iangreaves
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,202
|
Post by iangreaves on Mar 9, 2023 12:23:37 GMT 1
Can someone explain Phil's role in negotiations if the Pure administrators seem to be the problem now? Am I right in thinking Dean has to pay Phil for shares but also for the debt PH placed on the club via administrators? It's just the shares. All 3 parties agreed a fee in May 2022. That deal expired without money changing hands. A renegotiated deal has been agreed between the 2 owners but the 3rd party as yet won't agree. The central question is if the deal was agreed in May 2022 why was it not completed. Did Dean change his mind and want a different deal that the Pure administrator will not agree to? |
|
|
|
Post by terriersyndrome on Mar 9, 2023 12:23:55 GMT 1
Rudderless town NDA
|
|
|
|
Post by space hardware on Mar 9, 2023 12:29:16 GMT 1
It's just the shares. All 3 parties agreed a fee in May 2022. That deal expired without money changing hands. A renegotiated deal has been agreed between the 2 owners but the 3rd party as yet won't agree. So it's the 3rd party we should be bashing, not Phil and Dean?..... I suppose it depends on the reason why the deal wasn't completed in May of last year. Greed, would be my guess. |
|
drewden
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,812
|
Post by drewden on Mar 9, 2023 12:42:43 GMT 1
May 29th would be my guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Mar 9, 2023 12:44:21 GMT 1
It's just the shares. All 3 parties agreed a fee in May 2022. That deal expired without money changing hands. A renegotiated deal has been agreed between the 2 owners but the 3rd party as yet won't agree. The central question is if the deal was agreed in May 2022 why was it not completed. Did Dean change his mind and want a different deal that the Pure administrator will not agree to? Did anyone expect Dean and Phil to sit down and agree on how the 75% should be passed back to Dean? I suspect the only way that would ever happen would be if it were set in stone legally, otherwise its highly likely either side would want more than the other was prepared to give. I had, naively it seems, expected there would be some sort of agreement already in place. |
|
|
|
Post by detox on Mar 9, 2023 12:57:31 GMT 1
As fans we can only watch and speculate as to what is happening, although I appreciate there are folk who know more than others. Let's consider what we know, or think we know. DH sells to PH, in a heavily NDA'd agreement, which basically sees him getting his club loans over a period of time. Most believe that this would have been funded by the Premier League parachute payments. It is entirely possible that PH's plan was to sell Pure at some point and then have the funds to support Town going forward. Under his tenure as chairman PH lent HTAFC monies from Pure. He lent money to offset the impact of Covid (my assumption here - might be wrong). Was that because he didn't have his own cash or just an advised business transaction? It probably doesn't matter now. Unfortunately Pure went bust as a result of legislation changing and the bulk of the cases they were managing became invalid, or of limited value. DH, as he still had a 25% share and a vested interest* stepped back into oversee the running of the club. * Vested interest - he was owed cash but I also believe he wouldn't have wanted to see Town in administration or being unable to function (everyone is entitled to an opinion here). The administrators of Pure are, quite rightly and as the people they represent would expect, are trying to secure the payment of the loan made to HTAFC. This will be used to pay off creditors. Those creditors have no interest in HTAFC and want their money back, not unreasonably. It appears that DH is trying to negotiate a deal around this loan as any new owner is unlikely to want this claim on their books. