Latest Update from Kris

4 hours ago, striker said:

Reading between the lines, I think the Administrators insisted on it being included. 

 

They also alluded to something changing, giving them bargaining power. The ex owner didn't have a choice in the end, he was finally boxed into a corner. 

 

All he can do now is stake his claim and exists, just as every other creditor. 

Nap likely turned the screw on the loan they had secured I imagine

On 05/12/2025 at 16:00, TAFKASO said:

What scenarios are there where the best deal for creditors is not the highest bid?

Well.... possibly a future payment to unsecured creditors?. This could be part of an overall package for the club and even extending out into community schemes. This bidder might not be making the highest bid but the overall package, including a future creditors payment, means it the one that best meets the Administrator's criteria.

Just spitballing (as our American friends like to say)

On 05/12/2025 at 17:00, Mr Grey Man said:

That's true, money flows like a river, and it will always flow to the powerful.

What if it's flowing the wrong way?

Like the Don?

On 06/12/2025 at 12:34, Bahrain Owl said:

I understand what you are saying. My company deals is asset disposals, steel mills, fabrication etc and I always find it an enigma how buyers prefer to stage or phase payments, after they have bargained the price down of course. We always say "there is no lack of funds, there is lack of desire to part with the funds".

Point to make on this, may have relavence - John McIvoy... recognised $ billionaire partners up with another wealthy family to bid....

That may be the case with your business but most administrator sales in the UK  have in my experience been set up to get cash on the nail. Stuff is auctioned or sold to a company that buys job lots of distressed product for cash.

I admit most of the stuff I've seen have been easier to sort than a football club.

4 hours ago, prowl said:

That may be the case with your business but most administrator sales in the UK  have in my experience been set up to get cash on the nail. Stuff is auctioned or sold to a company that buys job lots of distressed product for cash.

I admit most of the stuff I've seen have been easier to sort than a football club.

When assets are sold or auctioned off, isn't this considered as liquidation? Liquidation is announced, as far as I am aware, after the administrators have not been  successful in finding a solution which all the creditors are ready to accept and agree on (my company only really deals with liquidation or private treaties so I admit I am not 100% sure on this point). The court rules the company is bankrupt and to dispose the assets to satisfy the creditors. This value, generally, is very low indeed.

This is a potential danger at SWFC, if a certain creditor stands out and says he is not ready to accept the administrator's solution from the incoming buyer. If he gets mardy! However, he should be aware there will be significant differences in basically "scrap value" assets and potentially what a new owner is offering.

6 hours ago, Bahrain Owl said:

When assets are sold or auctioned off, isn't this considered as liquidation? Liquidation is announced, as far as I am aware, after the administrators have not been  successful in finding a solution which all the creditors are ready to accept and agree on (my company only really deals with liquidation or private treaties so I admit I am not 100% sure on this point). The court rules the company is bankrupt and to dispose the assets to satisfy the creditors. This value, generally, is very low indeed.

This is a potential danger at SWFC, if a certain creditor stands out and says he is not ready to accept the administrator's solution from the incoming buyer. If he gets mardy! However, he should be aware there will be significant differences in basically "scrap value" assets and potentially what a new owner is offering.

Administrators have to decide if a business is savable. They may decide it's not and they liquidate it. On the other hand they may decide it is savable but parts need to be sold off. It may be a retail company with 100 shops which needs to be reduced to 50.  There's excess stock to sell, some shop leases to get rid of or premises to be sold. Same with an industrial company with subsidiaries. 

With a football club I imagine it's different.

32 minutes ago, prowl said:

Administrators have to decide if a business is savable. They may decide it's not and they liquidate it. On the other hand they may decide it is savable but parts need to be sold off. It may be a retail company with 100 shops which needs to be reduced to 50.  There's excess stock to sell, some shop leases to get rid of or premises to be sold. Same with an industrial company with subsidiaries. 

 

With a football club I imagine it's different.

Clearly there is more value in selling the trade (football) as a going concern with associated assets than liquidating the whole thing. A court would support the admins view. Not only that but it would avoid having to make all employees reduandant which is an avoidable expense if they are transferred to new company

2 minutes ago, TamworthWednesdayite said:

Clearly there is more value in selling the trade (football) as a going concern with associated assets than liquidating the whole thing. A court would support the admins view. Not only that but it would avoid having to make all employees reduandant which is an avoidable expense if they are transferred to new company

Absolutely. I don't pretend to know much about administration of football clubs.

