Search results

yes but he doesnt have a charge on the acl assets or entity. Bondholders have the first charge on wasps holdings

he is a director yes and at the moment can influence (or PSC) the process until administration. However it is wasps holdings that own the shares in ACL not richardson. he controls or controlled it because he controlled wasps holdings. But legally speaking ACL is owned by wasps holdings

But ACL is owned by wasps holdings not Richardson. As such any proceeds from a share sale go to wasps holdings If ACL sell just the assets of ACL receive the cash from said sale and because of the charges in place those receipts get applied to the secured liabilities.

Am sure it will be a prepack situation. That doesn't mean necessarily that the value is set in the administration. It could be a way of separating the assets the purchaser wants from everything else. The price already set The purchaser pays acl for those assets and the assets move to a new...

For there to be a delay then there must be a funded bid(s) on the table. If so then the administrators of wasps holdings as wasps still own acl would be involved and the council will be involved. The bids being assesses and the most favourable agreed or could yet be rejected. Obviously the...

Turnover is through iec so expect acl had control of the bank account. Basically it looks to me like the trading account was not up to date plus didn't delaware put a few million in upfront for the trading rights?

Dilapidation costs will form part the negotiations certainly, will affect size of any offer or its structure. But they don't have to be paid day 1 and could well be programmed over several years

Looks like a short extension to get deal done to me. Nothing going to happen today but reasonable to expect game Tuesday at the cbs

Pompous 🤣 might come across as that on the odd occasion but I try very hard not to be. I also am happy to back up my points with provable facts and generally indicate when it's opinion or conjecture. Also happy to accept I can or might be wrong I provided some very brief facts as to why I don't...

Bit like your opening sentence then 🤔

Just a few bullet points Wages costs 2021 financials 13.4m The club lost cash flow for a period not permanently so any claim if there was one would be offset by the income when match played. Not only that they will have received some of the income anyway. Any purchaser of acl would have...

NEC - I don't get this NEC don't want the stadium part. It has a stadium event at least 23 times a year on a regular basis for the next 8 years at least generating rent, footfall, contributions to overheads etc then a couple of major concerts a year. Their involvement in stadium would be no...

So long as ccfc stick to the plan there should not be a problem. We cant sign players anyway just now unless they have no current contract and would not be fit enough in any case. It isnt great PR though. You have to wonder why the owners could not have avoided this that is a serious concern for...

could easily be barking up the wrong tree but we will know soon enough whats to happen

ccfc's administration

i dont know. will all be based on independent valuers reports employed by the owners

if thats all thats on offer how are the bondholders going to challenge it? think back to 2014 do we know what the best deal was? sealed bids wasnt it?

yes i would think so....... could be the full amount or "the best deal they could get". I am guessing if the new entity buys it for £35m that in the coming financials it will be worth more. If the money to buy it isnt put in to the new entity by interest bearing loans, say by issued share...

well depends on how they do the prepack and how that is financed. if the prepack clears the liability then yes

If they repeat what is now then it isnt going to work. The stadium needs to be run by people that know what they are doing, NEC, Delaware, Compass, AEG etc and no i dont mean any of these being second fiddle to the rugby owners as is the recent situation.