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable but I can't see how a deal could be struck on this loan as HTAFC are a "going concern" with assets that could, in theory, be used to pay that loan back. I suppose the negotiation is; "you can have this, but if we have to go into administration you will only get that". How that works legally I don't know but I wouldn't blame Pure's administrators for playing hard ball. I am not sure what I think about putting HTAFC into administration to avoid paying that money back. On the face of it it seems morally questionable, at best. That said I suppose this is the murky world of corporate business? So where does that leave us, those poor beggars who just want to watch their football team and hope it is run to give us the best chance of being successful? Well, and pretty much as it has been for the past 5 years or so, ignored observers who can do absolutely nothing to influence the mess that people have put us in. I can accept there is some bad luck and some "force majeur" here but when you consider that we generated the best part of £300m in revenue since May 17 to be threatened with administration again is pretty shameful in my opinion. It is additionally shameful that we have paid for a respected and senior manager to try and rescue us from relegation (our footballing challenges are well documented but are probably understandable in the face of the shambolic backdrop that is the running of the club) but might tell him; "sorry Neil we are going to get a 12 point deduction, are you ok with that"? I think what really depresses me is that there seems no easy solution to this mess. Apportioning blame is all very well but all we want is for someone to stop this utter fiasco and get back to being a football club again. We are heading to League One, I am not happy about this but I can accept it as it is where we deserve to be. What happens next is anyone's guess, but it at some point the rot must stop. The problem is I am not sure when or who will actually steady the ship and set us on a new course. The longer this continues the worse it will get. 16000 season tickets sold on the belief we had turned a corner. How many will be sold from the cul de sac we are now in? It's utterly shameful and hopeless. I'm probably behind the events here, but I thought the loans between Pure Sports and HTAFC were unaffected by Pure Group Ltd because Pure Sports was not part of Pure Group Ltd but a seperate entity ? HTAFC is part of Pure Sports, where the shares purchase came from (or part shares ..not sure if the full price was ever paid). using Pure Sports as a holding company for HTAFC is fair enough I think , and not out of the ordinary.
So why are the Adminstrators involved in what Pure Sports owe to Dean Hoyle or what money was spent to keep the club running ? Ok, the 75% shareholding is sat in there and the £2.5m (I think) that was the 50% payment...there's another £2.5m due to DH which was deferred but likely overdue now.
I maybe thought the angle here was if the club is for sale, those shares might be worth something, so rather than simply giving them back to DH, and the £2.5m paid out to DH being returned in exchange, PH is thinking maybe he could get more than £2.5m from a prospective purchaser of the club ?
I'm probably confusing myself here, too much is unknown and tbh it's not my speciality..but a prospective buyer would negotiate with the main shareholder won't they, ie PH ? DH is a minor shareholder but with a big chunk of his money invested (unlike PH). Can PH do a deal without DH...can he say here's the 75% shareholding, give me £10m and the clubs yours...if so, what does DH do...demand repayment of his £35m or forclose the club putting it into Admin, is that where this is coming from ?
I still don't know where the Administrator comes into this unless PH has borrowed from Pure Group as well. PH isn't personally liable for debts in a Ltd company so he could happily pocket £10m (say) ...and ride off into the sunset.
I feel a headache coming on.....
|
|
Sparrow
Frank Worthington Terrier
Posts: 1,965
|
Post by Sparrow on Mar 9, 2023 13:00:53 GMT 1
Since we gained promotion in May 2017 we received over £375,000,000 in Premier league TV Money, Prize money & Equal Share, Parachute payments and player sales (OK not all of that has been received yet). Add in the other income we've had since then and it'll be £450m+
£450,000,000 coming into the club in just under 6 years and there's talk of Administration!! Indeed the first mention of Administration was October/November 2021 in those program notes.
