SPANIARDS BID REJECTED | Page 5 | Vital Football

SPANIARDS BID REJECTED

moonay said:
LMB, I'm really not trying to wind up anyone. All I've said, from the outset, consistently, is that the EFL only have the power of approval over the prospective owner. They don't have any power as to approve how the club might be run. It really is as simple as that.

I have no idea why you're ranting about the £5m ........... though if you want to know where it's come from, I seem to remember it being an estimate of 2 years worth of running costs.

The end of your post is a rant, with no punctuation, making it very difficult to understand.

Regardless, I'll ask yet again, please, please, please, show where the EFL can reject an owner for not liking their business plan, cash flow forecast, or any other business tool. They're judging the owner ....... not his methods.
Click to expand...
Please tell me where that 5 million pound running costs comes from and how do you estimate something like that, other things need to be considered especially future earnings, the cash flow forecast is an undeniable piece of documentation to calculate how any business will be run in the future and how much money will be needed, the EFL might have produced that forecast themselves for all I know, but it is an integral part of their criteria to pass any future owners test.

Oh and the stuff about punctuation is a cheep shot that you tend to roll out with nany on here who think you argue for the sake of it right or wrong.

Waiting in anticipation for your 'I must have the last word post' another thing others have accused you of repeatedly.
 
Updates from Nixon twitter this morning for those who don't follow. Answering some of the questions we have had on here.

These are his comments not mine, so you know as much as i do after reading them.

Spanish bidder 'changed their mind'

'Admin were misled'

'Plan to bring in young Spanish players killed off by Brexit rules'

'There are bidders'

RRR are still about

'First bidder in with deposit gets chance to close the deal'

On Ganaye and Americanms 'Door is open. But were put off by numbers in the end.'

'Wigan. Spanish bidders wanted EFL to drop the points penalty thing attached to NOT paying creditors. Wow. A bullet dodged ... '

'Wigan. May be worth pointing out that the 300k deposit paid the wages for a month. So it wasn’t a total waste of time. ' Doesn't believe deposit will be returned.

'Naismith exit for Cyprus now close. Another wage gone. Another good player gone. '
 
Degsy1 said:
They seem to have been "spooked" between Christmas & New Year by a combination of a realisation of difficulties in bringing in foreign players due to new Brexit rules and the worsening of the COVID situation (new Strains ?). Anyway they decided to cut their losses and exit - not good for us !.
Click to expand...

To be fair Degsy, all of those issues were clear for all to see ........ well, certainly Brexit. OK, Covid has got worse in the last few days, but the signs were there well before Christmas.

If they were ignorant to all of this, then they've only themselves to blame.
 
loudmouthblue said:
Please tell me where that 5 million pound running costs comes from and how do you estimate something like that, other things need to be considered especially future earnings, the cash flow forecast is an undeniable piece of documentation to calculate how any business will be run in the future and how much money will be needed, the EFL might have produced that forecast themselves for all I know, but it is an integral part of their criteria to pass any future owners test.
Click to expand...

Why are you so insistent on having an argument over the £5m?. I've never mentioned it.

In the meantime, for the bloody umpteenth time, please, show me in the EFL's own regulations where the EFL can reject an owner because of whatever it is you're claiming.
 
moonay said:
This little thread is worth a moment of your time ...............

https://twitter.com/x/status/1346448555624554496
Click to expand...

Good find Moonay. The Spanish sounded every bit as bad as we could've feared, sounds like this is a blessing that they fucked off rather than followed through. I think all of those questioning the SC and Nandy's refusal to endorse them now understand after seeing some of the likely reasoning.

The key phrase there i imagine is 'no more work means no more money' i suspect this will focus minds.
 
Degsy1 said:
Good Interview - well worth listening to.

It's clear the Spanish were not time wasters and had invested a lot of money in this takover deal so far.

They seem to have been "spooked" between Christmas & New Year by a combination of a realisation of difficulties in bringing in foreign players due to new Brexit rules and the worsening of the COVID situation (new Strains ?). Anyway they decided to cut their losses and exit - not good for us !.
Click to expand...

