by Hound » 15 Jan 2024 13:28
by SCIAG » 15 Jan 2024 13:35
genome I was thinking a lot about the playoff final yesterday
Was that penalty shootout a huge sliding doors moment?
by Brum Royal » 15 Jan 2024 13:40
Snowflake RoyalBrum Royal How does the EFL/FA actually force a sale though? If they ban him from ownership, how does that affect his position?
They give him a deadline or the club is expelled.
Can't own a Football League Club, if the club isn't in the Football League.
by 6ft Kerplunk » 15 Jan 2024 13:42
by Snowflake Royal » 15 Jan 2024 13:46
blythspartan I am being ribbed by a Pompey supporting mate who thinks we should raise money like they did to save our club. The problem being even if we raised something like £10 to £20m I don’t believe Dai would enter negotiations with the fans or anyone else.
by Greatwesternline » 15 Jan 2024 13:46
blythspartan I am being ribbed by a Pompey supporting mate who thinks we should raise money like they did to save our club. The problem being even if we raised something like £10 to £20m I don’t believe Dai would enter negotiations with the fans or anyone else.
by WestYorksRoyal » 15 Jan 2024 13:48
by Snowflake Royal » 15 Jan 2024 13:49
Brum RoyalSnowflake RoyalBrum Royal How does the EFL/FA actually force a sale though? If they ban him from ownership, how does that affect his position?
They give him a deadline or the club is expelled.
Can't own a Football League Club, if the club isn't in the Football League.
But in that instance, surely it accelerates the route to liquidation? If you have all the assets of a football club but nowhere for them to play, why not just get rid of the lot and make use of the land to sell to get money back (stadium protection excepted)?
by Forbury Lion » 15 Jan 2024 14:54
Snowflake RoyalBrum RoyalSnowflake Royal They give him a deadline or the club is expelled.
Can't own a Football League Club, if the club isn't in the Football League.
But in that instance, surely it accelerates the route to liquidation? If you have all the assets of a football club but nowhere for them to play, why not just get rid of the lot and make use of the land to sell to get money back (stadium protection excepted)?
Pretty much, but it does solve the FL's problem.
The stadium isn't worth much as anything other than a stadium because the ground is contaminated and the stadium would need to be demolished. But maybe Dai thinks he can get more selling off the club's land and assets piecemeal once the club is gone, than he can selling the club as a package. Or maybe he knows he'll get less, but he sees it as not being beaten and shown up by someone else.
by Dirk Gently » 15 Jan 2024 15:02
Forbury LionSnowflake RoyalBrum Royal
But in that instance, surely it accelerates the route to liquidation? If you have all the assets of a football club but nowhere for them to play, why not just get rid of the lot and make use of the land to sell to get money back (stadium protection excepted)?
Pretty much, but it does solve the FL's problem.
The stadium isn't worth much as anything other than a stadium because the ground is contaminated and the stadium would need to be demolished. But maybe Dai thinks he can get more selling off the club's land and assets piecemeal once the club is gone, than he can selling the club as a package. Or maybe he knows he'll get less, but he sees it as not being beaten and shown up by someone else.
Stadium has that community asset protection order on it, so presumably can't be demolished?
by Sutekh » 15 Jan 2024 15:18
by themwasthedays » 15 Jan 2024 15:23
by Dirk Gently » 15 Jan 2024 15:27
Sutekh Is Bearwood "protected" in any way?
by Sutekh » 15 Jan 2024 15:31
Dirk GentlySutekh Is Bearwood "protected" in any way?
Can't see how it would be. It doesn't qualify for ACV, so it'd be down to the planners to approve/deny a change of use application.
by Clyde1998 » 15 Jan 2024 15:33
Dirk GentlyForbury LionSnowflake Royal Pretty much, but it does solve the FL's problem.