Well done to all involved
|
|
|
|
Post by townatheart on Mar 9, 2023 13:02:04 GMT 1
As fans we can only watch and speculate as to what is happening, although I appreciate there are folk who know more than others. Let's consider what we know, or think we know. That is my question as well, then I am old and easily 😕 DH sells to PH, in a heavily NDA'd agreement, which basically sees him getting his club loans over a period of time. Most believe that this would have been funded by the Premier League parachute payments. It is entirely possible that PH's plan was to sell Pure at some point and then have the funds to support Town going forward. Under his tenure as chairman PH lent HTAFC monies from Pure. He lent money to offset the impact of Covid (my assumption here - might be wrong). Was that because he didn't have his own cash or just an advised business transaction? It probably doesn't matter now. Unfortunately Pure went bust as a result of legislation changing and the bulk of the cases they were managing became invalid, or of limited value. DH, as he still had a 25% share and a vested interest* stepped back into oversee the running of the club. * Vested interest - he was owed cash but I also believe he wouldn't have wanted to see Town in administration or being unable to function (everyone is entitled to an opinion here). The administrators of Pure are, quite rightly and as the people they represent would expect, are trying to secure the payment of the loan made to HTAFC. This will be used to pay off creditors. Those creditors have no interest in HTAFC and want their money back, not unreasonably. It appears that DH is trying to negotiate a deal around this loan as any new owner is unlikely to want this claim on their books. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable but I can't see how a deal could be struck on this loan as HTAFC are a "going concern" with assets that could, in theory, be used to pay that loan back. I suppose the negotiation is; "you can have this, but if we have to go into administration you will only get that". How that works legally I don't know but I wouldn't blame Pure's administrators for playing hard ball. I am not sure what I think about putting HTAFC into administration to avoid paying that money back. On the face of it it seems morally questionable, at best. That said I suppose this is the murky world of corporate business? So where does that leave us, those poor beggars who just want to watch their football team and hope it is run to give us the best chance of being successful? Well, and pretty much as it has been for the past 5 years or so, ignored observers who can do absolutely nothing to influence the mess that people have put us in. I can accept there is some bad luck and some "force majeur" here but when you consider that we generated the best part of £300m in revenue since May 17 to be threatened with administration again is pretty shameful in my opinion. It is additionally shameful that we have paid for a respected and senior manager to try and rescue us from relegation (our footballing challenges are well documented but are probably understandable in the face of the shambolic backdrop that is the running of the club) but might tell him; "sorry Neil we are going to get a 12 point deduction, are you ok with that"? I think what really depresses me is that there seems no easy solution to this mess. Apportioning blame is all very well but all we want is for someone to stop this utter fiasco and get back to being a football club again. We are heading to League One, I am not happy about this but I can accept it as it is where we deserve to be. What happens next is anyone's guess, but it at some point the rot must stop. The problem is I am not sure when or who will actually steady the ship and set us on a new course. The longer this continues the worse it will get. 16000 season tickets sold on the belief we had turned a corner. How many will be sold from the cul de sac we are now in? It's utterly shameful and hopeless. I'm probably behind the events here, but I thought the loans between Pure Sports and HTAFC were unaffected by Pure Group Ltd because Pure Sports was not part of Pure Group Ltd but a seperate entity ? HTAFC is part of Pure Sports, where the shares purchase came from (or part shares ..not sure if the full price was ever paid). using Pure Sports as a holding company for HTAFC is fair enough I think , and not out of the ordinary. So why are the Adminstrators involved in what Pure Sports owe to Dean Hoyle or what money was spent to keep the club running ? Ok, the 75% shareholding is sat in there and the £2.5m (I think) that was the 50% payment...there's another £2.5m due to DH which was deferred but likely overdue now.
I maybe thought the angle here was if the club is for sale, those shares might be worth something, so rather than simply giving them back to DH, and the £2.5m paid out to DH being returned in exchange, PH is thinking maybe he could get more than £2.5m from a prospective purchaser of the club ? I'm probably confusing myself here, too much is unknown and tbh it's not my speciality..but a prospective buyer would negotiate with the main shareholder won't they, ie PH ? DH is a minor shareholder but with a big chunk of his money invested (unlike PH). Can PH do a deal without DH...can he say here's the 75% shareholding, give me £10m and the clubs yours...if so, what does DH do...demand repayment of his £35m or forclose the club putting it into Admin, is that where this is coming from ? I still don't know where the Administrator comes into this unless PH has borrowed from Pure Group as well. PH isn't personally liable for debts in a Ltd company so he could happily pocket £10m (say) ...and ride off into the sunset. I feel a headache coming on.....
