RSS Feed Share on Facebook Send this to Twitter | Login Login | Register
City Independent
The Hull City Fanzine
 
Hull City Forum

Hull City Forum

Deails Post
116 posts. < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > Show 15 30 50

New Back To Top

potential

2263 posts
First used 09/01/17

#16
07/11/2018 at 21:00

Quote Quote by theotherphantom on 07/11/2018 at 16:02
Is there a sell-on clause for Robertson? Can't see him leaving Liverpool, but you never know.

Current values, according to the papers

Maguire £60m
Robertson £60m
Hull City £45m


Maguire leaving Leicester in the next window with recent events there? Events? yes, sorry bit of an understatement. Apart from that, he seems happy there.
Where does Robertson go from Liverpool? Guaranteed start, pushing for the title, and European football. He also looks a good fit for the way Klopp wants to play, would that happen at another club?

If papa is hanging out for a few shillings from any sell on clauses, he could be waiting another 24 hours.

But just how in the name of all thing holy, unholy and anything else, has football descended to the point where two players have a value almost triple that of a football club? 

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7172 posts
First used 09/01/17

#17
08/11/2018 at 08:13

A decent point Potential.

I’d argue this point. Assuming the Allams take the parachute payment @ £34,000,000, the club becomes insolvent, and therefore isn’t actually worth anything.

Burning £100k a week and in the bottom three. Hoping Harry Maguire fancies play8ng in Manchester is not a valid business plan.

The Allams are not worried. It’s a win win for them. Once it goes under they can write off the balance of the debt against tax. That’s as good as cash and the sooner they do that the better for them as CT rates come down. The £34m gets them back to parity as a minimum.

Maybe Carl Chadwick is the third mystery bidder and we are merging with East Hull Hatters in Dunswell.

I doubt there is a sell on for Robertson. I r3ckon they thought he’d never play in the 1s, such is there footballing knowledge. 

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

Obadiah

User Image

6420 posts
First used 09/01/17

#18
08/11/2018 at 09:08

If the Allams walk off with the parachute payments of £34 million and put the club into administration there's a good chance they'll end up disqualified as company directors and all for a £6 million reduction in their tax bill.  

New Back To Top

karlberg

User Image

2697 posts
First used 09/01/17

Group
Hull City

#19
08/11/2018 at 10:27

Has Essex Gull got on opinion on this whilst England are at tea ? 

link; www.finesse-internet.co.uk/the-best-trip/ (THE BOOK THE CLUB REFUSED TO SELL). 

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7172 posts
First used 09/01/17

#20
08/11/2018 at 10:31

That’s not how it works Obi.

If you trade while insolvent, and you know it, you MAY get pulled on it, but the authorities are toothless and any half decent lawyer would urinate over companies house and or HMRC, such are their resources in such matters.

Here’s how it works.

Allamhouse is owed £Xm. Upon receiveing said £34,000,000 they make a payment against the debt of £34,000,000. The fact that the business is unsustainable without unsecured debt does not mean they are subsequently in hock for future debts. That’s the wonder of the veil of incorporation. You can be the same person but not be related to yourself. It works for rich people, others will suffer.

They know. We know they know. 

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

Obadiah

User Image

6420 posts
First used 09/01/17

#21
08/11/2018 at 10:47

Quote Quote by RichardCheatham - City AFC on 08/11/2018 at 10:31
That’s not how it works Obi.

If you trade while insolvent, and you know it, you MAY get pulled on it, but the authorities are toothless and any half decent lawyer would urinate over companies house and or HMRC, such are their resources in such matters.

Here’s how it works.

Allamhouse is owed £Xm. Upon receiveing said £34,000,000 they make a payment against the debt of £34,000,000. The fact that the business is unsustainable without unsecured debt does not mean they are subsequently in hock for future debts. That’s the wonder of the veil of incorporation. You can be the same person but not be related to yourself. It works for rich people, others will suffer.

They know. We know they know.



If the Allams put the club into administration after pocketing £34 million for themselves they could end up being disqualified. Wherever you got your information from it is incorrect.

New Back To Top

potential

2263 posts
First used 09/01/17

#22
08/11/2018 at 11:33

Is repaying the debt to Allamhouse the same as trousering, or depositing the money into a personal account?

Or is this answer to this question not quite a simple yes, no?

