beep0608 Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) The more I read about their situation, the more I get annoyed at their protestations of innocence and pleas for leniency. How did the HMRC debt manage to rise to £550000? Have they not even been paying in recent months? This club are a joke and deserve every point deducted of the 25. On the point above, I think that if HMRC vote against then it fails, and it's final. I just checked the Dundee forum and some of them seem to be realising how close they are to the brink. I understand that they need MORE than 75% of the vote, based on the debt, to stay alive. If HMRC alone have more than 24% that is it. They're quoted as having at least 24% already, according to the calculations printed today. As posted in the other topic, if we signed Scott Fox, say, that would reduce the football debt, and increase the HMRC's share... What a thought. Incredible that it's on such a knife edge...but we're talking about Dundee's throat here. Edited January 7, 2011 by beep0608 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy1967 Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 A very good summary, and the important point is that the Administrator's primary role is to recover as much as possible for the creditors. As much as we all want it, that does not mean punish Dundee, and in his defense, by holding onto Griffiths and Harkins, probably the only assets of any value, I think he is probably doing the right thing. There are rumored to be about £2m in debt and if the 6p in the pound offer is accurate, that would mean the creditors would get £120,000 from the sale of the club in it's current state. Sell Griffiths and Harkins and the value will be massively reduced from the reduction in assets and the almost certain reduction in the clubs league status. So, how much would they get for the 2 players mentioned ? Probably not a lot. I can't see that any Scottish club that can afford them would want them, which leaves the English Leagues. GH was hardly a roaring success there and with times tough I can't see them fetching more than £250k for the pair. Take away agents fees, sell on clauses, players cut, administrator's fees, taxes and there isn't going to be much left for the creditors. OK, so some of this is based on rumour and speculation, but I just wanted to suggest that it is not neccesary for the administrator to sell everything to be doing his job. I have the misfortune of losing more money than I can care to mention recently from unfortunate company's that have went tits up. The minute mr Administration steps in all I see is an assett stripper. If there is 20K left in a company Mr Administrator will continue to 'do his best' to keep the company afloat and trading. Usually this is at £200/hr minimum for yer average joe upto £ 400/hr for a senior partner down to £ 90/hr for a junior ( photocopyer on £ 5/hr ).When the 20K is gone they leave like locusts with feck all left saying they tried ! In my opinion Gretna were a classic example of this. No fans, little income but they could afford administrators for 4/5 months until the club was not viable and the ground had to be sold to pay the debt ! Could they afford Blair Nimmo at £ 400/hr lolol !! The whole administration issue needs sorted at legal level not government level. An administrator should have equal or less rights to money available than outstanding creditors inmho ! As far as Dundee ( more than Gretna ) are concerned it is a much harder situation for an administrator for obvious reasons regarding fan base / history etc. Normal administartion rules dictate that all usable assetts are sold but not to the detrement of the continuing function of the company. Not quite sure how any other rules can superseed this ruling ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 Well that's them out the Cup. They cup tied both Harkins & Griffiths. With his team getting beaten 0-4 and a couple of minutes to go Griffiths gets himself sent off. That must have knocked a good few grand off his selling price. All in all not a very good day for Dundee FC. Rather sad, innit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 Well that's them out the Cup. They cup tied both Harkins & Griffiths. With his team getting beaten 0-4 and a couple of minutes to go Griffiths gets himself sent off. That must have knocked a good few grand off his selling price. All in all not a very good day for Dundee FC. Rather sad, innit? Don't think it will make much difference to their value. I doubt if any Scottish club that can afford them would want them and the cup tie/suspension wont apply if they head down south. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 If Dundee do go out of business, would we have to wave goodbye to our 25% of any Harkins transfer fee? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 If Dundee do go out of business, would we have to wave goodbye to our 25% of any Harkins transfer fee? think that would be gone anyway as we would have to join the end of the queue for cash would we not?