My question as well, then I am old and easily 😕 |
|
|
|
Post by Mastercracker on Mar 9, 2023 13:02:45 GMT 1
Can someone explain Phil's role in negotiations if the Pure administrators seem to be the problem now? Am I right in thinking Dean has to pay Phil for shares but also for the debt PH placed on the club via administrators? The honourable thing for Potless to do would be to put his hand into his own pocket and pay Kroll what they want, but I suspect there's as much chance of that happening as of plaiting piss. Whilst it’s a relatively small amount, I’m not sure it’s amount that he can feasibly pay. Which is partly why the club should never have been sold to someone with so little liquid cash. |
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Mar 9, 2023 13:14:54 GMT 1
As fans we can only watch and speculate as to what is happening, although I appreciate there are folk who know more than others. Let's consider what we know, or think we know. DH sells to PH, in a heavily NDA'd agreement, which basically sees him getting his club loans over a period of time. Most believe that this would have been funded by the Premier League parachute payments. It is entirely possible that PH's plan was to sell Pure at some point and then have the funds to support Town going forward. Under his tenure as chairman PH lent HTAFC monies from Pure. He lent money to offset the impact of Covid (my assumption here - might be wrong). Was that because he didn't have his own cash or just an advised business transaction? It probably doesn't matter now. Unfortunately Pure went bust as a result of legislation changing and the bulk of the cases they were managing became invalid, or of limited value. DH, as he still had a 25% share and a vested interest* stepped back into oversee the running of the club. * Vested interest - he was owed cash but I also believe he wouldn't have wanted to see Town in administration or being unable to function (everyone is entitled to an opinion here). The administrators of Pure are, quite rightly and as the people they represent would expect, are trying to secure the payment of the loan made to HTAFC. This will be used to pay off creditors. Those creditors have no interest in HTAFC and want their money back, not unreasonably. It appears that DH is trying to negotiate a deal around this loan as any new owner is unlikely to want this claim on their books. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable but I can't see how a deal could be struck on this loan as HTAFC are a "going concern" with assets that could, in theory, be used to pay that loan back. I suppose the negotiation is; "you can have this, but if we have to go into administration you will only get that". How that works legally I don't know but I wouldn't blame Pure's administrators for playing hard ball. I am not sure what I think about putting HTAFC into administration to avoid paying that money back. On the face of it it seems morally questionable, at best. That said I suppose this is the murky world of corporate business? So where does that leave us, those poor beggars who just want to watch their football team and hope it is run to give us the best chance of being successful? Well, and pretty much as it has been for the past 5 years or so, ignored observers who can do absolutely nothing to influence the mess that people have put us in. I can accept there is some bad luck and some "force majeur" here but when you consider that we generated the best part of £300m in revenue since May 17 to be threatened with administration again is pretty shameful in my opinion. It is additionally shameful that we have paid for a respected and senior manager to try and rescue us from relegation (our footballing challenges are well documented but are probably understandable in the face of the shambolic backdrop that is the running of the club) but might tell him; "sorry Neil we are going to get a 12 point deduction, are you ok with that"? I think what really depresses me is that there seems no easy solution to this mess. Apportioning blame is all very well but all we want is for someone to stop this utter fiasco and get back to being a football club again. We are heading to League One, I am not happy about this but I can accept it as it is where we deserve to be. What happens next is anyone's guess, but it at some point the rot must stop. The problem is I am not sure when or who will actually steady the ship and set us on a new course. The longer this continues the worse it will get. 16000 season tickets sold on the belief we had turned a corner. How many will be sold from the cul de sac we are now in? It's utterly shameful and hopeless. I'm probably behind the events here, but I thought the loans between Pure Sports and HTAFC were unaffected by Pure Group Ltd because Pure Sports was not part of Pure Group Ltd but a seperate entity ? HTAFC is part of Pure Sports, where the shares purchase came from (or part shares ..not sure if the full price was ever paid). using Pure Sports as a holding company for HTAFC is fair enough I think , and not out of the ordinary. So why are the Adminstrators involved in what Pure Sports owe to Dean Hoyle or what money was spent to keep the club running ? Ok, the 75% shareholding is sat in there and the £2.5m (I think) that was the 50% payment...there's another £2.5m due to DH which was deferred but likely overdue now.
I maybe thought the angle here was if the club is for sale, those shares might be worth something, so rather than simply giving them back to DH, and the £2.5m paid out to DH being returned in exchange, PH is thinking maybe he could get more than £2.5m from a prospective purchaser of the club ? I'm probably confusing myself here, too much is unknown and tbh it's not my speciality..but a prospective buyer would negotiate with the main shareholder won't they, ie PH ? DH is a minor shareholder but with a big chunk of his money invested (unlike PH). Can PH do a deal without DH...can he say here's the 75% shareholding, give me £10m and the clubs yours...if so, what does DH do...demand repayment of his £35m or forclose the club putting it into Admin, is that where this is coming from ? I still don't know where the Administrator comes into this unless PH has borrowed from Pure Group as well. PH isn't personally liable for debts in a Ltd company so he could happily pocket £10m (say) ...and ride off into the sunset. I feel a headache coming on.....
