Is Administration a desirable outcome? (3 Viewers)

[sky blue john]

Have I missed them?

From what i see it all looks investagative at this stage. I'm sure once there is anything concrete then the members will be consulted.

 

---

[wince]

I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.

Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.

Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.

There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose? That's a very reasoned assessment but still , Two things puzzle me, that never get address,1st, is all this effort to own a football team for such a little return WHY? if we all took the emotion out of it and say its was a factory and not a football team , would they keep going ,and 2ND, the less money going into any business means more time and effort to make a return (even though now it has been explained how they could make a small return, its not there business model so again WHY?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.

Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!

 

[clint van damme]

From what i see it all looks investagative at this stage. I'm sure once there is anything concrete then the members will be consulted.

didn't they say they are sending out a questionnaire to supporters to gauge what direction fans wanted to go. Something other clubs have done.

 

[wince]

That's a very reasoned assessment but still , Two things puzzle me, that never get address,1st, is all this effort to own a football team for such a little return WHY? if we all took the emotion out of it and say its was a factory and not a football team , would they keep going ,and 2ND, the less money going into any business means more time and effort to make a return (even though now it has been explained how they could make a small return, its not there business model so again WHY?

 

[Nick]

The worrying thing is, how confused and misinformed our fanbase is then would a vote even be worthwhile? It's worth educating fans and just dealing with facts before anything to be honest.

 

[no_loyalty]

Administration worked so well for us last time, if it wasn't for admin we'd still have SISU in charge, oh wait..

As Godiva stated, the same thing will happen again if we go into admin, Appleton appointed administrator, Sisu highest bidders, club back to Sisu

 

[Godiva]

Thats why we have voting in this country.
How many members do the trust have ?
Surely a vote accross its members is the way to go. Its simple really if you want a say/vote join if you haven't already.

This is something I struggle with a bit. As I remember the Trust was kinda re-animated back in 2011/12 as the original sisu-out-campaign was born. So - for me at least - the Trust was and still is a protest group that attracts a certain part of the fan group.
It took in a lot of new members back then, people who paid £1. But then there is no yearly renewal of membership. This means that nobody knows for certain how many members the Trust really have. It also means that the Trust is not generating meaningfull income to pay for audits, a full time secretary and so on. They are in my mind not run organized as a trust should be.

It also mean that we cannot ask the 'members' to vote and expect a result we can believe is representing the entire fan base.

You say it's simple - if anyone wants to vote they just have to join the Trust. But surely, those who do not agree with the policy of the Trust will never join (and so never vote) as the membership will add power to the direction they do not support? I would never join (insert party name) to let them know I disagree with their policy.

 

[oldskyblue58]

If SISU want crystallise the loss then what is to stop them going straight to a liquidation? They don't need administration to sort the debts out because apparently there are no big creditors other than them and an administration means you have to take on the football debts in any case to continue in the league. ARVO would sweep up all the assets that remain. OK doomsday scenario and you would think unlikely but most of what has gone on has defied logic so far. If they convince the court there is no business to save then that's it isn't it?

Why would SISU fund an insolvency to end up with what they already have. Last time had a very specific purpose to it - and strangely nothing really changed, still massive debts and accumulated losses. If income levels went so low, there is no value to a deal. It might force a decision on SISU but we might not like the outcome.

Everyone seems to focus on SISU but it is ARVO that control all the assets and have control of any sale or insolvency. I think it is that group of " investors" that are being protected and will benefit from a sale or forced sale

 

[Captain Dart]

I'm sure he mentioned the name but I can't remember who he said. Fairly sure it was a company not an individual though the second administrator was Trevor Birch I think.

Andrew Andronikou who was an uncooperative total pain in the ass & Trevor Birch who was 9eventually) more receptive to common their sense proposals.

 

[Godiva]

That's a very reasoned assessment but still , Two things puzzle me, that never get address,1st, is all this effort to own a football team for such a little return WHY? if we all took the emotion out of it and say its was a factory and not a football team , would they keep going ,and 2ND, the less money going into any business means more time and effort to make a return (even though now it has been explained how they could make a small return, its not there business model so again WHY?

If only we knew how much they actually receive in management fees from the investment funds! Sadly it's not really clear in Sisu's accounts, but if we could estimate a number, then we could maybe assume they would accept that number times 5 or 6 as a severage package. The problem here is that any money a buy-out generate will have to be split between the shareholders except for the loans provided by ARVO (which you would have to be included in the buy-out price).

This is OSB territorie - it's way above my pay grade to even guesstimate any number.
In any case - the number will not be what we think is fair or realistic. Not even close.

 

[Ian1779]

Admin works for no-one, certainly not the trust. There is no party in theory that could force admin upon the club other than SISU so if it did occur it would be on their terms, with their appointed administrator. And if they desired to keep hold of the club it would be their bid that is successful.

IMO we have the option of either someone approaching the owners privately and doing a deal that way, or coming to some arrangement where AVRO continue to be the owners but SISU move aside.

I like the idea of having a local chairman with no previous connections to the club coming in and taking over day to day running might be more realistic. Fans see SISU move out of the way - all monies that the club can generate would stay in the club (and this would mean a short/medium term deal at Ricoh) and then fans can see their money is going to fund squad/club/academy. This wouldn't really be a million miles away from what the trust are proposing or would be likely to end up with.

