• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Administration?

  • Thread starter Thread starter S3RGIO33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Would fraudulent preference not only happen if we then went into administration though? Surely if it's just carrying on he'd be OK taking his loans back so long as we don't default on anyone else?

No, in any insolvency the administrator or liquidator will investigate the directors' behaviour prior to the event, and prepare a report which can recommend whether the directors should be disqualified from office or if there has been criminal conduct. As an aside, the FD would certainly be the subject of disciplinary action by the ICAEW.
 

No, in any insolvency the administrator or liquidator will investigate the directors' behaviour prior to the event, and prepare a report which can recommend whether the directors should be disqualified from office or if there has been criminal conduct. As an aside, the FD would certainly be the subject of disciplinary action by the ICAEW.

So, exactly like I said so long as theres no administration or liquidation. No insolvency, no problem with him doing it?
 
So, exactly like I said so long as theres no administration or liquidation. No insolvency, no problem with him doing it?

The trouble is that if he did, it would leave the club unable to pay off its other debts as they fall due. This is the classic standard text book definition of insolvency. By the way, if one of the people you don't pay is HMRC, they don't ponce around with administration; they simply issue a winding-up order.
 
Fairly sure we'll avoid administration for a year or so, simply because Short still has potential to screw money out of the club
Still more telly money to come in
Transfer fees for a few players
Asset stripping

I expect a large wave of redundancies to come, but if Short pulls the plug now he stands to lose way more than either flogging to the Germans in the summer or liquidating the when he's cleaned us out
 
The trouble is that if he did, it would leave the club unable to pay off its other debts as they fall due. This is the classic standard text book definition of insolvency. By the way, if one of the people you don't pay is HMRC, they don't ponce around with administration; they simply issue a winding-up order.

I don't know if you're just tired mate, but you're still not really confirming what I said as incorrect. Again, as I said, so long as we keep everyone else sweet and pay them as they are due, there's nothing to stop Short paying his own loans back so long as he doesn't breach any agreement with any of the other lenders.
 
I don't know if you're just tired mate, but you're still not really confirming what I said as incorrect. Again, as I said, so long as we keep everyone else sweet and pay them as they are due, there's nothing to stop Short paying his own loans back so long as he doesn't breach any agreement with any of the other lenders.

I am tired, I've had a hard day. Let's just say that the inward cash flows are such that if he pays himself, somehow fairly significant is going to end up unpaid.
 
I am tired, I've had a hard day. Let's just say that the inward cash flows are such that if he pays himself, somehow fairly significant is going to end up unpaid.

That's still not what I asked like, but never mind.

Having had a quick read around I've managed to confirm what I said as correct anyway. So long as no one else doesn't get paid when due, he can take what he likes back off his loans so long as we stay away from administration / liquidation.
 
1. There's a mysterious staff meeting in the diary for this week which has people already upset, resigned and fearful;
2. Staff are claiming privately that administration is going to be announced this week.

Number 2 may be speculation based on Number 1 of course.

I’ve lurked on here for years, but for some reason you’ve compelled me to reply!

You’ve gone from administration is definitely happening to the staff are guessing based on the two points above.

Truth is, unless the staff member you know sits on the board, then they really don’t know.

I’d say I’m in a similar situation with my job. It’s was announced a while ago that who employs me is under review. It’ll either be the company I work for, or a third party.

Ever since that announcement, the rumours have been flying, from it’s definitely happening to massive job losses to just last week where the last third party involved has definitely pulled out. Truth is though that no-one on the ‘shop floor’ knows what’s going on.

Workplaces like this are always full off rumour, this is just the latest one. I’m pretty confident we’re a long way off administration right no.
 
Whatever happens happens

May you live in interesting times


Old chinese proverb

Doesnt always mean good tho.
 
My typing is bad at the best of times. I've been singing in a concert (rehearsal all afternoon, performance in the evening); couple of beers afterwards, but more because I'm knackered. Also, a bit narked that people who I've told things directly are totally ignoring what I've said.

Baritone or Tenor?

The trouble is that if he did, it would leave the club unable to pay off its other debts as they fall due. This is the classic standard text book definition of insolvency. By the way, if one of the people you don't pay is HMRC, they don't ponce around with administration; they simply issue a winding-up order.

They're the boys who'll close you down.
 
Did you not read anything I've ever written? In administration Short gets zilch, nada, zero. SBC won't get all their money. It's not in the interests of anyone who cold appoint an administrator. Legally, Short can't even do ti without the agreement of SBC.



It will be an announcement of a round of redundancies. Staff are making 2+2=5



Actually, he can't if it leaves the club insolvent. By paying himself rather than other creditors he would be committing the offence of fraudulent preference.
Not sure why you have to exclaim annoyance at other posters before contradicting yourself anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top