CONFRIMED: Latest rumours Confrimed as Unconfrimed

[Greatwesternline]

I thought the point (repeatedly made on here) is that only Dai can put us into administration, and only if he decides to sue himself for a fraction of the debt he owes to himself.

It's not worth trying to explain this. Time and time again it has been attempted. The typical hobnob punter simply doesnt understand the circumstances for why administration is used by other clubs, and why it doesnt apply to our situation.

I think some people think administration and the legendary 9/10 point deduction that comes with it are imposed upon clubs by a league, and simply dont understand that Reading doesnt actually owe anyone else any money other than the owner himself, and thus there is no reason why Dai would put his own debts to himself into administration.

The closest we've got to administration was when we stopped paying Compass for the service contract at the training ground.

[rabidbee]

We need an FAQ thread.

[Snowflake Royal]

Just a thought, considering that Dai isn`t exactly on the EFLs Christmas card list at the minute do you think if a takeover isn`t completed by the time the fixtures are released in June that they would expel us from the league?

No.

Of course they will

[Snowflake Royal]

I thought the point (repeatedly made on here) is that only Dai can put us into administration, and only if he decides to sue himself for a fraction of the debt he owes to himself.

It's not worth trying to explain this. Time and time again it has been attempted. The typical hobnob punter simply doesnt understand the circumstances for why administration is used by other clubs, and why it doesnt apply to our situation.

I think some people think administration and the legendary 9/10 point deduction that comes with it are imposed upon clubs by a league, and simply dont understand that Reading doesnt actually owe anyone else any money other than the owner himself, and thus there is no reason why Dai would put his own debts to himself into administration.

The closest we've got to administration was when we stopped paying Compass for the service contract at the training ground.

We're not paying quite a lot of people, but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Otherwise, spot on.

See also all the people who blame the FL's 'Fit and Proper Person Test' which isn’t what they think and hasn't been called that for 15 years. Or for Dai having sunk two other clubs, both of which happened after he bought us and the fL approved him.

[Stranded]

Just a thought, considering that Dai isn`t exactly on the EFLs Christmas card list at the minute do you think if a takeover isn`t completed by the time the fixtures are released in June that they would expel us from the league?

No.

Of course they will

Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.

We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.

[tidus_mi2]

Can definitely see us getting expelled from the league if the owner situation isn't sorted by the time the fixtures come out, doubt the EFL want this mess repeated again next season.

[Greatwesternline]

I thought the point (repeatedly made on here) is that only Dai can put us into administration, and only if he decides to sue himself for a fraction of the debt he owes to himself.

It's not worth trying to explain this. Time and time again it has been attempted. The typical hobnob punter simply doesnt understand the circumstances for why administration is used by other clubs, and why it doesnt apply to our situation.

I think some people think administration and the legendary 9/10 point deduction that comes with it are imposed upon clubs by a league, and simply dont understand that Reading doesnt actually owe anyone else any money other than the owner himself, and thus there is no reason why Dai would put his own debts to himself into administration.

The closest we've got to administration was when we stopped paying Compass for the service contract at the training ground.

We're not paying quite a lot of people, but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Otherwise, spot on.

See also all the people who blame the FL's 'Fit and Proper Person Test' which isn’t what they think and hasn't been called that for 15 years. Or for Dai having sunk two other clubs, both of which happened after he bought us and the fL approved him.

Wycombe is wrong. You don't need to be a secured creditor to ask a court to place a company into administration. You just dont stand much chance of getting your money back because you will be behind other secured creditors in the queue to get your money back. Asking a court to put a company into administration is a tool available to anyone who is owed money by a company.

And while we are not paying people on time, we are paying everyone eventually. At least that's what has been published so far.

[Snowflake Royal]

It's not worth trying to explain this. Time and time again it has been attempted. The typical hobnob punter simply doesnt understand the circumstances for why administration is used by other clubs, and why it doesnt apply to our situation.

I think some people think administration and the legendary 9/10 point deduction that comes with it are imposed upon clubs by a league, and simply dont understand that Reading doesnt actually owe anyone else any money other than the owner himself, and thus there is no reason why Dai would put his own debts to himself into administration.

The closest we've got to administration was when we stopped paying Compass for the service contract at the training ground.

We're not paying quite a lot of people, but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Otherwise, spot on.

See also all the people who blame the FL's 'Fit and Proper Person Test' which isn’t what they think and hasn't been called that for 15 years. Or for Dai having sunk two other clubs, both of which happened after he bought us and the fL approved him.

Wycombe is wrong. You don't need to be a secured creditor to ask a court to place a company into administration. You just dont stand much chance of getting your money back because you will be behind other secured creditors in the queue to get your money back. Asking a court to put a company into administration is a tool available to anyone who is owed money by a company.