I’m not having that. We all knew about Brexit (although I see big Sam is putting that excuse out as to his transfer plans changing). Covid strain hasn’t really changed anything - we’re only getting out of this with the vaccine.

They had no real interest in the club. They only saw an opportunity to asset strip it and made money, not invest and grow it. We’ve dodged a bullet here, this is fantastic news, however it’s come about.
 
loudmouthblue said:
Oh and the stuff about punctuation is a cheep shot that you tend to roll out with nany on here who think you argue for the sake of it right or wrong.

Waiting in anticipation for your 'I must have the last word post' another thing others have accused you of repeatedly.
Click to expand...

I honestly struggled to understand the points you were trying to make. Read it back yourself and tell me I'm wrong.

I don't "tend to roll out with" that kind of thing at all ........... neither with many, nor nany ! (OK, maybe occasionally, but only in jest).

I don't want the last word ......... I want you to back up your point by showing where in the EFL's regulations, it says they can reject someone because of how they intend to run the club.
 
Made in Wigan said:
I’m not having that. We all knew about Brexit (although I see big Sam is putting that excuse out as to his transfer plans changing). Covid strain hasn’t really changed anything - we’re only getting out of this with the vaccine.

They had no real interest in the club. They only saw an opportunity to asset strip it and made money, not invest and grow it. We’ve dodged a bullet here, this is fantastic news, however it’s come about.
Click to expand...

I think it's entirely possible the Brexit rules impacted their plans, but if that was the death blow they would've pulled the plug when it was announced weeks ago. So i think it's safe to say that wasn't that big a factor.

Didn't the Chinese pull this type of stunt with Whelan? Agreed a price and then at the 11th hour dropped it (but certainly not by 50%) in the hope that the fear of losing the deal would see the seller accept the lower off than restart the process.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
I think it's entirely possible the Brexit rules impacted their plans,
Click to expand...

The end of freedom of movement was on the cards when we left at the start of the year. It was never going to be reinstated. Not really sure what other aspect might have affected their decision.

Sounds like bollocks ........ or a negotiating tactic that's blown up in their face.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
If Admin think there is an advantage to doing so then the SC's requests will likely be ignored unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Speed is of the essence. The EFL have stated they're happy to deal with two bids simultaneously. There'd have to be a damn good reason to grant exclusivity at this stage.
 
I'm bloody glad these lot are not being allowed to bring in a load of young Spanish lads. I want to see a team of young British lads just like this generation we are nurturing. It's a happy day for me this lot have fucked off...just thing of the damage down the line if they hadn't.
 
moonay said:
I honestly struggled to understand the points you were trying to make. Read it back yourself and tell me I'm wrong.

I don't "tend to roll out with" that kind of think at all ........... neither with many, nor nany ! (OK, maybe occasionally, but only in jest).

I don't want the last word ......... I want you to back up your point by showing where in the EFL's regulations, it says they can reject someone because of how they intend to run the club.
Click to expand...

It is only you who is saying that, I am saying the whole test package is about finance and character of the bidders, and unless they meet the financial criteria the bid is a none starter, to calculate how much is needed to run the club for the following two years a cash flow forecast is essential and any bidder can match or better that financial criteria, ask your banker friend from mudhutter how it works.
 
loudmouthblue said:
It is only you who is saying that, I am saying the whole test package is about finance and character of the bidders, and unless they meet the financial criteria the bid is a none starter, to calculate how much is needed to run the club for the following two years a cash flow forecast is essential and any bidder can match or better that financial criteria, ask your banker friend from mudhutter how it works.
Click to expand...

I'm happy to leave it there LMB. I've asked on a number of occasions, and you've not come up with anything, so, we'll leave it.

As for a banker friend, I've no idea who you're talking about ....... but regardless, as the EFL didn't reject the bid in December because of any financial concerns (or at least, none that were made public, or were in contravention to any of the rules or regulations), I guess it's irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.