I wish I could give you an answer but: I don't have any inside knowledge I am largely ignorant to the legalities and agreements in question. Basically I am pretty clueless (but most would know that about me anyway  ). You might well be right, I've no reason to challenge you at all, and if so people might ask; "What is more important, the future of the club or individuals' financial positions? I have always never had an issue with DH getting his loans back but surely that recovery must be relative to the financial position of the club. The reasons why we are here are well debated. Had things been done differently DH could have recovered his money, or a good proportion of it, the club could have been reasonably stable and most would be pretty comfortable. Where we are now is to no-ones benefit. |
|
|
|
Post by townarentbest on Mar 9, 2023 13:17:46 GMT 1
I got pelters back in October for even suggesting we could go into administration this season. And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? |
|
COWSHEDPHIL
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Everybody In The Centre Circle!
Posts: 4,006
|
Post by COWSHEDPHIL on Mar 9, 2023 13:20:07 GMT 1
I got pelters back in October for even suggesting we could go into administration this season. And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? No chance we go into admin once we’ve smashed West Brom and Norwich |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Mar 9, 2023 13:21:01 GMT 1
I got pelters back in October for even suggesting we could go into administration this season. And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? That seems to be the bit thats actually missing in all this administration talk. |
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Mar 9, 2023 13:24:11 GMT 1
I got pelters back in October for even suggesting we could go into administration this season. And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? Hence the word 'could'. Just like we 'could' stay up. |
|
|
|
Post by Porrohman on Mar 9, 2023 13:27:08 GMT 1
And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? That seems to be the bit thats actually missing in all this administration talk. To quote (sort of) a famous poster (although the spelling may be better) "No one knows. Let's wait and see." 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by townarentbest on Mar 9, 2023 13:32:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Mar 9, 2023 13:37:17 GMT 1
And there's still no evidence at all to suggest we actually will ? No chance we go into admin once we’ve smashed West Brom and Norwich Get me a pint of what this guys drinking.... |
|
|
|
Post by Teddington Ted on Mar 9, 2023 13:43:12 GMT 1
It's just the shares. All 3 parties agreed a fee in May 2022. That deal expired without money changing hands. A renegotiated deal has been agreed between the 2 owners but the 3rd party as yet won't agree. So it's the 3rd party we should be bashing, not Phil and Dean?..... Isn’t that a bit like me agreeing to sell my house to a mate but being annoyed that a 3rd party (the bank who my mortgage is with) is insisting some of the proceeds are theirs? I’m sure all those owed wages, bills and other payments from Pure will be delighted that the administrators are after a fair cut. |
|
goodbet
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,611
|
Post by goodbet on Mar 9, 2023 13:43:25 GMT 1
I don't think that anyone ever announces that they may be going into administration.
If anyone did give prior warning the organisation would find that suppliers would want payment with delivery, the bank would remove any overdraft facility. This would end up driving any organisation in to administration even if it could have be avoided.
I believe that all this speculation is based on the clubs value plummeting in League 1 giving Dean no hope of getting his money back. Based on this idle speculation people think that he may just cut and run.
