CONFIMRED - The final countdown

[Extended-Phenotype]

As it is, he's claiming he would have made £12 million out of the club if he'd been able to buy it. Whereas, of course, he would have lost money, month on month. That's what owning a football club generally involves. So he's not got a legitimate case.

You can keep saying this, but it doesn't make it any more true.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

As it is, he's claiming he would have made £12 million out of the club if he'd been able to buy it. Whereas, of course, he would have lost money, month on month. That's what owning a football club generally involves. So he's not got a legitimate case.

You can keep saying this, but it doesn't make it any more true.

Which part isn't true?

The sum of £12 million is widely reported. It may vary a bit, but it's in that region.

Why is he claiming that sum in his court case? Because that's what he says he has lost out on by not buying the club. It's not the costs he incurred in his attempt to buy the club. He himself puts that at about $1 million.

Would he have made a lot of money if he'd been able to buy the club? Only by asset stripping.

[Extended-Phenotype]

As it is, he's claiming he would have made £12 million out of the club if he'd been able to buy it. Whereas, of course, he would have lost money, month on month. That's what owning a football club generally involves. So he's not got a legitimate case.

You can keep saying this, but it doesn't make it any more true.

Which part isn't true?

The sum of £12 million is widely reported. It may vary a bit, but it's in that region.

Why is he claiming that sum in his court case? Because that's what he says he has lost out on by not buying the club. It's not the costs he incurred in his attempt to buy the club. He himself puts that at about $1 million.

Would he have made a lot of money if he'd been able to buy the club? Only by asset stripping.

His claim is way more complicated than that. While it does include lost time and money invested into the takeover, plus damages for breaching exclusivity, it's more than a bit basic to interpret “lost profits” as “taking a monthly income”. It’s his argument that the deal was terminated unjustly, and that if Dai had behaved lawfully, RC would be in possession of shares that would have risen in value. The evaluation includes financial projections that haven’t been publicly disclosed. My guess is that RC’s team had a strategy in place that factored in promotions, matchday and commercial revenue, player development and sales, broadcasting and solidarity payments, that would improve the club’s valuation over a long period. It doesn’t matter about Reading running at a loss – now or in the future. It matters what price the shares would increase. RC's whole shtick has been about turning around the fortunes and value of football clubs, leaving them stronger than when he arrived.

RC is seeking to prove that DY terminated the deal unlawfully. If he can do that, he can rightly claim damages equal to the amount he projects, or lower than depending on whether the judge finds the projection credible.

Note, he doesn’t have to prove without doubt he’d have lost £12m. Much like a court case in which someone sues for damages due to libel or deformation – you provide an estimate of what the deformation might have cost you, back that up with evidence as best you can, and the court decides if that’s fair. Johnny Depp recently took Amber Heard to court for $50m damages, and though he won, the court decided a valuation of $15m. This is how law works; you punch high, as there is absolutely no reason not to sue for the most money you think you could get. You can still win (because the court finds the grounds of your claim legitimate) but leave with less (because they didn’t find enough convincing evidence for the full amount).

So yeah, it’s such a dumb take to think this is about how much profit the club makes.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

You can keep saying this, but it doesn't make it any more true.

Which part isn't true?

The sum of £12 million is widely reported. It may vary a bit, but it's in that region.

Why is he claiming that sum in his court case? Because that's what he says he has lost out on by not buying the club. It's not the costs he incurred in his attempt to buy the club. He himself puts that at about $1 million.

Would he have made a lot of money if he'd been able to buy the club? Only by asset stripping.

His claim is way more complicated than that. While it does include lost time and money invested into the takeover, plus damages for breaching exclusivity, it's more than a bit basic to interpret “lost profits” as “taking a monthly income”. It’s his argument that the deal was terminated unjustly, and that if Dai had behaved lawfully, RC would be in possession of shares that would have risen in value. The evaluation includes financial projections that haven’t been publicly disclosed. My guess is that RC’s team had a strategy in place that factored in promotions, matchday and commercial revenue, player development and sales, broadcasting and solidarity payments, that would improve the club’s valuation over a long period. It doesn’t matter about Reading running at a loss – now or in the future. It matters what price the shares would increase. RC's whole shtick has been about turning around the fortunes and value of football clubs, leaving them stronger than when he arrived.

RC is seeking to prove that DY terminated the deal unlawfully. If he can do that, he can rightly claim damages equal to the amount he projects, or lower than depending on whether the judge finds the projection credible.

Note, he doesn’t have to prove without doubt he’d have lost £12m. Much like a court case in which someone sues for damages due to libel or deformation – you provide an estimate of what the deformation might have cost you, back that up with evidence as best you can, and the court decides if that’s fair. Johnny Depp recently took Amber Heard to court for $50m damages, and though he won, the court decided a valuation of $15m. This is how law works; you punch high, as there is absolutely no reason not to sue for the most money you think you could get. You can still win (because the court finds the grounds of your claim legitimate) but leave with less (because they didn’t find enough convincing evidence for the full amount).

