Suspect deal is "Dead in the water" Another year of Mr D, !
The museum could clean up here ;-) Trust me, it isn't.
The deal might not be, but next season certainly is!
These are business men buying our club with great care and diligence. Our concerns about when the season starts won't make them cut corners, not for you, not for no one. It's unfortunate, but it's just the way it is.
The reality of the situation doesn't make it any less depressing, RD's stain will be left on our club for years to come. The way things look like now, avoiding relegation will be a huge success next season.
Suspect deal is "Dead in the water" Another year of Mr D, !
The museum could clean up here ;-) Trust me, it isn't.
The deal might not be, but next season certainly is!
These are business men buying our club with great care and diligence. Our concerns about when the season starts won't make them cut corners, not for you, not for no one. It's unfortunate, but it's just the way it is.
The reality of the situation doesn't make it any less depressing, RD's stain will be left on our club for years to come. The way things look like now, avoiding relegation will be a huge success next season.
I'm nervous as hell about it myself Stu. Gotta strengthen midfield, urgently. Need about 6 more players I'd say.
Suspect deal is "Dead in the water" Another year of Mr D, !
The museum could clean up here ;-) Trust me, it isn't.
The deal might not be, but next season certainly is!
These are business men buying our club with great care and diligence. Our concerns about when the season starts won't make them cut corners, not for you, not for no one. It's unfortunate, but it's just the way it is.
I'm sure they are, but some of the delays surely have come from the complicated nature of their consortium, with members dropping out and being replaced by new ones. I entirely understand why Muir doesn't want to buy the club 100% himself, but if it was just him buying the club, and not a consortium, I'm sure the deal would have been done by now.
James has GM said some dropped out or are you quoting other rumour-mongers?
No I have no idea if anyone pulled out, or was rejected by the ELF.
And @killerandflash , the club said the complicated nature of the consortium is the reason for further paperwork, not sure they said people pulled out, did they? But if they did, it's maybe not surprising, in that they may have bought into the idea, only to be put off when doing due diligence, with all the legal nightmares from the pre Roland era. But yes one owner is simpler, in theory.
James has GM said some dropped out or are you quoting other rumour-mongers?
No I have no idea if anyone pulled out, or was rejected by the ELF.
And @killerandflash , the club said the complicated nature of the consortium is the reason for further paperwork, not sure they said people pulled out, did they? But if they did, it's maybe not surprising, in that they may have bought into the idea, only to be put off when doing due diligence, with all the legal nightmares from the pre Roland era. But yes one owner is simpler, in theory.
Suspect deal is "Dead in the water" Another year of Mr D, !
The museum could clean up here ;-) Trust me, it isn't.
The deal might not be, but next season certainly is!
These are business men buying our club with great care and diligence. Our concerns about when the season starts won't make them cut corners, not for you, not for no one. It's unfortunate, but it's just the way it is.
The reality of the situation doesn't make it any less depressing, RD's stain will be left on our club for years to come. The way things look like now, avoiding relegation will be a huge success next season.
I'm nervous as hell about it myself Stu. Gotta strengthen midfield, urgently. Need about 6 more players I'd say.
Looking at the players we've lost since last season, I reckon we need at least 8, 4 of which need to be starters.
I wonder how much the universe has expanded since this thread began? By the time this sale goes through, the pitch will be the size of Eltham. But it’s all relative...
( just had a look - the universe is expanding at 68 kilometres per second apparently. Kin hell )
86400 seconds in a day...then times that by the current oh fuck number.
Correct me if I am wrong but don't we only have until 9th August to finalise signings? After that it's just loans we can sign until the 31st?
I know things shouldn't be rushed but this could have a huge effect on our season...
We can sign players up untill 31st August at midnight (1st sep)
Not entirely correct. With effect from this season, the EFL transfer window has been aligned with that of the Premier League. It shuts on Thursday 9th August 2018 at 5pm for permanent transfers.
But EFL clubs can still:
Sign players on Standard Loan up to the 31st August 2018. Sign players on Standard Loan up to 31st August 2018 with an option to agree a permanent transfer when the next window opens. Register players who ceased to be registered with a club during the period up until 31st August 2018. Transfer players OUT to a club in any League whose window is still open.
