Deal edging closer? | Page 41 | Vital Football

Deal edging closer?

moonay said:
Three things there TB:

- If that £4m was what it took to settle the o/s debt, then given that we've since sold Kipre (I'll ignore Windass, as most of his money probably went to Rangers), then we've surely paid off a little more of that o/s debt. (For the sake of argument, we'll presume that they'd already allowed for the Euxton money).

- Based on what Krasner had said previously, prior to Kipre's sale, we were supposed to be covered by Euxton's sale.

- The selling price has nothing to do with making us sustainable. It's a one off cost, that doesn't go into the club in any way. I'm puzzled by what you mean here.

I still maintain that a club with players assets to sell doesn't go for the same price as the same club, but with no saleable player assets.
Click to expand...

I am sorry for the delay in replying to this and it may no longer be relevant but I am going to try and explain my reasoning.

I fear you are confusing the issue with the sale.

There are several parts to the sale, the stadium company, the training ground, Sharpys and the football club.

Krasner has separated those assets for us and the bidders and given the price required to buy each of the separate parts. He has said that he doesn't want to sell the stadium and training pitch separately from the football club for obvious reasons. That aside they are still valued separately and as such their values are set, those of the property assets by an independent valuation and the football assets by the admins.

I think the part that you and others are missing is that they are separate entities. As such they are being sold off as parts of a whole but not as a whole, if that makes sense. The football club and its player assets are only being sold for £1 therefore it is not possible to lower that figure and no amount of players sold is going to change that.

I agree this does not seem to be confusing, and why should anyone pay the same price for something when part of it has been sold, but the key is that the football assets are being given away for a peppercorn rate and the sale value does not reflect the asset value. I don't want to labour the point and will leave it at that but in this sale we need to remember that the only thing the bidders are actually buying are the properties and not the football players.

My analogy of selling the house by the way was to highlight the fact that the club is still incurring debt, I take your point that if you stripped the furnishings out it would devalue the sale and that would also apply to the property assets in this sale.
 
Regarding Krasner amongst the other things that p*** me off about him is that he made the excuse of that it's difficult to be in regular contact with the Americans due to the time difference.

Absolute nonsense,there is only around 5 hours difference to Tampa.So he should adjust his working hours accordingly(with what seems our only serious bidder left)to get in regular contact and have serious discussions about sorting this deal out.

These people are serious about buying our great club,or else they would've buggered off ages ago,but in the back of my mind I'm worried there's a tipping point which could be another quality player sale like Morsy or Byrne for peanuts by those leeches.

Anyone would think they are dragging this out on purpose due to their high daily fees?So if they can't be bothered to adjust their working hours accordingly to accompany the Americans,then I'm not exactly expecting any news in the next couple of days,unless of course they charge double time for working weekends.

Anyway it's nice to have a game to turn a bit of our focus onto today,so why I'm here I'll go for 2-2 draw and we win on penalties,as we are due a win on them bloody things.
 
Thanks for the response TB. I still think though that Krasner's "offer" is massively misleading....................... and to be honest, disingenuous.

He's said that he isn't going to sell the stadium separately to the club ......... .so why put the value against the stadium, rather than the club?

If he was genuine with his intention, then he could just as easily have put the value against the club, and said he'd throw the stadium (and C Park) in for £1. At least this way, the price would have reflected the impact of the ongoing player sales....... £6m (maybe more) before anyone went, and down to a couple of £m now (if that).

After all, if he wasn't going to sell the stadium independently of the club, the assets in the sale were the players, and the sale price is simply aiming (primarily) to pay off any creditors.

I have to say ......obviously, I think your statement "the only thing the bidders are actually buying are the properties and not the football players." is wrong. The only reason anyone is interested in buying the club is because of the players. The only person to whom your statement might apply is Lenegan ................... and supposedly, he isn't going to get it, unless he changes his bid.
 
The true valuation of a football club goes out the window when in administration, the land assets are worth significantly more than 3.5m.

Its all about what money is required to pay off the creditors and adminstrators fees, the owners have walked and have waived their right to any money.

The fee to buy us should be what ever it takes to pay off the remaining money, if 3.5m was good enough two weeks ago before we raised 2.2m. Then you lower the price to sell the club and save the business.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Exactly their job is to get back the amount and leave. 1.5m admin fees, 1m layer fees, 300k legals costs, 25p in pound etc all add up to 3.5m according to admin in their last press confrence - the quickest way to get that figure was pause the player sales and negotiate the sale when the offer was in that region. But they sold 2.5m worth of players and killed the original offers meaning stay and their costs continue to rise - they extended the stay by their decision. Raising money to put in reserve for wages for 2 months rather than negotiating the offer at hand is the opposite of short term.
Click to expand...

KDZ, please stop mentioning a bid from the Americans being rejected it is confusing the issue. Unless you have evidence, that no one else has seen, that a bid was actually made then continually referring to it is just stirring emotions. As far as I can tell the only person that has mentioned a bid was Nixon, a journalist looking to sell papers. I know you set a lot of store by him but there is no proof that a bid has been lodged, let alone one that was acceptable.
 
moonay said:
Thanks for the response TB. I still think though that Krasner's "offer" is massively misleading....................... and to be honest, disingenuous.

He's said that he isn't going to sell the stadium separately to the club ......... .so why put the value against the stadium, rather than the club?