The stadium isn't worth much as anything other than a stadium because the ground is contaminated and the stadium would need to be demolished. But maybe Dai thinks he can get more selling off the club's land and assets piecemeal once the club is gone, than he can selling the club as a package. Or maybe he knows he'll get less, but he sees it as not being beaten and shown up by someone else.
Stadium has that community asset protection order on it, so presumably can't be demolished?
That "Asset of Community" isn't the magic panacea everyone seems to think. It only means that the community must be consulted and be given an option to purchase it before it can be sold to anyone else. But that's all it does. There are also plenty of precedents of it being ignored - not least when the MadStad was sold by the Thais.
Stopping demolition or change of use would be down to the local planning process, and is nothing to do with the ACV "protection".
by Dirk Gently » 15 Jan 2024 15:33
SutekhDirk GentlySutekh Is Bearwood "protected" in any way?
Can't see how it would be. It doesn't qualify for ACV, so it'd be down to the planners to approve/deny a change of use application.
Thanks, just asking as I think Reading had problems persuading the local council to let them develop the site even though it retained the site for sporting use.
by Sutekh » 15 Jan 2024 15:36
Dirk GentlySutekhDirk Gently
Can't see how it would be. It doesn't qualify for ACV, so it'd be down to the planners to approve/deny a change of use application.
Thanks, just asking as I think Reading had problems persuading the local council to let them develop the site even though it retained the site for sporting use.
That'll be Wokingham, who are just generally opposed to football in general and Reading in particular because it creates traffic on their nice middle-class roads. They scuppered the stadium expansion plan back in 2006/7.
by Elm Park Kid » 15 Jan 2024 16:31
As Reading FC supporters are only too aware, it has in recent months become increasingly clear that Mr Dai Yongge is no longer in a position - or does not have the motivation - to support the Club financially as he did following the change of control in 2017.
In November 2023, the EFL called for the disqualification of Mr Dai following the failure to fund the deposit account to cover player and staff salaries following repeated breaches of EFL Regulations. This was ultimately rejected by an Independent Disciplinary Commission and a financial sanction was imposed instead.
The EFL has now received confirmation that Mr Dai did not meet last Friday’s latest deadline to fund the deposit account as ordered, meaning he has been in default for nearly four months. As a result – and as per the terms of the 15 December decision - a further £50,000 fine has now been imposed, taking the total to £80,000.
His continued failings mean that once again the Club's hardworking staff have no reassurance as to payment of wages and demonstrates a clear disregard for his obligations as a director of the Club.
In respect of this issue, the League will now consider all available options it has under the Regulations and will have no hesitation in bringing further charges against Mr Dai.
In the meantime, and for the sake of the future of Reading FC, its staff, supporters, and local community we urge Mr Dai either to fund the Club adequately or to make immediate arrangements to sell his majority shareholding to appropriate new owners so everyone can move forward with renewed optimism.
For our part, we will work with Mr Dai, his team, and the Club plus any potential purchaser to navigate and meet the requirements of the Regulations as quickly as is physically possible and bring an end to this difficult period for all parties.
What followed the events at the end of last week were the unfortunate scenes on Saturday afternoon that led to the abandonment of the fixture versus Port Vale, and further demonstrated the impact the current situation is having on everyone associated with the Club.
However, entering the field of play is a criminal offence and puts the safety of all participants at risk. The EFL Board will discuss events at Saturday’s match during its meeting later this week as it has a responsibility to the League’s member clubs and the competition to ensure all 72 Clubs meet the requirements of the rules as previously agreed by EFL Clubs.
Finally, the League has been in regular dialogue with the Supporters Trust at Reading (STAR) in recent months and has always made – and will continue to do so – itself available to recognised supporters’ groups to discuss challenging situations and, regarding current matters involving Reading, has arranged to meet with representatives of a number of groups in the next 24 hours.
by Brogue » 15 Jan 2024 16:39
by genome » 15 Jan 2024 16:40
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Royals and Racers and 108 guests