Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Gary the Enfield
- Legend
- Posts: 8602
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 2:08 pm
- Location: Enfield
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
LeverEnd wrote:Maybe they'll convene a committee to discuss the committee's findings amid much shuffling of paper.Gary the Enfield wrote:Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Iles: "FL meeting this afternoon to decide whether SS bid given the go ahead. Very possible that there won't be a definitive answer, though."
Sounds........unproductive.
Elected or Supporter's Trust cobbled together committee?
-
- Reliable
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:51 am
- Location: Mordor
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Whenever I hear FA or Football league meeting, I get the impression that its about 10 blokes in a room all going :-Gary the Enfield wrote:LeverEnd wrote:Maybe they'll convene a committee to discuss the committee's findings amid much shuffling of paper.Gary the Enfield wrote:Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Iles: "FL meeting this afternoon to decide whether SS bid given the go ahead. Very possible that there won't be a definitive answer, though."
Sounds........unproductive.
Elected or Supporter's Trust cobbled together committee?
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
That's because that's what happens.wigan white wrote:Whenever I hear FA or Football league meeting, I get the impression that its about 10 blokes in a room all going :-Gary the Enfield wrote:LeverEnd wrote:Maybe they'll convene a committee to discuss the committee's findings amid much shuffling of paper.Gary the Enfield wrote:Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Iles: "FL meeting this afternoon to decide whether SS bid given the go ahead. Very possible that there won't be a definitive answer, though."
Sounds........unproductive.
Elected or Supporter's Trust cobbled together committee?
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Has anybody heard anything that this takeover is in danger of falling through?
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
twilight wrote:Has anybody heard anything that this takeover is in danger of falling through?
Only rumours on Facebook. Apparently rumours flying round the platinum suite today. Wait and see I suppose.
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Possibly people reading the below snippet from the Sun and getting worried?twilight wrote:Has anybody heard anything that this takeover is in danger of falling through?
https://twitter.com/SuperWhiteSmurf/sta ... 2316891136" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Better call the Gypo back then !!
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Nothing would surprise me this season.
Maybe it will turn out Sportshield is the problem not ED.
Maybe it will turn out Sportshield is the problem not ED.
...
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
We might as well make stuff up, it's not like we get told much!twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
...
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36387
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32701
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
So that bit you were bellyaching about as an enforced "ED delay" at the time?BWFC_Insane wrote:No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
No they don't. Where the feckity fex does it state new owners have to prove funding for the year after they take over?BWFC_Insane wrote:No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36387
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
They had a meeting and that is what the league has asked sports shield to do. The requirement to prove the ability to run the club as a going concern has been part of the league checks for a while.Lost Leopard Spot wrote:No they don't. Where the feckity fex does it state new owners have to prove funding for the year after they take over?BWFC_Insane wrote:No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Where was this information published? I'd like a copy.BWFC_Insane wrote:They had a meeting and that is what the league has asked sports shield to do. The requirement to prove the ability to run the club as a going concern has been part of the league checks for a while.Lost Leopard Spot wrote:No they don't. Where the feckity fex does it state new owners have to prove funding for the year after they take over?BWFC_Insane wrote:No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36387
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Please see section four of football league rules. But to help I've copied the relevant part below.Lost Leopard Spot wrote:Where was this information published? I'd like a copy.BWFC_Insane wrote:They had a meeting and that is what the league has asked sports shield to do. The requirement to prove the ability to run the club as a going concern has been part of the league checks for a while.Lost Leopard Spot wrote:No they don't. Where the feckity fex does it state new owners have to prove funding for the year after they take over?BWFC_Insane wrote:No. The reason there is a hold up is because sports shield have to prove to the league that they have sufficient funds to keep the club operational this year and next.twilight wrote:I think Sports Shield have just invested a bit of their own money (shares maybe) in and ED is and still will be the owner. I have just made this up but it sounded ok to me at the time
This is actually harder than it sounds. How do you prove investors intentions? And they can't stick money in a bank because income next season is unknown.
So they have to work on a projection of relegation to demonstrate they have a business plan in place to keep the club afloat.
Allied to this is the fact that Eddie changed the deal in the last 48 hours meaning they had to agree and then sign, and haven't yet I assume fully fleshed out their business plans based on the new numbers.
I know you don't believe anything reported in the Bolton news, but your own information wherever it has come from is very wrong I'm afraid.
16.16 By 31st March in each Season, each Championship Club shall submit to The League in respect of itself (or if the Championship Club considers it appropriate or The League so requests in respect of the Group of which it is a member) future financial information (‘Future Financial Information’) comprising projected profit and loss accounts, cash flow, balance sheets and relevant explanatory notes commencing from its accounting reference date or, if it has submitted interim accounts pursuant to Regulation 16.11, from the date to which those interim accounts were prepared and expiring on the next accounting reference date after the end of the following Season. The projected profit and loss accounts, cash flow and balance sheets shall be prepared at a maximum of six-monthly intervals.
16.21 If any Person proposes to acquire Control of a Club:
16.21.1 the Club shall submit to The League up to date Future Financial Information prepared to take into account the consequences of the change of Control on the Club’s future financial position as soon as reasonably practicable prior to the change of Control or, if such submission is not reasonably practicable prior to the change of Control, no later than 10 Normal Working Days thereafter; and
16.21.2 The League shall have the power to require the Person who proposes to acquire or has acquired Control to appear before it and to provide evidence of the source and sufficiency of any funds which that Person proposes to invest in or otherwise make available to the Club.
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
^ I don't know what the feck they are looking for - but that bit you quoted doesn't mention timescale - as in - a year after they take control... have you missed some off?
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36387
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
Sorry yes. I realised and just edited. The relevant part was a bit higher in the rules. See edited post.thebish wrote:^ I don't know what the feck they are looking for - but that bit you quoted doesn't mention timescale - as in - a year after they take control... have you missed some off?
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32701
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
I'm not having it. It's bollocks. This "evidence of money" is just ED dicking about again. No honest. Really...Changing the rules on a whim.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36387
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Sports Shield - New Owners (Probably)
What Davies changed last minute was not that requirement. But the amount of money he wanted out of the deal suddenly increased.Worthy4England wrote:I'm not having it. It's bollocks. This "evidence of money" is just ED dicking about again. No honest. Really...Changing the rules on a whim.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher and 79 guests