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 think that would be gone anyway as we would have to join the end of the queue for cash would we not?? Football debts I believe have to be paid in full before other creditors get a penny. That said, if Dundee go out of business, they will get nothing for Inglorious Gary, so we would get 25% of bog all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleGreySky Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 I wonder what Allan Cowan etc thought we'd make out of a 25% sell on clause when they decided selling the best player the club has had in 10 years for £150,000 - less money than we'd make from a better league position and a couple of extra rounds of a cup competition - was a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) I wonder what Allan Cowan etc thought we'd make out of a 25% sell on clause when they decided selling the best player the club has had in 10 years for £150,000 - less money than we'd make from a better league position and a couple of extra rounds of a cup competition - was a good idea. we could have waited untill he finishes his contract and got sod all sorry but Dundee were robbed, GH was ok but not worth 150K no matter what planet you live on. Edited January 9, 2011 by jaggybunnet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) I wonder what Allan Cowan etc thought we'd make out of a 25% sell on clause when they decided selling the best player the club has had in 10 years for £150,000 - less money than we'd make from a better league position and a couple of extra rounds of a cup competition - was a good idea. The only way we'd make anything even approaching that kind of money is if a cup round drew us against one of the old firm. So rather than take £150,000 guaranteed (and required by the bank and tax men) we miss out on it and go for the 100-1 shot of getting the right cup draw? As jaggybunnet said, what planet are you on? Edited January 9, 2011 by Mr Bunny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beep0608 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 The only way we'd make anything even approaching that kind of money is if a cup round drew us against one of the old firm. So rather than take £150,000 guaranteed (and required by the bank and tax men) we miss out on it and go for the 100-1 shot of getting the right cup draw? As jaggybunnet said, what planet are you on? I'm feckin glad we did sell him, and Twaddle, else we'd have beaten Dundee to wherever they are now. I'm not saying our sins amount to theirs, but ignoring tax debts is the stupidest, as Dundee now know better than anyone. That was vital cash that we'd not had in for many seasons, or since, aside from a couple of cup runs which you can never depend on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm feckin glad we did sell him, and Twaddle, else we'd have beaten Dundee to wherever they are now. I'm not saying our sins amount to theirs, but ignoring tax debts is the stupidest, as Dundee now know better than anyone. That was vital cash that we'd not had in for many seasons, or since, aside from a couple of cup runs which you can never depend on. i totaly agree, just glad we managed to screw dundee for 150k for some one who was worth 50K if that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) Sorry to be repeating myself here but if Dundee sell Harkins the buying club should only be paying the net amount due for GH. Any % owed us should go direct to us. Should that not happen and the buying club send 100% of the price for Harkins direct to Dundee the amount owed us becomes what's termed a football debt. Dundee could come out of administration but while that debt to us remains they would/should be debarred from adding to their squad. I doubt that they could sell Harkins and the debt owed to us be paid as 6p in the £. This is a just layman talking so perhaps any accountants amongst us could clarify. Edited January 9, 2011 by lady-isobel-barnett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 Sorry to be repeating myself here but if Dundee sell Harkins the buying club should only be paying the net amount due for GH. Any % owed us should go direct to us. Should that not happen and the buying club send 100% of the price for Harkins direct to Dundee the amount owed us becomes what's termed a football debt. Dundee could come out of administration but while that debt to us remains they would/should be debarred from adding to their squad. I doubt that they could sell Harkins and the debt owed to us be paid as 6p in the £. This is a just layman talking so perhaps any accountants amongst us could clarify. cheers lady-isobel-barnett, i was unsure and thought as it was not player wages it didnt count Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 cheers lady-isobel-barnett, i was unsure and thought as it was not player wages it didnt count That's only my uneducated guess. I just don't think that if some club pays cash for Harkins that we could, post their administration, now become debtors of Dundee. If I'm wrong football's even more crazier than even I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter of '63 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) I'm feckin glad we did sell him, and Twaddle, else we'd have beaten Dundee to wherever they are now. I'm not saying our sins amount to theirs, but ignoring tax debts is the stupidest, as Dundee now know better than anyone. That was vital cash that we'd not had in for many seasons, or since, aside from a couple of cup runs which you can never depend on. Twaddle was an enigma...sometimes looking a class above First Division level but at other times - and often in the same game - a lackadaisacal waster. A transfer fee of £60,000 in retrospect looks a good fee...but his late equaliser against Livingston in the cup replay which led to a game against Rangers and then a televised replay was worth a great deal more to the club than £60,000. Edited January 9, 2011 by Winter of '63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted January 9, 2011 Members Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) That's only my uneducated guess. I just don't think that if some club pays cash for Harkins that we could, post their administration, now become debtors of Dundee. If I'm wrong football's even more