Looks like Bolton sale has finally gone through.

excessbee wrote:The circus continues. Bizarrely, Bury yesterday started selling tickets for Saturday's fixture against Doncaster. Today they have suspended sales, apparently because of staff shortages and uncertainty about whether the match will go ahead. They are now going to wait until after this afternoon's deadline. Not a lot of joined up thinking going on there!!

Physical tickets for that match are probably worth more than the club right now.

excessbee wrote:

NearlyDead wrote:

"Despite previously stating we would have liked an extra 24 hours to conclude the deal, actually our position is not a condition of the strict timeline they have put in place, but reflective of the systemic failings of a football club over a number of years.

from Sky

So they have spent the last 48 hours looking at the books, then?

There's an (approx) £3m charge on the ground tied to one of the loans, that's why no-one wanted the takeover.

Astonished that they managed to find in 2 days of due diligence (which usually takes at least a couple of weeks) what Steve Dale seems to have failed to recognise in however long it took him to find the quid he needed to take on responsibility for the debt.

It's also that which influenced the £2.7m figure Dale was talking about the fans raising.

Fast forward to 2022.

Our time at Rodney is up. We have nowhere to play.

Could we count on the support of the the EFL?

Would they safeguard us from falling the way of Bury? Will they learn their lessons?

Should we come under a "potential clubs in trouble list?" Along with many others who are further down the line.

Do we start putting the pressure on the WRU immediately in the wake of Burys plight?...

The Salamander wrote:Fast forward to 2022.

Our time at Rodney is up. We have nowhere to play.

Could we count on the support of the the EFL?

Would they safeguard us from falling the way of Bury? Will they learn their lessons?

Should we come under a "potential clubs in trouble list?" Along with many others who are further down the line.

Do we start putting the pressure on the WRU immediately in the wake of Burys plight?...

We're on the "potential clubs in trouble" list along with everyone else not currently in the Premier League.

As for "nowhere to play", we wouldn't get expelled unless we literally could not ground share elsewhere either.

As Bury's expulsion came mainly from a charge of £3m secured against their ground for one of the loans they were liable for, resulting in no-one being prepared to take on that debt, not having a ground to leverage loans against would actually be a positive in comparison.

According to a David Conn article in The Guardian dated 28 August Bury council have said that Gigg Lane "is protected for sporting purposes and no development would be allowed on it". That's surprising, given the ridiculous mortgage value it's been given, but a massive relief.

JonD wrote:According to a David Conn article in The Guardian dated 28 August Bury council have said that Gigg Lane "is protected for sporting purposes and no development would be allowed on it". That's surprising, given the ridiculous mortgage value it's been given, but a massive relief.

Shame Newport Council didn't take the same view on Somerton Park.

SJG99 wrote:

The Salamander wrote:Fast forward to 2022.

Our time at Rodney is up. We have nowhere to play.

Could we count on the support of the the EFL?

Would they safeguard us from falling the way of Bury? Will they learn their lessons?

Should we come under a "potential clubs in trouble list?" Along with many others who are further down the line.

Do we start putting the pressure on the WRU immediately in the wake of Burys plight?...

We're on the "potential clubs in trouble" list along with everyone else not currently in the Premier League.

As for "nowhere to play", we wouldn't get expelled unless we literally could not ground share elsewhere either.

As Bury's expulsion came mainly from a charge of £3m secured against their ground for one of the loans they were liable for, resulting in no-one being prepared to take on that debt, not having a ground to leverage loans against would actually be a positive in comparison.

.....and what's to say we WILL be able to ground share elsewhere? You're stating the obvious, and the obvious thing is that one day it'll be Newport County on the tea time news. It'll be Newport County that are told something like: "you have til 5pm on 31st May to tell us where you'll be playing next season"..... my guess is, that'll be nowhere that's suitable. Even if we could afford somewhere close, we need to be having these conversations now, but it seems months tick by at a time, with no 'stadium updates'... Make no mistake, if it's not sorted, we're out.
What we do from there is anyone's guess.
Does anyone know the actual cost of bringing Newport Stadium up to League standard, assuming of course, it's even available to us?

According to the Bury Times

London-based lenders Capital Bridging Finance Solutions Ltd hold the key mortgage on Bury's Gigg Lane home. It has a book value of £3.7million, double its redevelopment value.

Would a 'reputable lender' lend a sum that is twice what the property/land is worth?

Also, an interesting turn of phrase, 'key mortgage'. Almost as if there is more than one mortgage on it.

So, given that, at the moment, it doesn't look like a phoenix club is likely to be playing at Gigg Lane next season.

And reported buyers are still sniffing. Although there is no EFL appeals process, I do wonder if one of those buyers succeeds in the near future whether the EFL would countenance giving them back their golden share and just placing them in L2 next season, which would mean two relegation spots still in L2 this season.

While Bury FC is still trading, anything might still be possible, other than competing in L1 this season.