So yeah, it’s such a dumb take to think this is about how much profit the club makes.

You were doing really well of presenting a coherent case in a well-measured way until that last line...

Not sure your argument about the value of shares going up. As it's not a publicly quoted company, the only value of the shares is what another prospective buyer would be prepared to pay for them to own the company / club.

I'ma also pretty sure you can't just seek damages based upon utterly theoretical losses - you'd have to justify them being credible. Not sure, as a judge, I'd accept the argument that he'd be really good at running the club so he could sell it to someone else and make lots of money out of it.

[Hound]

In very simplistic terms, I’d say he has a fair shout to say if he’d taken over the club, it would have had an excellent chance of being a champ club next season and hence worth double the price he signed up for

Difficult to argue that one imo

[MartinRdg]

In very simplistic terms, I’d say he has a fair shout to say if he’d taken over the club, it would have had an excellent chance of being a champ club next season and hence worth double the price he signed up for

Difficult to argue that one imo

Yes - agreed. He could have quite easily had the funds to provide some new signings in January and, with a couple of first team starters and some squad members, I am sure that would have been enough to almost guarantee a playoff position come the end of the season. Of course, knowing our luck in playoffs, nothing could then be guaranteed but, if the miracle did happen, and we one the playoffs, then, I think, you would almost guarantee that the club would be worth, at least, another £12m.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

In very simplistic terms, I’d say he has a fair shout to say if he’d taken over the club, it would have had an excellent chance of being a champ club next season and hence worth double the price he signed up for

Difficult to argue that one imo

That would never stand up in court. It would be like me saying I would definitely have won on a long shot if I'd been able to get to Paddy Power's on time, so Reading Buses owe me for my winnings for making me too late to get there.

[Hound]

We’re on the edge of the playoffs having had to sell our main striker and with all the other shite going on

Hardly a long shot.

[Hound]

I’m genuinely confused why Dai doesn’t just sell to Couhig anyway

It’s the best chance of getting the most money back. It’s virtually no hassle - all the hard work was done, it just needs a signature

Nobody knows what goes on in his head but it’s still baffling. Even if he hates him for some reason - not really sure why - surely he just wants the least hassle and most money at this stage. Surely nobody gets anything out of the current situation

[Extended-Phenotype]

Not sure your argument about the value of shares going up.

It's about whether a buyer thinks they can later sell something for more than they bought it for.

Let's say you have a company you want to sell. Let's say that its even making a loss year on year. You want to sell it to me for $10,000. Your company valuation isn’t crazy just because you are running at a loss. I mean, no twat expects you to pay me to take it off your hands, that would be fcking retarded. No, you valuate it at a sum using projections to sell it as potential.

We enter exclusivity and I pay the bills while we complete on the agreement that it will complete. In the meantime, I’m drawing up a business strategy in which I think I can turn around your shit company into something someone else would pay $20k for. Your current profits aren’t necessarily important (as I wouldn’t be interested in buying your company in the first place). The projected profits for 5 years time aren’t entirely important either (although if I halve the losses I have technically doubled it’s worth). But I expect to shape it up and eventually sell it on for twice as much, using projections to sell that valuation as potential just like you did.

Then you take a piss on our agreement, breach our exclusivity and start courting some other asshole. Well, fck you man. You just cost me 10k, and I’m going to fcking sue you for it dipshit.

I'ma also pretty sure you can't just seek damages based upon utterly theoretical losses - you'd have to justify them being credible. Not sure, as a judge, I'd accept the argument that he'd be really good at running the club so he could sell it to someone else and make lots of money out of it.

He will get to justify those theoretical losses in court. That's the point of the court case. And thankfully for him, it's not you who has to accept the argument, it's an experienced judge.

[blythspartan]

I’m genuinely confused why Dai doesn’t just sell to Couhig anyway

It’s the best chance of getting the most money back. It’s virtually no hassle - all the hard work was done, it just needs a signature

Nobody knows what goes on in his head but it’s still baffling. Even if he hates him for some reason - not really sure why - surely he just wants the least hassle and most money at this stage. Surely nobody gets anything out of the current situation

Yeah, I agree with this.

Seeing lots of hatred towards RC on x, but he might the one thing stopping Dai from liquidating us. Obviously, no one really knows what’s going on, but I don’t trust Dai and his cronies who have fed TD lots of oxf*rd lies.