crazier than even I think. Trying to think back to when we went bust in the STJ era. Wasn't there a similar scenario with Alan Morgan and us owing Forfar money? Edited to add: A quick look at the Official history tells me that we owed Forfar £35k for Alan and this played a big part in our debt. I'm sure Forfar made some sort of concession towards the fee that helped us survive? Edited January 9, 2011 by Willjag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Trying to think back to when we went bust in the STJ era. Wasn't there a similar scenario with Alan Morgan and us owing Forfar money? Edited to add: A quick look at the Official history tells me that we owed Forfar £35k for Alan and this played a big part in our debt. I'm sure Forfar made some sort of concession towards the fee that helped us survive? I think also that some well-to-do fans came up with a lot of the money we needed to pay that off. Or maybe all of it, but I think you're correct in that Forfar gave us some leeway in some way, maybe deferring payment or taking it in installments, I don't remember exactly. Have to say that another memory I have of this, which may be wrong, is that the board most likely knew we were in soappy bubble financially when they made the deal for Morgan. Edited January 10, 2011 by Mr Bunny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleGreySky Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Twaddle was an enigma...sometimes looking a class above First Division level but at other times - and often in the same game - a lackadaisacal waster. A transfer fee of £60,000 in retrospect looks a good fee...but his late equaliser against Livingston in the cup replay which led to a game against Rangers and then a televised replay was worth a great deal more to the club than £60,000. A player who could shoot fro more than 12 yards out, too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metzmagic Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Dont think you can compare. This is the second time in recent times that Dundee have been in this situation and not only that, they had an apparent Fairy Godmelville to bank roll them to premier status or use it to make the club financially stabble and secure. Thistle lost one of our better players doing just that and Dundee went for sod them all we are going for glory and it back fired big time. First time around I was full of sympathy and realised we followed the same course but now I hope they follow Gretna, Clydebank, Airdrieonians to name a few cause noone seems to be missing them. Especially after our visit to Dens and how they seem to blame the SFL for all their ills. **** 'em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleGreySky Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 BBC rumour - Griffiths to Wolves for £150,000, but McCarthy might let him stay (loan?) until May. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blutarsky Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 STV reporting that Wolves have signed him for 150k subject to medical. If true, who gets the 150k? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stolenscone Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 STV reporting that Wolves have signed him for 150k subject to medical. If true, who gets the 150k? Dundee are simply a company in administration. The directors are relieved of their decision making powers, and those are vested in the administrator. The job of the administrator is simply to run the company until a buyer is found, or until it can trade its way out of administration. If neither can be achieved and the company can't be saved, then he calls in a liquidator and the company gets wound up. The purpose of the administration is to give the company breathing space from its creditors until a decision can be taken over whether and how the company can be saved. In order to come out of admin, typically a voluntary agreement will be reached with creditors to write off their debt in exchange for a pence in the pound settlement. If the right majority of creditors don't agree to the settlement, then it becomes harder to come out of admin, because at the point that you leave admin, the protection that the company was afforded from its creditors is lost and they can again raise court actions etc to pursue the debt. The short answer to your question is therefore that any transfer fees would go to the company (Dundee FC), but since the administrator is unlikely to have enough money to pay all debts in full, it is likely that the money will be put into the pot and used to increase the offer to creditors. If an arms length creditor knows that a company has a stash of cash that it is unwilling to throw into the pot when they are being asked to settle for only a portion of what is due to them, then it's unlikely that they would vote in favour of the voluntary agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blutarsky Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 Cheers! It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metzmagic Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 Sure I read somewhere recently that all Dundees creditors accepted their offer except the HM Revenue crew. This to me appears that Scumdee will be out of administration after January, monies paid off to the creditors and Taxes paid in full, will take the penalty deduction with all the greetin and moanin they can muster but still stay up cause Stirling are rank and start again next season with the the Marrs at the helm, more companies shying away from Scottish Football and a chip so big on the shoulder you could choke on it ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.