If he was genuine with his intention, then he could just as easily have put the value against the club, and said he'd throw the stadium (and C Park) in for £1. At least this way, the price would have reflected the impact of the ongoing player sales....... £6m (maybe more) before anyone went, and down to a couple of £m now (if that).

After all, if he wasn't going to sell the stadium independently of the club, the assets in the sale were the players, and the sale price is simply aiming (primarily) to pay off any creditors.

I have to say ......obviously, I think your statement "the only thing the bidders are actually buying are the properties and not the football players." is wrong. The only reason anyone is interested in buying the club is because of the players. The only person to whom your statement might apply is Lenegan ................... and supposedly, he isn't going to get it, unless he changes his bid.
Click to expand...

Those are the facts though Moonay, the tangible assets in the sale are the properties, not the players. Players values are highly speculative whereas property stays relatively stable. In simple terms, the players value is his contract not his ability, and he could run that contract down and leave you with nothing , bricks and mortar always have a value.

As far as anyone buying us will be concerned I disagree that the only reason they are buying us is for the playing staff, most businessmen, and that is what we are looking at, would want the fixed assets not an asset that could lose its value in a momentary bad tackle.

No matter how many players are sold the property values will not be reduced much and if as has been suggested there are bids in for them then those bids will need to be matched.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
The football club and its player assets are only being sold for £1 therefore it is not possible to lower that figure and no amount of players sold is going to change that.
Click to expand...

Technically correct explanation TB ....and a clear one....but ...anyone including the administrators know fine well that anyone buying the football club within the whole package are obviously aware of the innate value of the playing staff.....regardless of the nominal £1.

That they continue to ‘fire sale’ the playing squad is decimating that innate value and making it increasingly unlikely that anyone would buy a loss making club, saddled with a loss making stadium, that now has little or no foundation of playing talent .....from which any ‘springboard‘ can be developed to address those losses and the general fortunes of the club.

Everyone was seriously disappointed with the earlier sales and meagre fees earned, but most recognised it as a necessary evil....but the continuation of that policy increasingly looks like a deliberate attempt to undermine the prospects of a sale.
 
Sick of this defence of the admins. Yes they need to sell to pay debts but my 3 year old son would get a better price as would my 18 month old son.

Kipre worth upward of 5 million.

Krasner says wages covered for next two months so no need to sell. Money in the club again.

West brom get promoted to the greed league and are filthy rich.

We sell for 1 million.

WHY????

Begbies get a big sell on fee. 😡🐍

Sell him if you have to. That's not what this is about!!!! Its the pathetic 1 million fee. Admin or not, we could hold out for a lot more. Two or more clubs interested, instead we let him go for peanuts. Blackburn walk away as they cant compete wage wise with west brom and its a prem move. If never stop cedrics dream move but the more quality we let go for nothing the more likely the well will dry up and soon we will have nothing left. If we sell at a decent rate we will use our assets up much slower. They are our carbon fuel. Administration is more of a reason than ever to sell at market value and above.

Its disgusting, utter asset stripping vultures.
 
C_Latic said:
Because it would be done by now if they were.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, things are complicated, with several parties involved and the Council just can't commit to buying the stadium without going through procedures, which necessarily take time.
Buying the stadium is only one option, I know for a fact there are other options being discussed and it depends on the outcome of other discussions/deals
 
But TB, if he's not going to sell the stadium separately, then that can't be the only asset on which a value is placed. It just can't. It's a joint offering with the club ........ and the the value of the assets (players) within the club has reduced significantly in recent weeks ..........whilst also reducing the amount we owed creditors at the same time.

Anyway, it's been done to death.
 
Zeb2 said:
Technically correct explanation TB ....and a clear one....but ...anyone including the administrators know fine well that anyone buying the football club within the whole package are obviously aware of the innate value of the playing staff.....regardless of the nominal £1.

That they continue to ‘fire sale’ the playing squad is decimating that innate value and making it increasingly unlikely that anyone would buy a loss making club, saddled with a loss making stadium, that now has little or no foundation of playing talent .....from which any ‘springboard‘ can be developed to address those losses and the general fortunes of the club.

Everyone was seriously disappointed with the earlier sales and meagre fees earned, but most recognised it as a necessary evil....but the continuation of that policy increasingly looks like a deliberate attempt to undermine the prospects of a sale.
Click to expand...

I totally understand and agree with you from the point of view of the bidder, however turn that around and see it from the creditor or administrators view and the picture changes drastically.

All creditors want as much of their money back as possible and the talk of a 25% dividend is all that people are talking about on here. What about the other 75% they are owed, do they just shrug their shoulders and write it off or do they expect the admins to continue to to raise as much of that that they can. The only way that the admins can do that is with player sales. As I said, if you look at it from the bidders or fans view it makes no sense to continue to sell players but look at it from the other side and it makes perfect sense. The key point in all this is that the administrator has a duty to raise as much money to settle the creditors debts, not just the 25%, all of it and will continue to do that until an acceptable bid for the club comes in.
 
moonay said:
But TB, if he's not going to sell the stadium separately, then that can't be the only asset on which a value is placed. It just can't. It's a joint offering with the club ........ and the the value of the assets (players) within the club has reduced significantly in recent weeks ..........whilst also reducing the amount we owed creditors at the same time.

Anyway, it's been done to death.
Click to expand...

Last word on this mate as it has been done to death as you say.

Although Krasner has said he wants to sell the club and ground as one, he knows that he cannot take a bid lower than one that has already been received and he also knows that as a last resort he will be forced to sell the properties separately if no acceptable bid is made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.