• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Adam Pearson Consortium

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grumpy Old Man said:
The loan is to Sunderland Limited. If the shares in that company change hands (or the shares in Drumaville, the immediate parent), that loan is still to Sunderland Limited. There is no change in the entity owing it. SBC may wish to take a view on the recoverability of that debt in the light of those changes, but that's not the same thing. Legal personality, and all that.
Click to expand...

In standard corporate finance practice, that’s exactly what they will do. It would be extraordinary for a loan provider not to have to legally give consent for the assignment of that loan to another party. The loan provider must have recourse to determine whether that loan is serviceable by any third party. This is basic stuff.

I’ve been party to these types of agreements in the past and it’s absolutely standard. Any and every deal will live or die on the basis of whether SBC give consent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ShieldsBlackCat2015 said:
Instead of focussing on some event we know may or may not happen based on a position we aren't in what we need to do is, I think, think about focussing on an event we know may or may not happen based on a position we are in. We know Ellis is our owner so we need to look to him to learn what his plan is for the next 10 or 15 years. Recovery is not a short term plan but a long term plan.
Click to expand...

Ellis doesn't have a plan for the next 10 or 15 years man.....he probably doesn't have one beyond the next 10 or 15 minutes beyond ringing Bain up and asking if he's got a buyer yet.
 
Plank said:
the funny thing with sbc is that he is either

- a serious poster who is actually this much of a helmet
or
- some sad bastard whos been on a 3 year windup on every section of the board

:lol::lol:
Click to expand...
I just think he desperately needs a shag.
 
It may well be that there is still a nda in place as part of due diligence / negotiations. If so i’d expect a denial tbh
 
GinoBartali said:
In standard corporate finance practice, that’s exactly what they will do. It would be extraordinary for a loan provider not to have to legally give consent for the assignment of that loan to another party. The loan provider must have recourse to determine whether that loan is serviceable by any third party. This is basic stuff.

I’ve been party to these types of agreements in the past and it’s absolutely standard. Any and every deal will live or die on the basis of whether SBC give consent.
Click to expand...

I'm probably being pedantic. A change in shareholders is not an assignment of the debt. The debt is staying with the legal person to whom it was given. Were the assets and liabilities of Sunderland Limited being sold to another company, that would be an assignment. It's small, but important, distinction.
 
soapster said:
we know what his plan is. he wants to sell.

He does not want to put any more money into the club other than running costs.

Bain has just been on the radio and said that.

If you don't believe me, the interview will be played in full on total sport this evening

The club is being sold, we just don't know if anybody is willing to buy it as yet.

As with a lot of negotiations, things can suddenly change.

as a ps, don't side yourself with the mag m2017. he is not a mate of yours.
Click to expand...
Yes I am
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top