[Sutekh]

I’m genuinely confused why Dai doesn’t just sell to Couhig anyway

It’s the best chance of getting the most money back. It’s virtually no hassle - all the hard work was done, it just needs a signature

Nobody knows what goes on in his head but it’s still baffling. Even if he hates him for some reason - not really sure why - surely he just wants the least hassle and most money at this stage. Surely nobody gets anything out of the current situation

Yeah, I agree with this.

Seeing lots of hatred towards RC on x, but he might the one thing stopping Dai from liquidating us. Obviously, no one really knows what’s going on, but I don’t trust Dai and his cronies who have fed TD lots of oxf*rd lies.

Wondering if perhaps there’s a bunch of turnips involved with Dai on all this, presumably to delay things as much as possible and so maximise their whack.

Someone should be making a tv documentary on it all.

[Gunny Fishcake]

I think Couhig is turning into as big a c*nt as Dai

There’s no way he can have anything to do with our club after this fiasco which could finish us, he’ll be vilified if has anything to do with our club .

They should both well and truly f*ck off together

[Orion1871]

I think Couhig is turning into as big a c*nt as Dai

There’s no way he can have anything to do with our club after this fiasco which could finish us, he’ll be vilified if has anything to do with our club .

They should both well and truly f*ck off together

Couhig is a paragon of virtue and the only lawyer ever not to be a complete tosser. Wash your mouth out if you're criticising him on here.

[Snowflake Royal]

I think Couhig wants Platek to agree to put £12m into escrow, and for Dai to say he will accept that, rather than Platek paying the full sum to Dai and Couhig having to trust Dai to put £12m into escrow after the sale.

You'd be mad to trust to the latter.

[morganb]

What I still don't fully understand is:

Until Dai signed on the dotted line Reading FC was his, not Couhig's.
Something spooked Dai at the last minute so he didn't sign and reimbursed Couhig his loans. At this point RC should walk away.
I don't get how Couhig can now claim for anything except suing for breached exclusivity (not for fictional lost profits).

[Snowflake Royal]

What I still don't fully understand is:

Until Dai signed on the dotted line Reading FC was his, not Couhig's.
Something spooked Dai at the last minute so he didn't sign and reimbursed Couhig his loans. At this point RC should walk away.
I don't get how Couhig can now claim for anything except suing for breached exclusivity (not for fictional lost profits).

I assume it depends on the terms of the offer, exclusivity and any verbal agreements there may or may not have been.

[themwasthedays]

I think that Couhig is the only person who may save us from liquidation/administration, whilst he holds the securities. I think it is in our interest for him not to release them until the takeover, at which time they can be released contemporaneously (at the same time). It may be our only way of continuing. I'm sure discussions will have taken place between the parties concerned.

[MartinRdg]

What I still don't fully understand is:

Until Dai signed on the dotted line Reading FC was his, not Couhig's.
Something spooked Dai at the last minute so he didn't sign and reimbursed Couhig his loans. At this point RC should walk away.
I don't get how Couhig can now claim for anything except suing for breached exclusivity (not for fictional lost profits).

RC would have released the liens but DY's lawyers were sacked/resigned so there was no way to do it so RC can't just walk away while he holds the liens.

[Snowflake Royal]

There's a few points to consider here really aren't there, on whether this is good, bad or mediocre.

1) Dai is in exclusive sale discussions with someone, presumed to be Platek, and the FL seem to have said they're in dialogue with them. We can take this as a Fact then.
2) What we don't know is how far along in negotiations they are and whether the buyer [Inference Platek] is in a position to buy us NOW or before the expiration of some further deadline extension. Or even whether he'd go through with a purchase at all.
3) Dai has been in exclusivity discussions with at least three parties, possibly four, I forget. None of those actually resulted in a sale, with Couhig getting closest.
4) So it's an Assumption that anything would actually complete even if Couhig had agreed to this.
5) We can Infer that there's still an 'easy' route through to a sale, all that has to happen is Platek puts £12m of what he proposes to pay for the club in Escrow, to be held until Couhig's case is decided and ge distributed afterwards based on the outcome of the case. If Platek is poised to buy the club as soon as Couhig's 'block' is removed, then it's trivial to solve if Platek wants to buy and Dai is being honest about the commitment.
6) Couhig is suing Dai for breaching exclusivity and reneging on his agreement to sell the club to Dai, for loss of income. Fact
7) it's unreasonable to expect Couhig to just accept Dai's promise, when he's suing him for dishonesty and broken agreements.
Couhig would buy us today if Dai signed.
9) Dai selling to Couhig would open the door to Platek taking the same legal action Couhig is. But that would be post survival of club and Platek presumably doesn't have the same leverage with the liens as Couhig. But that's an educated Assumption

So basically, we have more info, but we're still no further forward. And we don't know that Couhig is actually preventing anything happen, because we don't know there's an oven ready deal sitting there waiting to go through.