery

[nicholaldo]

Presuably, an appplication for an injunction can be made right up to the signing of the SPA. If that's the case, I don't know what material difference today's announcement makes. The position hasn't really changed from yesterday, has it?

An application for an injunction is merely an application. To get an injunction the judge requires sufficient reason to grant one. The statement made quite clearly removes any possible reason for the granting of such an injunction. So, no, the position has changed quite dramatically.

In what sense? We knew on Saturday afternoon that a Heads of Teems agreement had been signed, and Bassini made his (probably empty) threat of court action yesterday. I don't understand why today's statement alters things. If Bassini can prove he has a case that his bid was better, an injunction can still be granted irrespective of what the administrators claim.

Whilst I agree today's statement doesn't alter the overall situation, it does appear to emphasize the process and reasoning by which FVW was chosen, and so that could be taken as a riposte to Bassini's comments and threat of court action.

From Iles article yesterday I think it was important to note that Bassini has made two bids, one linked with West Ham co-owner David Sullivan made as part of the administrators process that eventually resulted in FVW being chosen, and therefore we must assume of a lesser value than the FVW bid, and this new one that appears to have been made in the last 24 hours that Bassini claims is more favourable than the FVW bid. The judge therefore would, presumably, have to determine whether the process itself was fair and proper as accepting Bassini's bid outside of the process, a process he clearly understood, would render the whole process null and void.

FWIW I think Bassini is full of sh*t and won't take the matter to court anyway.

We already knew the administrators thought FV's offer was better because we knew they'd rejected both of Bassini's bids. He (Bassini) also thought his first bid was better than FV's and that's the basis of his apparent intention to launch legal action. I agree with you that it will very likely all come to nothing but many people seem to be celebrating the release of this latest statement as if it means we've heard the last of Bassini. It doesn't.

[BWFC_Insane]

Bassini is claiming he has a better bid...the bid was made 24 hours ago. The bid he put in on 12 June is what matters. He would have to prove that his bid met all the criteria and was better than the winning bid. Or that some process of the administration was incorrect. Rocking up with a bid weeks later is not grounds for an injunction. But if he can prove the administrators have acted improperly then sure that would be an issue.

However, one needs to consider who is really behind this and why. It’s not really about Bassini. He is just a faithful buffoon. Consider who is in FV and who might be unhappy with them getting their hands on property and land on the site of the football club...

[Bruce Rioja]

I'm happy in that the 'announcement' tells Bassini just where to fxck off to, without actually stating it - so I'll do it for them: "Oi, Bassini. Knob off."

Clearly, you can tell Bassini to feck off until you're blue in the face and still the thick-skinned c*nt won't be having any of it.

I just feel unable to rest until I hear him actually say "Yep, that's me out of it" or until a High Court Judge tells him to go feck himself.

[bristol_Wanderer3]

^^ If he is taking legal action on his first bid then he has to prove that the administrators had a biased (against him) or unfair process and his bid was better than a bid that is under NDA and he should know nothing about, not to mention better than the other three bids that were also rejected, and that he should also know nothing about.

From Iles yesterday..

Having failed once to buy Wanderers from Ken Anderson, Bassini did launch a second effort in administration which he says was unfairly dismissed.

West Ham vice-chairman David Sullivan was among his backers but it is hotly disputed that he ever produced adequate proof of funds to complete.

Now, 19 days after bidders were asked to present their ‘full and final’ offers, the 49-year-old returned with another bid, which has been turned down by the administrators.

With what we have seen from Bassini thus far, I am not concerned.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

My position is clear.
The Administrators have made a statement. It came out of their mouths (typewriters/keyboards/whatever). It distinguishes what we know now from what we knew before, because what we knew before was just paraphrasing or journalistic tittle-tattle.
The statement makes it clear who won the bid and on what terms.
No judge in their right mind is going to grant an injunction before the Sale and Purchase Agreement is signed. We therefore now have a future, which wasn't 100% the case before the statement came out.

I also agree that Bassini is full of shit and won't proceed to court anyway. But if he does the judge will say "bleahhhh" anyway.
Relax. Chill.

[nicholaldo]

Aye, but that would always have been their position. We didn't need official confirmation of that.

I'm not worried that Bassini will get his hands on the club or even have an injunction granted, but this statement released today doesn't alter any positions at all.

Fingers crossed, by the end of the week it'll all be settled and we can look forward to functioning as a proper football club for the first time in a long time.

[nicholaldo]

Bassini is claiming he has a better bid...the bid was made 24 hours ago. The bid he put in on 12 June is what matters. He would have to prove that his bid met all the criteria and was better than the winning bid. Or that some process of the administration was incorrect. Rocking up with a bid weeks later is not grounds for an injunction. But if he can prove the administrators have acted improperly then sure that would be an issue.

However, one needs to consider who is really behind this and why. It’s not really about Bassini. He is just a faithful buffoon. Consider who is in FV and who might be unhappy with them getting their hands on property and land on the site of the football club...

I think I know who you're referring to. But Bassini also (no doubt wrongly) believes his first bid was better.

[Worthy4England]

My position is clear.
The Administrators have made a statement. It came out of their mouths (typewriters/keyboards/whatever). It distinguishes what we know now from what we knew before, because what we knew before was just paraphrasing or journalistic tittle-tattle.
The statement makes it clear who won the bid and on what terms.
No judge in their right mind is going to grant an injunction before the Sale and Purchase Agreement is signed. We therefore now have a future, which wasn't 100% the case before the statement came out.