 

[Esoterica]

Admin works for no-one, certainly not the trust. There is no party in theory that could force admin upon the club other than SISU so if it did occur it would be on their terms, with their appointed administrator. And if they desired to keep hold of the club it would be their bid that is successful.

IMO we have the option of either someone approaching the owners privately and doing a deal that way, or coming to some arrangement where AVRO continue to be the owners but SISU move aside.

I like the idea of having a local chairman with no previous connections to the club coming in and taking over day to day running might be more realistic. Fans see SISU move out of the way - all monies that the club can generate would stay in the club (and this would mean a short/medium term deal at Ricoh) and then fans can see their money is going to fund squad/club/academy. This wouldn't really be a million miles away from what the trust are proposing or would be likely to end up with.

I agree. We've discussed so many times how it's going to take an insane bid to completely remove them. I think a foot in the door approach can be the only realistic way forward, a bandage to get the on the pitch side sorted and stop us hemorrhaging fans is as much a priority as removing SISU (although the two will likely come in hand in hand)

 

[Ian1779]

I agree. We've discussed so many times how it's going to take an insane bid to completely remove them. I think a foot in the door approach can be the only realistic way forward, a bandage to get the on the pitch side sorted and stop us hemorrhaging fans is as much a priority as removing SISU (although the two will likely come in hand in hand)

They won't go... so maybe a compromise is that they become irrelevant. We know that they aren't taking the club money and they don't want to invest. So they leave us alone - let us as a group of fans put into the club through ticket sales (removing Fisher would have to be an essential) and what we generate STAYS in the club - whether it's academy money, funds for transfer/wages. I don't see why as a group of fans we wouldn't be behind such an idea.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

No, some are not going cos the football is rubbish. Many state they're boycotting to 'starve them out'.

Of all the people around me who are not renewing not one is boycotting to starve them out. Just because a few onhere are saying it doesn't make it true

 

[Nick]

Of all the people around me who are not renewing not one is boycotting to starve them out. Just because a few onhere are saying it doesn't make it true

Out of interest, will they do away games?

 

[covboy1987]

I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.

Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.

Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.

There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.

Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

Out of interest, will they do away games?

.
To be fair most of them don't go to away games anyway. I wouldn't have thought so

 

[Captain Dart]

Admin works for no-one, certainly not the trust. There is no party in theory that could force admin upon the club other than SISU so if it did occur it would be on their terms, with their appointed administrator. And if they desired to keep hold of the club it would be their bid that is successful.

IMO we have the option of either someone approaching the owners privately and doing a deal that way, or coming to some arrangement where AVRO continue to be the owners but SISU move aside.

I like the idea of having a local chairman with no previous connections to the club coming in and taking over day to day running might be more realistic. Fans see SISU move out of the way - all monies that the club can generate would stay in the club (and this would mean a short/medium term deal at Ricoh) and then fans can see their money is going to fund squad/club/academy. This wouldn't really be a million miles away from what the trust are proposing or would be likely to end up with.

The club will only enter administration if it enters negative cash flow and the owners are not prepared to fund external debts (e.g. tax bills, stadium rental etc).
Even if that situation arises, judging by what was said at last nights meeting the current owners will put all kinds of obstacles in the way unless they are willing to sell.

There is still a long way to go in my opinion before anything gives.

 

[Specs WT-R75]

Currently the only debt is to Sisu owned/related entities. Unless that changed (i.e. HMRC), then the only entity that can put us into administration is Sisu or related companies.

The majority of the squad is on short term contracts that expire in the summer. If there are lower ST sales then the budget will be slashed, TF even said so, and we will become a mid-table L2 side if we are lucky.

So those that are NOPM and are expecting instant departure from Sisu are going to be very disappointed. Rock and a hard place unfortunately.

 

[dongonzalos]

I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.

Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.

Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.

There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.

Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!

Got to ask is the bold bit still in the negative area?
With that one line you confused me as to whether you want adminstration or not.
Our club getting sold to new owners debt free, depending on who the new owners are that could be an absolute God send

 

[dongonzalos]

People keep talking about NOMP and how it won't work.
It's happening due to the actions of SISU. Not because of orchestrated plan.
It is happening anyway in response to SISU's plans.
So we will find out how it's ends anyway to be fair.

 

[The Gentleman]

I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.

Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.

Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.

There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.

Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!

Hahahaha

I see after last night, Sisu's shite PR department cranks back into action.........

 

[Godiva]

Got to ask is the bold bit still in the negative area?
With that one line you confused me as to whether you want adminstration or not.
Our club getting sold to new owners debt free, depending on who the new owners are that could be an absolute God send

You should read the whole paragraph again as what you pick out is just a part of a very speculative scenario that is very unlikely to happen.

 

[Skybluefaz]

Hahahaha

I see after last night, Sisu's shite PR department cranks back into action.........

Go on..... Oh, is it if you go to games you are a sisu supporting scab?

 

[clint van damme]

Hahahaha

I see after last night, Sisu's shite PR department cranks back into action.........

whys that then? Were you there or did you listen to the Pompey trust rep last night? He clearly outlined some of the dangers of the club going into admin. Yes they rescued their club from that position but they had a few lucky breaks along the way.

 

[dongonzalos]

You should read the whole paragraph again as what you pick out is just a part of a very speculative scenario that is very unlikely to happen.

good editing