@JamesSeed said Leiden/Leiven had advised that historical issues are sorted it at great expense to the Australians. Who is Leiden/ven & why would they sort out the expense of historical problems ?
The transfer window closing on 9th August, is that good or bad ? ( Charlton can’t buy but also restricts Duchatelet’s ability to sell : does the harmonisation help the Premiership club more than EFL clubs ? )
What is the universe expanding into ? Will the universe stop expanding before the takeover completes ? (2 part question for Roland Duchatelet)
Sorry Rick but your post directly contradicts the one you posted immediately above. While I appreciate your inside info and fanzine, you are speculating again and many of your ITK observations have proved to be just that. Was your contact a CCC or L1? There is a difference. Stripe, PayPal, Worldpay, Paypoint, Shopify, Sage, 1st Data? All may have different protocols. They are not banks per sè. You are commenting on an issue raised by RD's lackey. If it was a problem at the club, why didn't your contacts appraise you sooner? Also, see Stig's contribution a few pages back.
You misread the post. I am not speculating. You said that “banks” (your description) never advance payments in this situation and hence that “morons” thinking there is anything unusual here are wrong.
In fact it has been standard practice for many years to forward the season ticket funds on receipt to my personal knowledge. I spoke to someone with 20 years experience of multiple L1 clubs in exactly this area - and still involved today - to check it is still the case and he confirmed that it is still standard practice to do so. He is someone who does the deal and manages the cash flow based on the income, not a junior employee.
One thing about working in football is that you get to know people at other clubs and everyone knows each other’s business and compares notes. Clubs help each other out in areas where they don’t compete and learn from each other if they have a problem or things change. If he says it’s not typical “unless they think there is serious financial risk” then it isn’t, because he will know.
Coming to this a little late. However, it is frankly ridiculous to imagine withholding season ticket receipts is anything but an exceptional practice. The primary reason season tickets are put on sale as early as they are is to help with cash flow when cash income would otherwise be at its lowest. If it was normal practice to withhold, clubs wouldnt get through the summer.
It strikes me that the bank are looking at the current situation of the club and are addressing the risk that cash is released and taken out of the business rather than provisioned against commitments (e.g. wages, supplier invoices), something that may ultimately render the club insolvent if an unpaid supplier opts to head to court. This doesn't mean the club is in a parlous financial situation, it does mean that the bank considers the sum of the current complexities a risk that needs mitigating.
Sorry Rick but your post directly contradicts the one you posted immediately above. While I appreciate your inside info and fanzine, you are speculating again and many of your ITK observations have proved to be just that. Was your contact a CCC or L1? There is a difference. Stripe, PayPal, Worldpay, Paypoint, Shopify, Sage, 1st Data? All may have different protocols. They are not banks per sè. You are commenting on an issue raised by RD's lackey. If it was a problem at the club, why didn't your contacts appraise you sooner? Also, see Stig's contribution a few pages back.
You misread the post. I am not speculating. You said that “banks” (your description) never advance payments in this situation and hence that “morons” thinking there is anything unusual here are wrong.
In fact it has been standard practice for many years to forward the season ticket funds on receipt to my personal knowledge. I spoke to someone with 20 years experience of multiple L1 clubs in exactly this area - and still involved today - to check it is still the case and he confirmed that it is still standard practice to do so. He is someone who does the deal and manages the cash flow based on the income, not a junior employee.
One thing about working in football is that you get to know people at other clubs and everyone knows each other’s business and compares notes. Clubs help each other out in areas where they don’t compete and learn from each other if they have a problem or things change. If he says it’s not typical “unless they think there is serious financial risk” then it isn’t, because he will know.
Coming to this a little late. However, it is frankly ridiculous to imagine withholding season ticket receipts is anything but an exceptional practice. The primary reason season tickets are put on sale as early as they are is to help with cash flow when cash income would otherwise be at its lowest. If it was normal practice to withhold, clubs wouldnt get through the summer.
It strikes me that the bank are looking at the current situation of the club and are addressing the risk that cash is released and taken out of the business rather than provisioned against commitments (e.g. wages, supplier invoices), something that may ultimately render the club insolvent if an unpaid supplier opts to head to court. This doesn't mean the club is in a parlous financial situation, it does mean that the bank considers the sum of the current complexities a risk that needs mitigating.
