Will Rollason Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 Beeb Wonder if we've made any inquiries ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bs3 Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 Have they gone bust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 Have they gone bust? No. The Administrator has just announced that negotiations are going well and player sales have been suspended in the meantime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oftbc Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 CP2010 have been very clever here. They have been told they can buy the ground for a certain price but if they one day sell it the bank wants the difference. Nothing wrong there. Surely as they are so desperate to get SP then they would be in no rush to sell it in the future so I don't see where the problem lies. Many Palace fans think Cp2010 are their saviours yet these people will happily see the club go under because of a potential resale value of the stadium. They have spun the line that the club will go bust if they don't agree a deal so fans will put pressure onto Lloyds which they have done. If I was a Palace fan I would be concerned for CP2010 intentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 CP2010 have been very clever here. They have been told they can buy the ground for a certain price but if they one day sell it the bank wants the difference. Nothing wrong there. Surely as they are so desperate to get SP then they would be in no rush to sell it in the future so I don't see where the problem lies. Many Palace fans think Cp2010 are their saviours yet these people will happily see the club go under because of a potential resale value of the stadium. They have spun the line that the club will go bust if they don't agree a deal so fans will put pressure onto Lloyds which they have done. If I was a Palace fan I would be concerned for CP2010 intentions. Not a fair assessment. They were quite happy to include a so-called anti-embarrassment clause as normal practice but the bank apparently wanted it to be unlimited, not normal practice. It was not the consortium who talked about liquidation but the Administrator who expected the hedge fund to force liquidation and hence a fire sale of players. Without the takeover the Administrator would have no money to pay wages and bills so liquidation would be inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 No. The Administrator has just announced that negotiations are going well and player sales have been suspended in the meantime. Why are we NOT surprised. once again, it's the boy who cried "wolf". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 CP2010 have been very clever here. They have been told they can buy the ground for a certain price but if they one day sell it the bank wants the difference. Nothing wrong there. Surely as they are so desperate to get SP then they would be in no rush to sell it in the future so I don't see where the problem lies. Many Palace fans think Cp2010 are their saviours yet these people will happily see the club go under because of a potential resale value of the stadium. They have spun the line that the club will go bust if they don't agree a deal so fans will put pressure onto Lloyds which they have done. If I was a Palace fan I would be concerned for CP2010 intentions. And don't forget they are holding everyone to ransom over the sale of players. In 82 we had to lose 99% of our players and ended up with basically a youth team and hence got relegated to the old division 4......CP2010 want their cake and eat it. It wouldn't surprise me if CP2010 managed to wrangle a take over and then still had a fire sale, with all the profits going towards their pockets instead of their creditors. Things are not as they seem..... BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 The way I understand it is that the Bank want ALL monies above the purchase price, for a very long time, whereas the new consortium want any settlement based on current valuations. It may be something to do with wanting to transfer the Stadium to a Holding Company under a lease-back deal, for a higher valuation, to put extra money to the Club, whilst protecting their investment. Or if the Club go bust in 20 years, the Bank may make a very tidy and undeserved profit. To be honest, it sounds like this lot are trying to avoid the mistakes of past Chairmen who took on the Club with strings attached and lost a lot of money as a consequence. And presumably as taxpayers bailed out this Bank, using the same standard, taxpayers should be entitled to all future profits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 The way I understand it is that the Bank want ALL monies above the purchase price, for a very long time, whereas the new consortium want any settlement based on current valuations. It may be something to do with wanting to transfer the Stadium to a Holding Company under a lease-back deal, for a higher valuation, to put extra money to the Club, whilst protecting their investment. Or if the Club go bust in 20 years, the Bank may make a very tidy and undeserved profit. To be honest, it sounds like this lot are trying to avoid the mistakes of past Chairmen who took on the Club with strings attached and lost a lot of money as a consequence. And presumably as taxpayers bailed out this Bank, using the same standard, taxpayers should be entitled to all future profits. My understanding too, as explained here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/crystal_palace/8714650.stm Which is why those questioning the consortium's motives are wide of the mark I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 My understanding too, as explained here: http://news.bbc.co.u...ace/8714650.stm Which is why those questioning the consortium's motives are wide of the mark I think. They have a point there but that still doesn't explain why they are going to pull out if players are sold. BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristolCityFC1 Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 just heard on ssn that palace have a future, as a deal/agreement has been reached Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted June 1, 2010 Report Share Posted June 1, 2010 They have a point there but that still doesn't explain why they are going to pull out if players are sold. BCAGFC Presumably because they would be left with no assets at all and no funds to replace them as the money from sales would not be available to sign and pay new players? They had after all agreed to meet costs for the summer themselves if the deals for the club and the ground went through rather than selling players to pay wages. As far as you can ever tell in these situations they do not seem to be Jordan 2.0, any more then Derren Coller and Ken Sage were looking to asset strip our club back in 1982. I am not their official spokesman though, just expressing a view from the evidence I have seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.