NEW THREAD FOR ALL THINGS TAKEOVER | Page 412 | Vital Football

NEW THREAD FOR ALL THINGS TAKEOVER

Status
Not open for further replies.
I could be completely wrong but my understanding was Property Company selling Euxton would pay admins fees, if there was any money left after that it would go to the other Creditors and the only way Yeung got money was if creditors and admin were both paid up in full.

Yes, that was my understanding as well KDZ, but do we look at the property company in Isolation, not as part of the group. That property company has no creditors. Only the football club has creditors, but that doesn't have a pot to piss in.
 
The bit I found interesting was Stanley's assertion that none of their fees would come out of "Wigan Athletic" as such (yes, I know, semantics), but would come out of the property company and any money not going to them would be going to Hong Kong anyway.

We debated this on here recently and when I suggested this might be the case it was (rightly) pointed out to me that in reality Au Yeung would get nothing as other creditors still had to be paid and if ther ews money lefty over the creditors would just egt a great %.
I accepted this as making perfect sense.

Now, I'm wondering whether the "property" company (one of the 5 companies in the convoluted company structure) has no actual creditors in it's own right and so any money left over from the property sales will go to HK, but the other company which is essentially Wigan Atheltic - which has many creditors, has no assets other than what someone will pay.

Can't remember whether it was MB or TB who set me straight last time, I'd be interested to hear your opinion given Stanley's comments.

My understanding was that when we went in to administration there were 5 parts to what had gone in to administration because it was the holding company that was in administration: Latics, the stadium company, Christopher Park, Euxton & Sharpy's
Administrators said very early on that ideally they wanted someone to buy all 5 as they were all tied in to the same umbrella/holding company that was in administration. However they also said that, if needs be they would sell off some parts individually if it looked like that was needed to get a buyer for the "football club"
So (& this is only my understanding of it) in one sense he is absolutely right to say that the football club are not paying their fees. Whoever eventually buys us (if anyone does) then they won't have paid anything to the administrators - but as Simon Jordan said after the pre-recorded interview, the administrators he bought Palace from could also have claimed the same thing even though in effect they were paid from the sale.by the new owner
But I don't think that he can claim that Euxton & Sharpy's were for sale as part of the purchase of the Wigan Athletic Holding Company but now that these were not part of that structure but owned by a HK based entity - This is the first time that this separate HK based entity who would have got all the sale money from the sale of Euxton & Sharpy's has been mentioned to the best of my knowledge
 
I know i fell for the spanish lot hook line sinker
But never once did i believe or fall for frampton and his fantasy world he offerd
Just another time waster best to be forgotten

The common denominator in all potential bidders walking away / backing out / disappearing is the Admin. Surely these horrible f@ckers should be held accountable for banging in even more nails in our demised coffin. Think some time very soon these NDA's need to be ignored and for someone have the balls to tell us what's what.
 
I have zero trust in admin, but is it possible Frampton's team decide they didn't want to do the deal for some reason or some complication popped up and they want to save face and blame admin for something at their end?

If the Admins have been doing something wrong then i am certain they will report admin to the appropriate authorities and raise their concerns with the EFL. There will have been a team of lawyers working on any takeover deal who will have a record of all correspondence and will be able to prove any claims if they exist.

I've always been opened minded on Frampton, but i'm not shocked something came up that made him walk away to be honest.

That's exactly what I've been thinking to be honest
 
Due to the way administration works can anyone confirm if they can increase the price legally? Especially after they have already ring fenced assets and have add ons to cover fees.

There has never been a "price" as such as far as I can tell - They will take whatever they can to pay the creditors as much as they can.
If the best offer only pays the creditors 2p in the £ then they'll accept that
The £3mill "price" only comes from that being what is needed to avoid the 15pnt deduction by paying 25p (I think) in the £.
It's not like when you sell your house & have it valued before putting it on the market for whatever figure you're given. The purchase price at present isn't the value of the holding company and it's assets but the amount needed to pay the EFL's minimum pennies in the £ to non-football creditors in order to avoid that points deduction
I guess at a push the purchase price for the club could increase for any buyer if the admin are able to show that the sale of Euxton & any sell on fees for players who have been flogged is not enough to cover their fees
 
Due to the way administration works can anyone confirm if they can increase the price legally? Especially after they have already ring fenced assets and have add ons to cover fees.