And while we are not paying people on time, we are paying everyone eventually. At least that's what has been published so far.

We reportedly haven't paid Opta or whoever supports their stats for a year and other such stuff relating to keeping our website up to date and functioning.

[Hound]

I doubt we know the full story of who have and who haven’t been paid

Bottom line is Dai has to go or we’ll be done.

Points deductions, fines etc are a total waste of time. If Dai doesn’t sell we’ll automatically take one of those relegation places anyway as we’ll be no more. Every single effort from everyone involved should be made to try to ensure this happens, everything else is just noise

[OLLIE KEARNS]

No.

Of course they will

Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.

We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.

To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.

[The Royal Forester]

Of course they will

Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.

We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.

To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.

I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.

[Wycombe Royal]

but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Did I, I don't remember saying that......

[Wycombe Royal]

Wycombe is wrong

If I said it.

[Stranded]

Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.

We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.

To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.

I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.

But they will want to avoid that if at all possible, so will be looking for guarantees before the fixtures are out that we are going to be around and can meet obligations etc.

If we were to be expelled after fixtures are out it opens up a number of problems. Firstly, each side will now then have 1 less home game - could cause issues in terms of ST prices - loss of income etc.

Secondly, one side will finish their season before everyone else. Now the likelihood is that will have minimal impact but you could equally end up with a situation where 2 sides are playing each other on the last day knowing a draw keeps them both up at the expense of the side who finished the week before.

Again, the EFL will want to avoid anything that could lead to such a scenario. So any deadlines will likely be early - say end of April, so that they can reprieve or promote a replacement side.

[Snowflake Royal]

but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Did I, I don't remember saying that......

I was guessing a bit, but you're one of the few who often seems to have a clue, if it wasn't you either it was someone else (likely) or I misunderstood (less likely as I recall being surprised and trying to get more explanation)

[tmesis]

Well, they may not expel us at that point but if there is doubt about us as a going concern they will want to avoid the situation they had with Bury where they had to suspend their first 6 games as they didn't want them playing any games until proof was given that creditors could be paid off. When the takeover fell through, the EFL pulled the plug as their owner couldn't give assurances that he could fund the club.

We are in a slightly different position in that we don't really have external creditors however, if we are stuck with Dai there is no way, in my mind, they will let us go into another campaign where there is a very high risk of the club/owner not meeting their obligations. They will demand Dai puts aside the 125% of wages and proof that funds will be available to pay all liabilities on time. If that cannot be provided, and Dai has pretty much made it clear that he has no intention of producing such proof then there has to be a very strong chance that without a takeover (or one being close to complete) that we start next season as an EFL club - in fact, it is likely we aren't playing anywhere next season in that scenario.

To my mind they could expel us as early as end of April. Owner doesn’t pay fines after 35 days = owner barred and given 28 days to sell the club. Owner doesn’t sell the club = club expelled from the EFL.
The EFL will want us gone long before fixtures are published because of the added complications of who would be playing in which league. Hope I’m wrong but it seems to now be a game of brinkmanship with end of April being the deadline.
I don’t really blame the EFL for this but they should cut out the nonsense that they are supposedly trying to support the club.

I don't see why we would have to be expelled before the fixture list is published. All it needs is for whichever division we are due to be play in would have only 23 teams. meaning the club we were due to play would have a day free of a fixture This has happened before, so I cannot see it causing any problems doing it this way.

I think the league would want to avoid a situation where we are in July/August without a squad of players, and no obvious ability to finance the season.

I also think they'd rather avoid having 23 teams in a division for a season, and the other clubs would rather have 23 games bringing in income rather than 22.

Kicking us out early would also give any club reprieved from relegation a chance to prepare properly.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Or we could do a Bolton and go into a season with no senior players. We'd get relegated for sure, but it would keep us alive and the transfer fees from like likes of Wing, Knibbs and Smith would help us survive. And Bolton are doing just fine now.

[Pepe the Horseman]

but I think it was Wycombe who pointed out they have to be secured creditors to put us in Admin.

Did I, I don't remember saying that......

either it was someone else (likely) or I misunderstood (less likely)

Lol

[WestYorksRoyal]

Anybody else feel like everyone is being rescued except us? Since this started out, Southend, Scunthorpe, WBA and now Rochdale have seen their hellscape end. Yet our cnut refuses to fcuk off.

[Snowflake Royal]

Did I, I don't remember saying that......

either it was someone else (likely) or I misunderstood (less likely)

Lol

Glad you liked it. I do seem to have a weird brain that's good at remembering not useful detail though.