All just speculation.
|
|
|
|
Post by runner76 on Mar 9, 2023 13:45:45 GMT 1
That seems to be the bit thats actually missing in all this administration talk. To quote (sort of) a famous poster (although the spelling may be better) "No one knows. Let's wait and see." 😉 …if only we could ask Mystic Meg….. |
|
|
|
Post by hthp on Mar 9, 2023 13:46:06 GMT 1
The honourable thing for Potless to do would be to put his hand into his own pocket and pay Kroll what they want, but I suspect there's as much chance of that happening as of plaiting piss. Whilst it’s a relatively small amount, I’m not sure it’s amount that he can feasibly pay. Which is partly why the club should never have been sold to someone with so little liquid cash. Yeah but he "made loads of good decisions"  |
|
goodbet
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,611
|
Post by goodbet on Mar 9, 2023 13:48:47 GMT 1
So it's the 3rd party we should be bashing, not Phil and Dean?..... Isn’t that a bit like me agreeing to sell my house to a mate but being annoyed that a 3rd party (the bank who my mortgage is with) is insisting some of the proceeds are theirs? I’m sure all those owed wages, bills and other payments from Pure will be delighted that the administrators are after a fair cut. Are they after a fair cut or just trying their luck and attempting to grab whatever they can? A case like this could give the administrators a name and they could be well aware of this. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Mcgee on Mar 9, 2023 13:54:33 GMT 1
I'm probably behind the events here, but I thought the loans between Pure Sports and HTAFC were unaffected by Pure Group Ltd because Pure Sports was not part of Pure Group Ltd but a seperate entity ? HTAFC is part of Pure Sports, where the shares purchase came from (or part shares ..not sure if the full price was ever paid). using Pure Sports as a holding company for HTAFC is fair enough I think , and not out of the ordinary. So why are the Adminstrators involved in what Pure Sports owe to Dean Hoyle or what money was spent to keep the club running ? Ok, the 75% shareholding is sat in there and the £2.5m (I think) that was the 50% payment...there's another £2.5m due to DH which was deferred but likely overdue now.
I maybe thought the angle here was if the club is for sale, those shares might be worth something, so rather than simply giving them back to DH, and the £2.5m paid out to DH being returned in exchange, PH is thinking maybe he could get more than £2.5m from a prospective purchaser of the club ? I'm probably confusing myself here, too much is unknown and tbh it's not my speciality..but a prospective buyer would negotiate with the main shareholder won't they, ie PH ? DH is a minor shareholder but with a big chunk of his money invested (unlike PH). Can PH do a deal without DH...can he say here's the 75% shareholding, give me £10m and the clubs yours...if so, what does DH do...demand repayment of his £35m or forclose the club putting it into Admin, is that where this is coming from ? I still don't know where the Administrator comes into this unless PH has borrowed from Pure Group as well. PH isn't personally liable for debts in a Ltd company so he could happily pocket £10m (say) ...and ride off into the sunset. I feel a headache coming on.....
I wish I could give you an answer but: I don't have any inside knowledge I am largely ignorant to the legalities and agreements in question. Basically I am pretty clueless (but most would know that about me anyway ). You might well be right, I've no reason to challenge you at all, and if so people might ask; "What is more important, the future of the club or individuals' financial positions? I have always never had an issue with DH getting his loans back but surely that recovery must be relative to the financial position of the club. The reasons why we are here are well debated. Had things been done differently DH could have recovered his money, or a good proportion of it, the club could have been reasonably stable and most would be pretty comfortable. Where we are now is to no-ones benefit. It appears Pure Sports Consultancy Ltd (Town owners 75% - i.e. Hodgkinson) borrowed money from his dodgy business empire, Pure Group Ltd (now in Admin), because the dodgy fucker didn't have any of his own to fund Town. The admins, not surprisingly, want this money back to pay off creditors, Hoyle looks like he's trying to give them as little as possible whilst acquiring the club back. |
|
jambo
Chris Hay Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 52
|
Post by jambo on Mar 9, 2023 13:55:16 GMT 1
If he's buying them to immediately sell them I don't imagine he wants to take a huge loss on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by H6dds on Mar 9, 2023 13:55:40 GMT 1