They can ask whatever price they like but it is down to the bidders as to what they get.

The admins are bound by law to accept the highest bid, as long as that bidder can prove he has the money to buy. They can make things difficult by delaying and approaching other parties but ultimately they have to sell, either as a going concern or in a liquidation. Selling as a going concern is in their interest as there is a guaranteed buyer whereas in liquidation they might not find anyone to take the assets.

As far as fees go, they are at the head of the chain and any money raised goes to pay their fees first. I have been trying to get to the bottom of what was agreed in relation to their fees but struggled to find the documents.

It now however appears that a deal was struck with Au Yeung to give them an hourly rate plus uplift with a cap which they have now reached. It is now up to the creditors to agree whether to continue in this manner or seek to have them removed and new admins appointed.

They are saying that they estimate it will take a further 600k to complete the sale and need the creditors to approve this. In my opinion the chance was lost at the initial creditors meeting to challenge their fees and the creditors are now fighting a losing battle.

The money to pay their fees will come from the property assets already sold and the Stadium sale as part of the takeover, which is why they are insistent on the price they are asking. If that price is not met they will still receive their full fees but the creditors are the ones who will suffer and the football club will then receive a further 15 point deduction from the EFL.
 
I see the football agent pal has earned some dosh out of all of this.
More to come as well, reading the text (250,000 quid estimated).

Agents Fees – Football
As outlined in the Proposals, Yatin Patel of Keith Harris and Partners (“the Agent”) was instructed by the Joint Administrators to provide advice and assistance in relation to the various player sales.
To date, £120,000 has been paid to the Agent. Any further payments to the Agent will be subject to the successful sale of the Football Club.
 
Last edited:
The bit I found interesting was Stanley's assertion that none of their fees would come out of "Wigan Athletic" as such (yes, I know, semantics), but would come out of the property company and any money not going to them would be going to Hong Kong anyway.

We debated this on here recently and when I suggested this might be the case it was (rightly) pointed out to me that in reality Au Yeung would get nothing as other creditors still had to be paid and if ther ews money lefty over the creditors would just egt a great %.
I accepted this as making perfect sense.

Now, I'm wondering whether the "property" company (one of the 5 companies in the convoluted company structure) has no actual creditors in it's own right and so any money left over from the property sales will go to HK, but the other company which is essentially Wigan Atheltic - which has many creditors, has no assets other than what someone will pay.

Can't remember whether it was MB or TB who set me straight last time, I'd be interested to hear your opinion given Stanley's comments.

Not sure exactly what you are questioning here Arthur but I'll have a stab at answering.

As far as I am aware the liquidation was of the five group companies, all of which have separate creditors to pay. As it is a group administration the assets that are sold will go towards settling the group debt as a whole.

Monies raised from the sale of any of the property assets will go into the general pot as will any surplus from the trading accounts of any of the companies. The only companies that are able to trade currently will be the Stadium and Football companies. Both Sharpy's and Euxton have been sold from the property company and the money from that has been ring fenced to pay the admins fees and any surplus going to creditors.

Money from transfers and player sales has been used to pay the Football creditors and keep the football club going. We have received amounts which were being held by the EFL in relation to staged transfer payments and these are again being used to pay running costs.

The sale of the Club, Christopher Park and Stadium is the final piece of the jigsaw. The admins need to realise a sale price of £3 million pound to successfully pay 25p in the pound to the creditors and avoid the further points penalty. This is to be done by selling the Stadium for £2.5 million and Christopher Park for 500k, the Football Club can then be sold for £1.

If this is achieved there will be no cash going to HK as Au Yeung has waived his rights to be considered a creditor and as this will only satisfy 25p in the pound to creditors no surplus will be left to be paid over.

I hope this is of help. Sorry for the long winded post.
 
