chinapig

Basically, if you do not have an unspent criminal conviction you are ok. If Dale had been disqualified as a company director because of his other business dealings he would not have passed either. Unfortunately, the sort of predatory capitalism he indulges in is positively respectable in this country so he has been able to make money from failed companies to his heart's content with no fear of disqualification.

Just as Oyston was, something that also didn't bother the EFL. I suspect there are plenty more skeletons in cupboards, which is why the clubs are resistant to proper scrutiny.

The situation gets even shadier: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/23/bury-company-debt-cva-steve-dale-daughter

Again from The Guardian: The EFL then confirmed that although Dale passed its “owners and directors test” because he has no criminal convictions, he never provided proof of his “source and sufficiency of funding”, which league rules require of prospective owners before a takeover, or within 10 days afterwards.

Harvey is indeed notorious but the fact that he was appointed tells you a lot about the clubs who appointed him. Jevans talks like a politician and has been quick to deny the EFL's failure so I'll judge her when I see some action. Given that all she promised to do about clubs being allowed to sell their grounds was to look at the wording I am not holding my breath.

I believe he passed the fit and proper test, since any old spiv can do that, but the EFL did not, as you say, approve the sale. Just another example of laughable governance. Jevans in the meantime is trying to exonerate the EFL and promising a review of governance. My money is on that either being kicked into the long grass or recommending cosmetic changes.

He is still saying he has the money at the same time as asking for donations. From The Guardian: Bury FC: Speaking to Talksport presenter Jim White, Bury owner Steve Dale has pleaded with supporters and local businesses to club together and pledge £2.7m to help save the club, despite claiming he doesn’t actually need the money and is not looking for charity. “Fans, anyone out there who will pledge money to come to us … if they come to us and say we’ll put £100 in, £1000 in, if the big players put in £100,000, £500,000 .., whatever it is, we want it pledged to the company,” he said. “We need a pledge of £2.7m plus to save Bury. If the company, Bury Football Club, needs the money and needs to use it, they’ll put up shares and pay 2.5% interest on that money. We don’t need it, let me say that, unless the EFL pull another stroke. “So what we’re looking to do now is go out there and say to local businesses – we’ve got massive firms in our areas, we’ve got the Boohoo boys, Together Finance, the old card guy Ron Wood, we’re got loads of people within Bury who will maybe look at it and think: ‘well it’s short change out of my pocket, I’ll pledge some money’. “If we take any money off someone we’ll pay interest on it and we will secure it on shares in the club. Let me make this clear, we’re not looking for charity here, because we don’t need it. But the EFL want it. The EFL have made this ridiculous claim that we need this money, but we’re saying we don’t!” Meanwhile Kieran Maguire points out that: Dale has been a director of over 20 companies that are either dissolved, in liquidation or a CVA. There’s a lot of money to be made by becoming involved in companies in distress. This is the kind of person the EFL allows to own clubs.

Who will surely have the contract for the IT infrastructure, to go with the contract he has to maintain the systems at Ashton Gate.

Compulsory purchase of the land seems to be their expectation. That would go down well with Council Tax payers. Or not.

Is there a lack of capacity, a lack of demand or both? And won't the ending of free movement make the former worse? Which in turn makes it harder to find the skilled people to build a stadium, or any major project?

A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. Sam Goldwyn (though he probably wasn't the first to say it).

Ah, but surely there were only about 3,500 Coventry fans? The Gas may only have taken 1,400 but the rest of the crowd was made up of Brum fans there to support them because they are universally loved by the fans of all other clubs. QED.

Thanks for pointing out. A pretty limp response by Jevans though, waffle about clarity and looking at the wording doesn't come close to adequate. The only true part is that it's not a loophole, it's a rule specifically introduced to allow clubs to act recklessly because that's what some of them wanted to be free to do.

You are right course, I am deeply ashamed of our club for not doing so. No wonder the fans of every other club are talking about it. Is it too late to make amends? Perhaps we could pay for them to have proper doors fitted to their players and officials entrance so they don't have to secure it with a rusty padlock on the outside? Then they can boast about having Championship ready doors to go with the sprinklers.

Come now, I'm sure Man City fans talk about little else but the Taylor deal. There's probably a long thread about it on most club's forums, it's such a big scandal, a stain on the game's spotless reputation. Remind me who agreed the sell on clause and forgot to set it at £10m though, as their fans don't seem to know anything about it. Or they do but don't want to hold their beloved owner accountable for it. Or for anything else

Thanks for posting. Predictable silence from the EFL. In the wake of the Bolton and Bury situations you would think they would be concerned about more reckless financial management but they have proved themselves incompetent at every step. And of course the football media cries crocodile tears over Bolton and Bury but shows no interest in other clubs risking their future.

Mr P will no doubt give a comprehensive answer but you do realise the club was FFP compliant in the period you refer to I assume and therefore had no need to game the system? I would think that is the definition of FFP friendly. Of course with the finances being bolstered by player sales of something approaching £60m over the last 2 years there isn't any need to play fast and loose with the finances. Your use of the word overdrawn in relation to the P&L is a bit odd as the P&L is not a credit facility but again there are accounting experts on here who may clarify the point for you.

I see one poster said they are miles behind us on and off the pitch and yet he hasn't been banned for being a Sh1thead. Has freedom of speech broken out over there or are their Mods getting a bit sloppy?

Bristol Sport is in effect an overarching management company that provides common services to the football, rugby and basketball operations. A lot more efficient than each doing its own thing. I'm surprised somebody of your obvious intelligence could look at the definition of franchise and conclude that Bristol Sport is one. Not that it matters but it is rather pathetic that Gasheads cling on to franchise as a term of abuse because they are so far behind in every respect. Still, unique kit, most loyal fanbase, loved by the fans of every other club etc. etc.

I seem to recall they were claiming on Sagchat that a takeover was imminent last October. Naturally nothing happened. I sometimes wonder if these things are invented to distract the deluded fans from the reality of their position. Not that they seem to recognise it anyway.

Thanks for sharing your expertise. I take your point of course, it just seems futile to carry out technical work if there is no realistic prospect of buying the land in question. It seems to me that at best a company whose only asset has a charge on it is going to face punitive interest rates on any loans it manages to raise.

So: 1. They don't own the land. 2. They are doing technical work (whatever that is) in respect of land they don't own. 3. They haven't discussed with the Council. 4. They have no source of funding. 5. They are talking about an impossible time scale. 6. Their gullible fans have fallen for another content-free statement. Yep, definitely coming for us.

Not a complete idiot I think. He knows he has a gullible fan base who are usually hooked by promises of jam tomorrow. They will continue to follow him and in 2 years time when they are no nearer to a new stadium he will blame the Council and they will follow suit. Nice watch though.

No need, it's a well known habitat for a rare species of newt. Or it will be once I transport them from Long Ashton.

Plus the mysterious London office.