7 minutes ago, TamworthWednesdayite said:

Clearly there is more value in selling the trade (football) as a going concern with associated assets than liquidating the whole thing. A court would support the admins view. Not only that but it would avoid having to make all employees reduandant which is an avoidable expense if they are transferred to new company

I think the actions and support of the fans prove it's a going concern and this should be the selling point for any owner wanting to buy us. 

Just now, Daveyboy66 said:

I think the actions and support of the fans prove it's a going concern and this should be the selling point for any owner wanting to buy us. 

And the fact that NO ONE during my lifetime apart from the first years under Buckingham and Catterick has had us in the top flight chasing honours...it's a blank slate for any progressive owner

1 hour ago, prowl said:

Administrators have to decide if a business is savable. They may decide it's not and they liquidate it. On the other hand they may decide it is savable but parts need to be sold off. It may be a retail company with 100 shops which needs to be reduced to 50.  There's excess stock to sell, some shop leases to get rid of or premises to be sold. Same with an industrial company with subsidiaries. 

 

With a football club I imagine it's different.

It's certainly very interesting to read about the differences spread over the industry.

May I ask if you work in asset disposals, restructuring, phoenixing etc?

All these things have to done legally. As far as I know an administrator is not legally allowed to rule on a company's status. They are there as "project managers" to a certain extent as all directors have to stand down under administration. 

The creditors still say yes or no to the OTB (note I do not use "takeover") which must be arranged through the administrator as ruled by a court. If the creditors no not accept, after a declared period of time, the administrators put their coats on and it goes back to the court.  The court may rule the company bankrupt and if so, it ceases to exist. Then another company, such as my own, is appointed to dispose of the assets. The examples you illustrate about retail branches being closed etc comes under restructuring (as far as I make out). Industrial scaling back, we call capacity adjustment..

Yes, I accept it may vary depending on each industry or sector but the process seems to be exactly that; a process.

27 minutes ago, Daveyboy66 said:

And the fact that NO ONE during my lifetime apart from the first years under Buckingham and Catterick has had us in the top flight chasing honours...it's a blank slate for any progressive owner

We finished 3rd 35 years ago, if we had kicked on from there who knows what might have happened.

I think the odds of any creditor voting against the preferred buyer's offer is virtually nil. I would imagine the administrators would be assuming deemed consent to any proposal which means that the proposal is considered approved if less than 10% of the creditors by value object by a certain date.

If they did vote against it or object, the administrator would seek directions from the court. I would imagine the judge would consider whether there had been a fair process and no undue prejudice, and is likely to direct the administrator to proceed and accept the offer as the best for the creditors. It would seem hard to suggest a better deal for creditors could be achieved as BT are very experienced and appear to have embarked on a professional and comprehensive process to achieve the best bid.

We are in good hands and it will soon all play out.  

1 minute ago, Daz said:

I think the odds of any creditor voting against the preferred buyer's offer is virtually nil. I would imagine the administrators would be assuming deemed consent to any proposal which means that the proposal is considered approved if less than 10% of the creditors by value object by a certain date.

 

If they did vote against it or object, the administrator would seek directions from the court. I would imagine the judge would consider whether there had been a fair process and no undue prejudice, and is likely to direct the administrator to proceed and accept the offer as the best for the creditors. It would seem hard to suggest a better deal for creditors could be achieved as BT are very experienced and appear to have embarked on a professional and comprehensive process to achieve the best bid.

 

We are in good hands and it will soon all play out.  

But but but, one of them is a Wednesday fan, how can it be fair and impartial.

14 minutes ago, Daz said:

I think the odds of any creditor voting against the preferred buyer's offer is virtually nil. I would imagine the administrators would be assuming deemed consent to any proposal which means that the proposal is considered approved if less than 10% of the creditors by value object by a certain date.

 

If they did vote against it or object, the administrator would seek directions from the court. I would imagine the judge would consider whether there had been a fair process and no undue prejudice, and is likely to direct the administrator to proceed and accept the offer as the best for the creditors. It would seem hard to suggest a better deal for creditors could be achieved as BT are very experienced and appear to have embarked on a professional and comprehensive process to achieve the best bid.

 

We are in good hands and it will soon all play out.  

The first thing that worries most folk is the fact that Chansiri is the biggest creditor!  And the second worry is his irrational behaviour and "shrewd" business decisions but the administrator guys will be well aware and are well experienced to deal accordingly.