CONFRIMED: Latest rumours Confrimed as Unconfrimed

[Pepe the Horseman]

The EFL has not been told the identity of the new buyer

Errr.

[Sutekh]

If Haitong do seize the ground in lieu of payment from Dai then they'll simply look to sell it but the issue will always be how much rent they'll fleece the club for in the meantime.

Can't see any way a prospective buyer going to pay Dai, say, £25m while having to fork out a further £1.5m in rent per season (or £55m for the stadium).

[Armadillo Roadkill]

If Haitong do seize the ground in lieu of payment from Dai then they'll simply look to sell it but the issue will always be how much rent they'll fleece the club for in the meantime.

Can't see any way a prospective buyer going to pay Dai, say, £25m and then fork out a further £1.5m in rent per season (or £55m for the stadium).

If the bank seizes the stadium, then they can only sell it on for its market value, which cannot be £55 million. Or they can hang onto it and watch it degrade over time, but that makes no sense.

So the bank needs to co-ordinate the sale of the stadium with the sale of the club if they're to get any money back.

[Hound]

The club's not worth much without the stadium.

The stadium's not worth much without a viable tenant, and RFC is the only realistic one.

If I've understood all of the machinations, this appears to be the only ground for hope.

It also kicks the "reliable source" that put the blame on Couhig's last minute bargaining into touch.

Maybe that’s why he dropped it he offer to £8m?

[PieEater]

Can someone explain how an overseas company can have a charge on the stadium, a UK asset? Is there some place in the UK that registers these charges, otherwise how would any buyer know how many other companies in the world that have loaned Dai money have also got charges on the stadium.

Do BVI courts have any juristiction here anyway? Could a buyer just ignore their decision as long as they get the ownership changed.

[Wycombe Royal]

Can someone explain how an overseas company can have a charge on the stadium, a UK asset? Is there some place in the UK that registers these charges, otherwise how would any buyer know how many other companies in the world that have loaned Dai money have also got charges on the stadium.

Do BVI courts have any juristiction here anyway? Could a buyer just ignore their decision as long as they get the ownership changed.

I was wondering the same. Surely this charge would need to be registered with Companies House?

[South Coast Royal]

Can someone explain how an overseas company can have a charge on the stadium, a UK asset? Is there some place in the UK that registers these charges, otherwise how would any buyer know how many other companies in the world that have loaned Dai money have also got charges on the stadium.

Do BVI courts have any juristiction here anyway? Could a buyer just ignore their decision as long as they get the ownership changed.

I was wondering the same. Surely this charge would need to be registered with Companies House?

I thought that overseas companies didn't have to register such charges-I may be wrong.

[Crusader Royal]

If Haitong do seize the ground in lieu of payment from Dai then they'll simply look to sell it but the issue will always be how much rent they'll fleece the club for in the meantime.

Can't see any way a prospective buyer going to pay Dai, say, £25m while having to fork out a further £1.5m in rent per season (or £55m for the stadium).

If the club has a contract to lease the stadium at a set rate surely it would be illegal for a new owner to increase that rate until a new agreement was due, unless there were terms in the lease allowing rent rises at any point. Most leases included the provision for rents to be reviewed at specific points (every 5 years on a 25 year lease for example).
Of course as the original lease is between 2 Dai companies there may not even be a proper contract.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

If Haitong do seize the ground in lieu of payment from Dai then they'll simply look to sell it but the issue will always be how much rent they'll fleece the club for in the meantime.

Can't see any way a prospective buyer going to pay Dai, say, £25m while having to fork out a further £1.5m in rent per season (or £55m for the stadium).

If the club has a contract to lease the stadium at a set rate surely it would be illegal for a new owner to increase that rate until a new agreement was due, unless there were terms in the lease allowing rent rises at any point. Most leases included the provision for rents to be reviewed at specific points (every 5 years on a 25 year lease for example).
Of course as the original lease is between 2 Dai companies there may not even be a proper contract.

You'd think a bank in China wouldn't want to start running a property management company in the UK, unless they already have similar assets. Selling would be the better option, and the only viable buyer I can see is a football club. Demolition and redevelopment is probably not a good option either.

As to just ignoring any ruling of a court in the BVI - not honouring international law would set a precedent that would spook foreign investors into the UK. The billionaires that hide their cash tax fee in such places would be unlikely to let any government put their scams at risk by undermining the legal agreements they depend upon.

[katweslowski]

Reading Borough Council made the stadium a community asset. I've no idea if this means anything legally, or whether it's just a title.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... e%20owners.