My understanding is that we are only talking about income from season ticket sales where credit cards have been used as payment. The banks cannot withhold money received on ticket sales where the payment method is cash, cheque or Debit Card.
I wonder what proportion of season ticket sales are paid for using a credit card?
I suspect this is more of an issue in League One as the reliance on TV money which if I recall is release twice a year, is less.
However it is mainly about cash flow and given how much additional funds/loans are needed and the essentially banked season ticket money which is likely forthcoming (how many League clubs have ever failed to put on a match for insolvency reasons? ) it doesn’t seem to be a major issue, although interesting to some, I would have thought not that significant in the grand scheme of things.
Sorry Rick but your post directly contradicts the one you posted immediately above. While I appreciate your inside info and fanzine, you are speculating again and many of your ITK observations have proved to be just that. Was your contact a CCC or L1? There is a difference. Stripe, PayPal, Worldpay, Paypoint, Shopify, Sage, 1st Data? All may have different protocols. They are not banks per sè. You are commenting on an issue raised by RD's lackey. If it was a problem at the club, why didn't your contacts appraise you sooner? Also, see Stig's contribution a few pages back.
You misread the post. I am not speculating. You said that “banks” (your description) never advance payments in this situation and hence that “morons” thinking there is anything unusual here are wrong.
In fact it has been standard practice for many years to forward the season ticket funds on receipt to my personal knowledge. I spoke to someone with 20 years experience of multiple L1 clubs in exactly this area - and still involved today - to check it is still the case and he confirmed that it is still standard practice to do so. He is someone who does the deal and manages the cash flow based on the income, not a junior employee.
One thing about working in football is that you get to know people at other clubs and everyone knows each other’s business and compares notes. Clubs help each other out in areas where they don’t compete and learn from each other if they have a problem or things change. If he says it’s not typical “unless they think there is serious financial risk” then it isn’t, because he will know.
Coming to this a little late. However, it is frankly ridiculous to imagine withholding season ticket receipts is anything but an exceptional practice. The primary reason season tickets are put on sale as early as they are is to help with cash flow when cash income would otherwise be at its lowest. If it was normal practice to withhold, clubs wouldnt get through the summer.
It strikes me that the bank are looking at the current situation of the club and are addressing the risk that cash is released and taken out of the business rather than provisioned against commitments (e.g. wages, supplier invoices), something that may ultimately render the club insolvent if an unpaid supplier opts to head to court. This doesn't mean the club is in a parlous financial situation, it does mean that the bank considers the sum of the current complexities a risk that needs mitigating.
My understanding is that we are only talking about income from season ticket sales where credit cards have been used as payment. The banks cannot withhold money received on ticket sales where the payment method is cash, cheque or Debit Card.
I wonder what proportion of season ticket sales are paid for using a credit card?
I think you can rule out cash and cheque as relatively trivial by volume in 2018, although the club’s assertion it was still (unlawfully) charging a fee for credit cards will have put off some. Although “credit cards” was stated it may well extend to debit cards because of the (weaker) legal protection they offer.
While we're on the subject of season tickets and takeovers. If a takeover happened tomorrow, what would be the chances of actually scoring a couple of season tickets in time to use them for the first home game? Would the process move at the speed of a Keohane managed development of Sparrows Lane?
Sorry Rick but your post directly contradicts the one you posted immediately above. While I appreciate your inside info and fanzine, you are speculating again and many of your ITK observations have proved to be just that. Was your contact a CCC or L1? There is a difference. Stripe, PayPal, Worldpay, Paypoint, Shopify, Sage, 1st Data? All may have different protocols. They are not banks per sè. You are commenting on an issue raised by RD's lackey. If it was a problem at the club, why didn't your contacts appraise you sooner? Also, see Stig's contribution a few pages back.
You misread the post. I am not speculating. You said that “banks” (your description) never advance payments in this situation and hence that “morons” thinking there is anything unusual here are wrong.