Since we gained promotion in May 2017 we received over £375,000,000 in Premier league TV Money, Prize money & Equal Share, Parachute payments and player sales (OK not all of that has been received yet). Add in the other income we've had since then and it'll be £450m+ £450,000,000 coming into the club in just under 6 years and there's talk of Administration!! Indeed the first mention of Administration was October/November 2021 in those program notes. Well done to all involved £450m and we don't own our stadium or training facility, we have got a squad on a league one budget that would struggle in league one and our ladies get to buy their own kit and training gear, some legacy that! |
|
iangreaves
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,202
|
Post by iangreaves on Mar 9, 2023 14:02:24 GMT 1
I wish I could give you an answer but: I don't have any inside knowledge I am largely ignorant to the legalities and agreements in question. Basically I am pretty clueless (but most would know that about me anyway ). You might well be right, I've no reason to challenge you at all, and if so people might ask; "What is more important, the future of the club or individuals' financial positions? I have always never had an issue with DH getting his loans back but surely that recovery must be relative to the financial position of the club. The reasons why we are here are well debated. Had things been done differently DH could have recovered his money, or a good proportion of it, the club could have been reasonably stable and most would be pretty comfortable. Where we are now is to no-ones benefit. It appears Pure Sports Consultancy Ltd (Town owners 75% - i.e. Hodgkinson) borrowed money from his dodgy business empire, Pure Group Ltd (now in Admin), because the dodgy fucker didn't have any of his own to fund Town. The admins, not surprisingly, want this money back to pay off creditors, Hoyle looks like he's trying to give them as little as possible whilst acquiring the club back. But we are told there was agreement on a deal between Hoyle, Hodgkinson and the Pure administrators in May 2022. Why didn't Hoyle simply complete that agreement? |
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Mar 9, 2023 14:06:15 GMT 1
So let's say for argument sake it would cost Dean 5m to pay everyone off and gain full control. He then has to potentially keep propping us up, but the upside being there will be X(5m+?) amount coming in from past/future player sales, he can also negotiate a sale which sees him be paid back some debt or earn a sale fee...
If he was to put the club into admin, he wouldnt have to pay the 5m and could walk away without having to put anymore in, but without ever getting anything back?
Appreciate that's extremely simplistic, but?
Also, to the suggestion he could then buy the club back for not much money and arrange a deal with new owners...... why wouldnt the new owners just buy the club out of Admin?
|
|
|
|
Post by waggers on Mar 9, 2023 14:12:53 GMT 1
It appears Pure Sports Consultancy Ltd (Town owners 75% - i.e. Hodgkinson) borrowed money from his dodgy business empire, Pure Group Ltd (now in Admin), because the dodgy fucker didn't have any of his own to fund Town. The admins, not surprisingly, want this money back to pay off creditors, Hoyle looks like he's trying to give them as little as possible whilst acquiring the club back. But we are told there was agreement on a deal between Hoyle, Hodgkinson and the Pure administrators in May 2022. Why didn't Hoyle simply complete that agreement? He'll have been advised by some suits there was an opening to get a better deal for him, so cancelled the agreed deal. |
|
|
|
Post by allan 1958 (OAF-WROY)(SSLFF) on Mar 9, 2023 14:15:50 GMT 1
Isn’t that a bit like me agreeing to sell my house to a mate but being annoyed that a 3rd party (the bank who my mortgage is with) is insisting some of the proceeds are theirs? I’m sure all those owed wages, bills and other payments from Pure will be delighted that the administrators are after a fair cut. Are they after a fair cut or just trying their luck and attempting to grab whatever they can? A case like this could give the administrators a name and they could be well aware of this. The answer is in the question. Administrators! largely scum of the earth, charge a man with no money a fortune and pay the creditors the pittance that remains. Yep not a fan |
|
|
|
Post by townarentbest on Mar 9, 2023 14:16:07 GMT 1
Since we gained promotion in May 2017 we received over £375,000,000 in Premier league TV Money, Prize money & Equal Share, Parachute payments and player sales (OK not all of that has been received yet). Add in the other income we've had since then and it'll be £450m+ £450,000,000 coming into the club in just under 6 years and there's talk of Administration!! Indeed the first mention of Administration was October/November 2021 in those program notes. Well done to all involved £450m and we don't own our stadium or training facility, we have got a squad on a league one budget that would struggle in league one and our ladies get to buy their own kit and training gear, some legacy that! Yes, there's a high level of spend associated with being a Premier League club 🤷♂️ Brighton, a club that got promoted when we did, currently sit carrying debt of over £300m despite obviously seeing far more income than we have since then. |
|
).