[katweslowski]

One of the most frustrating things about all of this is that the club won't address these rumours or issues. I understand they can't respond to every idiot on Twitter. But when you have something spreading and rumours coming from all sorts of places, it would be refreshing to have the club give some clarity.

To be honest, they should be doing this anyway ffs, not in response.

E.g.

"Couhig deal fell through - soz about that. Also to tell you the stadium is subject to a loan by Dai and could be someting which the Chinese Bank could take control of in order to re-pay the debt." ...... plus extra info about how they're handling it all

[Sanguine]

Reading Borough Council made the stadium a community asset. I've no idea if this means anything legally, or whether it's just a title.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... e%20owners.

When this was announced I thought this meant that it could only be used for football, i.e. it was stop the ground being sold off separately.

[Greatwesternline]

Can someone explain how an overseas company can have a charge on the stadium, a UK asset? Is there some place in the UK that registers these charges, otherwise how would any buyer know how many other companies in the world that have loaned Dai money have also got charges on the stadium.

Do BVI courts have any juristiction here anyway? Could a buyer just ignore their decision as long as they get the ownership changed.

I was wondering the same. Surely this charge would need to be registered with Companies House?

You register charges against properties at the Land Registry. Someone who can be bothered could buy the title deeds report for the Mad Stad and have a look. it'd only be £1.50

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Do loans to overseas banks secured on UK assets appear on the charges register at the land registry?

Earnshaw reckons Couhig was aware of this at outset and new prospective owner also is....

[Clyde1998]

The club's not worth much without the stadium.

The stadium's not worth much without a viable tenant, and RFC is the only realistic one.

If I've understood all of the machinations, this appears to be the only ground for hope.

It also kicks the "reliable source" that put the blame on Couhig's last minute bargaining into touch.

The club without the stadium is probably worth more than the stadium without the club. In fact, the stadium is probably worthless (at best) without the club.

As you've said, there's no viable team to become a tenant at the stadium without us playing there. Reading Borough Council are never going to approve of any development that demolishes the stadium and the car park is already owned separately.

The club at the very least could temporarily play somewhere else - most likely Wycombe. Absolutely far from ideal, but would allow the club to continue operating whilst a more permanent solution is found.

Would give the perspective owner some sort of negotiating leverage over the Chinese bank - otherwise they've simply got a worthless asset on the books, which they can't generate any revenue from.

[royalgent]

Can someone explain how an overseas company can have a charge on the stadium, a UK asset? Is there some place in the UK that registers these charges, otherwise how would any buyer know how many other companies in the world that have loaned Dai money have also got charges on the stadium.

Do BVI courts have any juristiction here anyway? Could a buyer just ignore their decision as long as they get the ownership changed.

I was wondering the same. Surely this charge would need to be registered with Companies House?

I thought that overseas companies didn't have to register such charges-I may be wrong.

It seems to me there’s a bit of a misleading line in this story - BVI stop notices apply to the sale of shares in BVI Companies, not assets.

Presumably the stadium is held via a BVI holding company - and the stop notice is to stop the transfer of shares in that company.

[Crusader Royal]

Reading Borough Council made the stadium a community asset. I've no idea if this means anything legally, or whether it's just a title.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... e%20owners.

When this was announced I thought this meant that it could only be used for football, i.e. it was stop the ground being sold off separately.

It means very little.
The owner has to give interested community groups (essentially STAR) notice of sale and time to prepare a bid. The bid doesn’t have to be accepted and once the time period has elapsed the sale to others can go ahead.
Use of the stadium would be down to the local planning authority.
It’s essentially a token gesture.

[Crusader Royal]

.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

I was wondering the same. Surely this charge would need to be registered with Companies House?

I thought that overseas companies didn't have to register such charges-I may be wrong.

It seems to me there’s a bit of a misleading line in this story - BVI stop notices apply to the sale of shares in BVI Companies, not assets.

Presumably the stadium is held via a BVI holding company - and the stop notice is to stop the transfer of shares in that company.

I guess these must be the complicated ownership structure across multiple legal jurisdictions we were told about.

[WestYorksRoyal]

I don't know what to make of it all, and Earnshaw has rebutted some points in the Guardian article (the EFL do know who the new potential buyer is).

If a bank are involved, presumably they will act rationally. The club is worth less without the stadium than with. The stadium is literally worthless without the club. Last year's protection didn't add much, but it's in the covenant that it is a stadium used to host sport. Who else would use it other than Reading FC?

I don't see the logic over a bank blocking the sale and holding on to a stadium with no use. Even £2m a year rent barely touches the sides compared to Dai handing them £25m odd sales proceeds now.

It's clearly all murky, but logic dictates this should be a complication but not a deal breaker. Which is what the Chronicle are now reporting.