Not sure exactly what you are questioning here Arthur but I'll have a stab at answering.

As far as I am aware the liquidation was of the five group companies, all of which have separate creditors to pay. As it is a group administration the assets that are sold will go towards settling the group debt as a whole.

Monies raised from the sale of any of the property assets will go into the general pot as will any surplus from the trading accounts of any of the companies. The only companies that are able to trade currently will be the Stadium and Football companies. Both Sharpy's and Euxton have been sold from the property company and the money from that has been ring fenced to pay the admins fees and any surplus going to creditors.

Money from transfers and player sales has been used to pay the Football creditors and keep the football club going. We have received amounts which were being held by the EFL in relation to staged transfer payments and these are again being used to pay running costs.

The sale of the Club, Christopher Park and Stadium is the final piece of the jigsaw. The admins need to realise a sale price of £3 million pound to successfully pay 25p in the pound to the creditors and avoid the further points penalty. This is to be done by selling the Stadium for £2.5 million and Christopher Park for 500k, the Football Club can then be sold for £1.

If this is achieved there will be no cash going to HK as Au Yeung has waived his rights to be considered a creditor and as this will only satisfy 25p in the pound to creditors no surplus will be left to be paid over.

I hope this is of help. Sorry for the long winded post.

That was pretty much my understanding TB so what exactly did Paul Stanley mean when he said on TalkSport this morning (I paraphrase cos I can't remember the exact words)
"I don't know why people are focusing on the fees, these are coming from the property sales and are not coming from Wigan Atheltic. Any money over and above our fees will not be going to the club, but will be going to Hong Kong".

I was questioning the Hong Kong part of the statement. If he'd said "creditors" then fair enough but he specifically said Hong Kong
 
Plain to every one. Admin are ripping us off with there fees. But. If someone wanted to pay the asking price for Wigan Athlectic. They would get it. And we have played into Frampton hands. He as walked away blaming the admin. And really was a con man. Good bye and good riddance

Why though John....why bother with any of it if he had no intention in the first place ? It's much more likely that admin are doing something or demanding something that is scaring them off.
 
That was pretty much my understanding TB so what exactly did Paul Stanley mean when he said on TalkSport this morning (I paraphrase cos I can't remember the exact words)
"I don't know why people are focusing on the fees, these are coming from the property sales and are not coming from Wigan Atheltic. Any money over and above our fees will not be going to the club, but will be going to Hong Kong".

I was questioning the Hong Kong part of the statement. If he'd said "creditors" then fair enough but he specifically said Hong Kong

I think he was referring to the fact that the Football Club being sold for £1 will mean that none of their fees will impact the club sale, it will all be centred on the property assets. Like you I am a bit puzzled by the reference to HK and wonder if it was a slip of the tongue or an omission of the word creditors.

There is always the possibility that your original assumption was correct and that there were no creditors for the property company, which I must say I seriously doubt, and that there will be a surplus to send to HK.

Having said that looking at their assessment of fees for the remainder of the administration, as kindly provided by another poster, they will need to draw funds from the sale of the remaining assets to cover their total fees and that will mean that unless they are able to sell the remaining assets for more than the £3 million there will certainly be no surplus to send.
 
You have to ask our selfs who realy would pay 3 million for a league one club.

TBH John, if I had the necessary backing I would.

There are still sufficient assets within the club to warrant a punt.

If the deal could be done quickly and all transfers out stopped I would say we have a pretty good chance of staying in this division. The progress of so many of our youth and academy players would give me the hope of recovering my initial outlay over the coming seasons.

What people need to remember is that the asking price is for the property not the team and that property will still be there in the coming years. If all else fails you could still get some of your money back by selling the ground to Lenegan and the training ground to another smaller club.

In my view £3 million is not the stumbling block, it is the additional future running costs that would kill the deal.
 
Is Frampton still intending building a new hospital etc or was that just bullshit like his alleged bid to buy our club. Cuckoo land time wasting idiot on the same level as Choi, Yeung, Bregbies, EFL and Pollard.
Well he is a rugby fan as well
 
Status
Not open for further replies.