Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/12/21 in all areas

  1. Poor two sessions from last us today, but winning the final session has us in with a sniff. We need to bat a damn site better than we did first up, mind
    1 point
  2. Thanks for that. Looks like a lot of shunting around of the same debt originally used to purchase BRFC, plus the interest charged against it. Still the same position of Wael owning the club and having his investment protected by the value of the stadium. Plus the Colony seems to be owned independently with a possibility of being used for housing at a later date, if the adjacent site wins PP. I know this puts the actual club in a similar position as others but, for them to improve and become really competitive, they'd need massive investment for a new stadium, something Wael doesn't seem able to provide.
    1 point
  3. I didn't think that was any longer the case Bert. Hence Hani coming off Dwane Developments' board. Edit: 1883 accounts filed but not yet available.
    1 point
  4. ? What a shame for Mr. Harmer. Glos. have got to be careful against Hants, or they will suffer the same fate.
    1 point
  5. I don't think they're going to contain any surprises; the result is basically as it stands. That £15m debt was owed to 1883 and therefore hence on to Dwane Sports but has been cancelled and now 1883 owns more shares in the football club which it did anyway. I'd suggest that it doesn't matter much whether the reamining debt sits in 1883 - owed to DS - or in DS because if there ever is a sale then it could be either DS or 1883 that is sold. It will be interesting to see what is the position betweeen 1883 and DS but an owner with the intention of flogging off the club or asset stripping it is not going to convert debt to equity if only because of the tax advanatages of having it as debt - tax free repayment unlike dividends or sale proceeds / gains. I flagged it up when it looked like Rovers were heading into losing their stadium under the charge set upon it but I am happy to now flag up that the club looks financially solid. Or as financially solid as any non-premier league club does!
    1 point
  6. It's a football forum, he's posted football related info, chill out.
    1 point
  7. Strangely ,over 5000 of those views are actually by TBW!
    1 point
  8. I can only guess that the distinction in rules for “Professional Standing” and “established player” is down to the embargo reason. Looks like you can be under Registration Embargo for reasons other than P&S. Derby themselves have 5 counts against them, one of which is P&S. Perhaps if Derby’s only issue was P&S, the established player rule might be applicable….but as we see, Derby have 4 other issues. That’s the only thing I can come up with. Derby County Regulation 16.2 - Failure to provide audited annual accounts Regulation 16.3 - Annual Accounts not filed with Companies House Regulation 17 - Default in payments to HMRC Regulation 51.2.3 - Default in paying transfer fee instalments Profit and Sustainability Rules - non-submission of audited accounts
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...