There are certainly mortgages on other elements of the Bury holding. I think there was a clubhouse and at least one other bit of real estate that were both separately mortgaged.

JonD wrote:There are certainly mortgages on other elements of the Bury holding. I think there was a clubhouse and at least one other bit of real estate that were both separately mortgaged.

Yes, perhaps that is what is meant, in relation to the social club anyway.

Unlikely to refer to the car park, though, as that was sold/leased by Day in lots.

SJG99 wrote:

The Salamander wrote:Fast forward to 2022.

Our time at Rodney is up. We have nowhere to play.

Could we count on the support of the the EFL?

Would they safeguard us from falling the way of Bury? Will they learn their lessons?

Should we come under a "potential clubs in trouble list?" Along with many others who are further down the line.

Do we start putting the pressure on the WRU immediately in the wake of Burys plight?...

We're on the "potential clubs in trouble" list along with everyone else not currently in the Premier League.

As for "nowhere to play", we wouldn't get expelled unless we literally could not ground share elsewhere either.

As Bury's expulsion came mainly from a charge of £3m secured against their ground for one of the loans they were liable for, resulting in no-one being prepared to take on that debt, not having a ground to leverage loans against would actually be a positive in comparison.

Yes, I tend to think that our lack of real estate is a protection against predation rather than a problem. Though I'd rather be a council tenant than one of thw WRU. Concerning whether the EFL would try to help us as they have Bury, I think that the very considerable help we were given as Newport AFC and the new Newport County by the FA and the English leagues should answer that question. They do like us you know.

It seems Swinetown have been hauled up before the courts this week. And some of our fans don't agree with our club's relationship with a preferred agent. What's being alleged here in court trumps most club/agent dealings.

It seems Swinetown allegedly allowed agent Michael Standing (or his client, none other than Gareth Barry) to buy a shedload of shares (50%) in the club's holding company. Against the rules for either an agent or player to have a stake in another club, so the shares were held for them in the name of someone else without telling the FA.

Are you still following? So, the club had a sell-on clause in the deal when they sold Matt Ritchie to Bournemouth meaning they made £1.75M when he was sold onto Newcastle for a profit. Mr Standing then finds out the club owed £2M to a former chairman and were going to use the £1.75M for that, so Mr Standing (or Gareth Barry) chucks in some more money as his 50% contribution to the extra money owed to the ex-chairman.

Somehow Mr Standing finds out that the current chairman is trying to sell the club on the quiet and that none of the money was used to pay off the ex-chairman, and took the case to court. In amongst the court papers is the Judge's statement that Swinetown don't have sufficient funds to continue trading through to August and administration now looks likely. The Judge also mentions the allegedly illicit share sale citing that it broke FA rules.

At best, the club survives for the sake of their supporters but must surely be charged with financial wrongdoings if they did indeed sell a large stake to a current agent or player. At worst, they will be one of the first clubs to liquidate, face a points deduction or FFP sanction and lose any prospect they have of promotion this season.

They will swerve it somehow - probably be relaunched as Swindon Town 2020 FC Ltd by August.........

DeePeeNCAFC wrote:It seems Swinetown have been hauled up before the courts this week. And some of our fans don't agree with our club's relationship with a preferred agent. What's being alleged here in court trumps most club/agent dealings.

It seems Swinetown allegedly allowed agent Michael Standing (or his client, none other than Gareth Barry) to buy a shedload of shares (50%) in the club's holding company. Against the rules for either an agent or player to have a stake in another club, so the shares were held for them in the name of someone else without telling the FA.

Are you still following? So, the club had a sell-on clause in the deal when they sold Matt Ritchie to Bournemouth meaning they made £1.75M when he was sold onto Newcastle for a profit. Mr Standing then finds out the club owed £2M to a former chairman and were going to use the £1.75M for that, so Mr Standing (or Gareth Barry) chucks in some more money as his 50% contribution to the extra money owed to the ex-chairman.

Somehow Mr Standing finds out that the current chairman is trying to sell the club on the quiet and that none of the money was used to pay off the ex-chairman, and took the case to court. In amongst the court papers is the Judge's statement that Swinetown don't have sufficient funds to continue trading through to August and administration now looks likely. The Judge also mentions the allegedly illicit share sale citing that it broke FA rules.

At best, the club survives for the sake of their supporters but must surely be charged with financial wrongdoings if they did indeed sell a large stake to a current agent or player. At worst, they will be one of the first clubs to liquidate, face a points deduction or FFP sanction and lose any prospect they have of promotion this season.

I'm sure that if any Swindon supporters who got wind of this they would have been told to shut up because it is vital that all financial matters are kept confidential.

Strange is it not that the list of clubs being shafted gets longer and longer but all supporters are ever told is that all clubs lose money.

Just think. Football clubs all run at a loss year after year. And that the only way they survive is because ruthless businessmen suddenly become philanthropic about the local team.

Pull the other one.

That is why, notwithstanding the criticism I have of the current board, I remain convinced that the only way forward for clubs such as ours is fans ownership.