Wasps going into admin & the impact on CCFC (236 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Its clarified in the interview. Gilbert aays “people will say you should have nodded earlier and there’s an exclusivity clause” and Dawkins goes “urm yeah I suppose, but anyway I just want a transparent bidding process”

He’s another Haskell - loves the publicity and the “look at me”
 

rexo87

Well-Known Member
There was a bidding process, NEC and Ashley bid, Sisu and Dawkins didn’t. Unless someone can prove otherwise but despite being given the chance to they’re not claiming that. Everyone knew ACL was due for admin for two weeks leading up to Ashley being announced preferred bidder, it wasn’t a secret.

The whole idea of the exclusivity period just feels wrong though to me, that’s what I’m saying. Surely there should be some sort of hearing where the highest bidder gets it. That means creditors have more chance of getting more of their money back. Sounds very basic and I have next to no knowledge of the system. Just doesn’t feel right


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
He says several other bidders??

Well we know there’s at least one more “credible” interest, and of course Byng (lol). But they all seemed to not actually bid until they legally couldn’t have their bids entertained, which is weird.
 

tisza

Well-Known Member
Its clarified in the interview. Gilbert aays “people will say you should have nodded earlier and there’s an exclusivity clause” and Dawkins goes “urm yeah I suppose, but anyway I just want a transparent bidding process”
Process is transparent in that it is following standard procedures. I'm surprised he claims to know the details of Ashley's bid as I thought negotiations would be covered by an NDA during the exclusivity period.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The whole idea of the exclusivity period just feels wrong though to me, that’s what I’m saying. Surely there should be some sort of hearing where the highest bidder gets it. That means creditors have more chance of getting more of their money back


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah there was, that’s how Ashley became preferred bidder.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Process is transparent in that it is following standard procedures. I'm surprised he claims to know the details of Ashley's bid as I thought negotiations would be covered by an NDA during the exclusivity period.

He says he’s going off press reports TBF
 

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
Fuck it I’m gonna put it out here lads - I’ve made a 23m bid yesterday.

had a deal to buy the club but the council have locked me out. Just becuase I didn’t bid pre-pack

clearly the council’s fault and no mine
 

Nick

Administrator
Process is transparent in that it is following standard procedures. I'm surprised he claims to know the details of Ashley's bid as I thought negotiations would be covered by an NDA during the exclusivity period.
Reeves did say he hadn't signed one...
 

tisza

Well-Known Member
The whole idea of the exclusivity period just feels wrong though to me, that’s what I’m saying. Surely there should be some sort of hearing where the highest bidder gets it. That means creditors have more chance of getting more of their money back. Sounds very basic and I have next to no knowledge of the system. Just doesn’t feel right


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Getting the creditors the most money may well not be the best option for the business going forward. Sometimes need to avoid asset stripping from potential new owners.
Exclusivity period is to get the deal done quickly. Weeds out time wasters.
 

shepardo01

Well-Known Member
How does he know the regeneration promises Ashley is making?

Again is very naive to think he has no idea about it.
He absolutely has...
The Council as the freeholders were, dealing with the NEC bid, and are dealing with Ashley.
They, as freeholders have to authorise any transfer of the lease from ACL.. .
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
He absolutely has...
The Council as the freeholders were, dealing with the NEC bid, and are dealing with Ashley.
They, as freeholders have to authorise any transfer of the lease from ACL.. .

They do but there is a lot of noise about exclusivity. Frankly if Sisu had serious investors they were in pole position months ago to prepare for that and a move the minute the first notice was triggered
 

Telfer85

Well-Known Member
Unfortunately I just think they’ve been outmanoeuvred at the end of the day. Ashley getting that exclusivity deal has given him the head start on everyone else. I think the other bidders have just been very naive in thinking it would go into a normal admin process.

I do think Dawkins has genuine interest and backing in my opinion but I don’t think we’ll get chance to find out.

If it’s true he’s been working on a deal with Sisu as well (unless I misunderstood that) maybe it does show they are open to selling. Unfortunately I’m still not convinced in any way shape or form that Ashley is interested.
 

Nick

Administrator
I don’t think so no.

That’s what we need to know: who put a bid forwards before Ashley got exclusivity.
If there were multiple, how does it work with exclusively? Can somebody offer less but with exclusive payments than somebody offering more but with out them?

That would have been a good question.
 

olderskyblue

Well-Known Member
I don’t think so no.

That’s what we need to know: who put a bid forwards before Ashley got exclusivity.
Didn't he mention they had had up to 10 bids? (or interested parties?)
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
If there were multiple, how does it work with exclusively? Can somebody offer less but with exclusive payments than somebody offering more but with out them?

That would have been a good question.

As far as I can see the process is anyone could have bid at any point prior to Nov 1st, only Ashley and NEC did, then at that point a preferred bidder is named based on those bids and with it an exclusivity period to allow due dil.

If anyone’s got things that contradict that narrative I’m all ears but that’s my understanding and working assumption. So far the word from SaddleBrains’ source is “Sisu we’re waiting and got gazumped” and from Dawkins it’s “we bid after Nov 1st.

There’s a scandal here is Sisu or Dawkins we’re in any way stopped from bidding prior to Nov 1st, but neither seem to be suggesting that. So not sure how it’s anything but tough titties and move faster next time.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Interesting what Gilbert put back to him considering that's largely the subject of his big reveal tomorrow,the seemingly unfair aspect of exclusivity periods.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Didn't he mention they had had up to 10 bids? (or interested parties?)

Reeves mentioned 10 interested parties he spoke to including Hottiger, but they didn’t all go past a convo. Gilbert/CET reported 4 “credible parties” but only two bids.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
If there were multiple, how does it work with exclusively? Can somebody offer less but with exclusive payments than somebody offering more but with out them?

That would have been a good question.

Exclusivity is perfectly rational

It means they cover costs and so mean it’s a serious purchase. In theory they can offer less but again every party would know that
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Also I assume if anyone had put a better official bid in they could make the bond trustee aware and ensure bond holders also get the information
 

shepardo01

Well-Known Member
Exclusivity is perfectly rational

It means they cover costs and so mean it’s a serious purchase. In theory they can offer less but again every party would know that
Should the "club" (or if it paid, Sisu) be pissed off as at one stage, they were paying sums of money to get games on (and keep ACL going!?).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top