I also agree that Bassini is full of shit and won't proceed to court anyway. But if he does the judge will say "bleahhhh" anyway.
Relax. Chill.

Sorta, a bit. When the Admins announced they had a preferred bidder, they said (not hacks), that the PB met every criteria and was

The highest bid for the Club
They had proof and source of significant funding
Ability to fund Club for minimum of two years
Ability to satisfy secured, football and unsecured creditors (doesn't actually say "in full")
EFL approval

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Apart from reporting optimistic timescales, fed by the administrators, I’m struggling to see what the much-maligned hacks got wrong.

[Prufrock]

I never really get the criticism of Iles.

Nixon on the other hand, is a complete bell-end.

[LeverEnd]

I never really get the criticism of Iles.

Nixon on the other hand, is a complete bell-end.

Nixon is a tabloid journalist who reports innuendo and sensationalises rumour to get people talking (and clicking). Lots he tweets doesn't happen but I tend to believe thats because initial interest isn't necessarily followed up, not that he invents stuff as some claim. He gets plenty right. However his egotistical 'told you don't and general Twitter demeanor does have more than a hint of bellendness about it, I'll grant you!

Iles does little wrong. His is a balancing act that not everyone will be aligned with, but people love to shoot a messenger.

I don't get why people feel the need to get wound up about either.

[Prufrock]

Aye not so much the content of Nixon (he clearly had an "in" with Coyle that lots don't seem to realise hasn't been the case in about 7 years, but that's not his fault) and agree I don't think he makes stuff up, it's just a lot of speculation on flimsy ground at first. He doesn't exactly take the BBC approach to confirming a story which is fine if you take it with a pinch of salt.

It's the whole nose tapping, watch this space, I've told you ten times already, restricted tweets, "reluctant" Nicko, oops that didn't come off on to the next one charade. He's a tosser.

[LeverEnd]

Aye not so much the content of Nixon (he clearly had an "in" with Coyle that lots don't seem to realise hasn't been the case in about 7 years, but that's not his fault).

It's the whole nose tapping, watch this space, I've told you ten times already, restricted tweets, "reluctant" Nicko, oops that didn't come off on to the next one charade. He's a tosser.

Fair! I pity some of these saddos who grovel to him as well. And the blocking routine - I haven't even got a Twitter account but can read everything he writes via a Google search!

[Hoboh]

Aye not so much the content of Nixon (he clearly had an "in" with Coyle that lots don't seem to realise hasn't been the case in about 7 years, but that's not his fault).

It's the whole nose tapping, watch this space, I've told you ten times already, restricted tweets, "reluctant" Nicko, oops that didn't come off on to the next one charade. He's a tosser.

Fair! I pity some of these saddos who grovel to him as well. And the blocking routine - I haven't even got a Twitter account but can read everything he writes via a Google search!

Nixon blocked me from his twitter account.

Just as an aside, does anyone actually own or really look like owning the bloody club yet or are we being played like an archers long running soap here?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

does anyone actually own or really look like owning the bloody club yet or are we being played like an archers long running soap here?

Technically, the admins own us, don't they? But really:
• Heads Of Terms have been agreed with a preferred bidder
• The preferred bidder has now been officially unveiled by the admins – Football Ventures (Whites) Ltd, or whatever they're now called. This group is believed to be four-strong: Sharron Brittan, Parminder Basran, Mike James and Jeff Thomas.
• We're waiting for the Sales & Purchase Agreement as we head towards completion.

In truth, that's no further along than Ken got with Bassini, except for the involvement of the admins. But it does seem to be much more thorough (and frankly legit) this time.

[BWFC_Insane]

Al Nixon is a good guy who has had a soft spot for the club for a long time. Was watching us at Burnden in the early 90's. He is big mates with John McGinlay and Coyle and many players from that era. Of course he was still a journalist then and as Blackburn rose under JW he ended up covering them a lot for a period - so much so he became a regular on their version of the wanderer for a while. He's a decent bloke who probably misrepresents himself on twitter but its what these journalists are asked to do. Put stuff out there - drum up intrigue.

I don't know Iles but I suspect he's also a decent bloke doing a shitty job for little pay and continually expected to do investigative journalism with no budget and a salary few of us on here would get out of bed for.

Both Nixon and Iles are pretty good when reporting on usual football stuff like transfers and managerial stuff, but way out of their depth when it comes to discussing business and administration and club sales. They rely on people to tell them stuff but often cannot understand when they are being setup or played. Nixon is (I suspect unwittingly) playing a game for someone here, having obviously been fed the line "hey we want to pay all the little guys in full". It is unfortunate he has fallen for it, but there we are. I would hope his subsequent retreat from that argument is because he's realised what was going on but we'll see.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Apart from reporting optimistic timescales, fed by the administrators, I’m struggling to see what the much-maligned hacks got wrong.

For one I don't think Bassini is going to the High Court. However, I wasn't saying they got anything wrong. What I was saying was that when the administrators said something I tend to believe them more.
That's all, it's not a vendetta against the fourth estate

[Prufrock]

"Al Nixon". Lord above.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

"Al Nixon". Lord above.

[BWFC_Insane]

Bassini says "no injunction" but he will take action against the administrators and Ken Anderson.

https://twitter.com/JewishTelegraph/sta ... 6575496198

Now I wonder if the dots will be joined together as to where this story came from and why.....its not really anything to do with Bassini.....