In fact it has been standard practice for many years to forward the season ticket funds on receipt to my personal knowledge. I spoke to someone with 20 years experience of multiple L1 clubs in exactly this area - and still involved today - to check it is still the case and he confirmed that it is still standard practice to do so. He is someone who does the deal and manages the cash flow based on the income, not a junior employee.
One thing about working in football is that you get to know people at other clubs and everyone knows each other’s business and compares notes. Clubs help each other out in areas where they don’t compete and learn from each other if they have a problem or things change. If he says it’s not typical “unless they think there is serious financial risk” then it isn’t, because he will know.
Coming to this a little late. However, it is frankly ridiculous to imagine withholding season ticket receipts is anything but an exceptional practice. The primary reason season tickets are put on sale as early as they are is to help with cash flow when cash income would otherwise be at its lowest. If it was normal practice to withhold, clubs wouldnt get through the summer.
It strikes me that the bank are looking at the current situation of the club and are addressing the risk that cash is released and taken out of the business rather than provisioned against commitments (e.g. wages, supplier invoices), something that may ultimately render the club insolvent if an unpaid supplier opts to head to court. This doesn't mean the club is in a parlous financial situation, it does mean that the bank considers the sum of the current complexities a risk that needs mitigating.
My understanding is that we are only talking about income from season ticket sales where credit cards have been used as payment. The banks cannot withhold money received on ticket sales where the payment method is cash, cheque or Debit Card.
I wonder what proportion of season ticket sales are paid for using a credit card?
I think you can rule out cash and cheque as relatively trivial by volume in 2018, although the club’s assertion it was still (unlawfully) charging a fee for credit cards will have put off some. Although “credit cards” was stated it may well extend to debit cards because of the (weaker) legal protection they offer.
I paid for mine with a credit card without any surcharge.
(Had to renew my seat early or would have faced a double increase because of the re-zoning of some seats.)
Comments
BUMP!
Can't have this thread dropping off the front page.
And @killerandflash , the club said the complicated nature of the consortium is the reason for further paperwork, not sure they said people pulled out, did they?
But if they did, it's maybe not surprising, in that they may have bought into the idea, only to be put off when doing due diligence, with all the legal nightmares from the pre Roland era.
But yes one owner is simpler, in theory.
I know things shouldn't be rushed but this could have a huge effect on our season...
There's your answer
But EFL clubs can still:
Sign players on Standard Loan up to the 31st August 2018.
Sign players on Standard Loan up to 31st August 2018 with an option to agree a permanent transfer when the next window opens.
Register players who ceased to be registered with a club during the period up until 31st August 2018.
Transfer players OUT to a club in any League whose window is still open.
Edit: see above for a better explanation!
So we could sign an unattached player on 1 September but he couldn’t be registered and play till the Christmas transfer window opens?
We can sign free agents whenever we please
@JamesSeed said Leiden/Leiven had advised that historical issues are sorted it at great expense to the Australians. Who is Leiden/ven & why would they sort out the expense of historical problems ?
The transfer window closing on 9th August, is that good or bad ? ( Charlton can’t buy but also restricts Duchatelet’s ability to sell : does the harmonisation help the Premiership club more than EFL clubs ? )
What is the universe expanding into ? Will the universe stop expanding before the takeover completes ? (2 part question for Roland Duchatelet)
It strikes me that the bank are looking at the current situation of the club and are addressing the risk that cash is released and taken out of the business rather than provisioned against commitments (e.g. wages, supplier invoices), something that may ultimately render the club insolvent if an unpaid supplier opts to head to court. This doesn't mean the club is in a parlous financial situation, it does mean that the bank considers the sum of the current complexities a risk that needs mitigating.
I wonder what proportion of season ticket sales are paid for using a credit card?
However it is mainly about cash flow and given how much additional funds/loans are needed and the essentially banked season ticket money which is likely forthcoming (how many League clubs have ever failed to put on a match for insolvency reasons? ) it doesn’t seem to be a major issue, although interesting to some, I would have thought not that significant in the grand scheme of things.
If a takeover happened tomorrow, what would be the chances of actually scoring a couple of season tickets in time to use them for the first home game?
Would the process move at the speed of a Keohane managed development of Sparrows Lane?
(Had to renew my seat early or would have faced a double increase because of the re-zoning of some seats.)