New Back To Top

potential

2263 posts
First used 09/01/17

#23
08/11/2018 at 11:34

Quote Quote by potential on 08/11/2018 at 11:33
Is repaying the debt to Allamhouse the same as trousering, or depositing the money into a personal account?

Or is the answer to this question not quite a simple yes, no?

 

New Back To Top

Obadiah

User Image

6420 posts
First used 09/01/17

#24
08/11/2018 at 11:40

Quote Quote by potential on 08/11/2018 at 11:33
Is repaying the debt to Allamhouse the same as trousering, or depositing the money into a personal account?

Or is this answer to this question not quite a simple yes, no?



Basically, yes if the company goes into administration shortly afterwards. 

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7172 posts
First used 09/01/17

#25
08/11/2018 at 14:17

Tax law Obi. Simple as that.

Hull City Tigers have a liability with Allamhouse. £60m is it? Dunno, something like that. They will pay their outstanding, so all creditors are paid, but mostly £34m to Allamhouse, I.e, themselves. It’s an arms length transaction and got nothing to do with the people being the self same. If you think there is some moral police force waiting around the corner to nab them then you are going down the wrong path.

Putting City in admin because it is no longer viable is the ONLY solution for them, aside from them feeding the hole in the ground again and they ain’t doing that again.

If t5ere is no support For a £100k a week debt then as directors they would be liable for future debts, not past debts. It’s pretty simple stuff. They are in no danger other than a few keyboard warriors like ourselves shouting “cheat” from a very long distance, but in reality it’s not even a cheat, b3cause City owe them the money and they have a legal right to get it. Payment being controlled by the Allams is not a factor.  

Post edited on 08/11/2018 at 14:19 by RichardCheatham - City AFC

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

Obadiah

User Image

6420 posts
First used 09/01/17

#26
08/11/2018 at 14:34

Its Company and contract law, nothing to do with tax law. If they paid all the creditors, including themselves, then they could sell Hull City for £5 and be better off than if they put it into administration.

It is impossible for them to pay off all the creditors which is why Assem, Allam wants to be out before Christmas. 

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7172 posts
First used 09/01/17

#27
08/11/2018 at 16:39

It’s all of them, but the catalyst will be the non payment of taxes, NI. HMRC have grown weary of clubs defaulting on paye and vat. So, assuming the Allams continue as they have, they will repay £34m of the outstanding debt. Who can blame them and who else in their right mind would not do the same. It’s a rhetorical question.

Once there is no free cash in the club, they can either chose to continue to trade by putting up guarantees or actually funding the club. They will do neither. At that point they are trading insolvently because even buying the milk on credit would be an offence,I.e. trading knowing the debt cannot be repaid, or they continue in the hope some mug buys the club, one losing £100,000 a week and in the relegation zone. In the meantime, bills don’t get paid and someone puts them in administration. As above, it’s nearly always HMRC because they have a track record and anyone who pushes the button gets saddled with some costs.

Nothing complicated. No rules broken by the Allams.

I suspect you think they must ring fence the £34m while events get resolved or the £100k a week loss eats away the £34m, whichever is the sooner. Snowball and hell spring to mind.

Bit of speculation but it seems the most likely event in my opinion. Let’s see. I’d have a bet on it going in to administration but the last time I did that on this site I got stiffed for a few hundred quid by a certain Essex “Turpin” Gull, so perhaps we can just play for matchsticks.

As I say, by my calcs the £34m puts them back in the Black by a decent margin. Admin is a nice fuck you to the fans and the City, plus HMRC can reach for the Vaseline too. 

Post edited on 08/11/2018 at 16:41 by RichardCheatham - City AFC

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

essexgull

8849 posts
First used 12/01/17

#28
08/11/2018 at 17:08

Quote Quote by karlberg on 08/11/2018 at 10:27
Has Essex Gull got on opinion on this whilst England are at tea ?


Here is what I've heard allegedly, Garrrry old bean, take it or leave it...

Both buyers are tin-pot. They've offered around a quarter of what the Allans have valued the club at (ca. 7-9 million). The Allans are now prepared to take 25 million for the club, as Assam wants out asap, but neither prospective buyer can afford it and Duffen's mob have offered some sort of delayed payment scheme, that the Allans rightly don't trust, as their 'due diligence' offering for this purchase is some tiny Arabic bank offering them a future credit line - pretty much the same as you or I offering our Amex statement which shows our total spending limit. Neither buyer can show viable means to fund the club for the £4-5 million it is costing a year, so debt will be loaded onto the club even if it is sold debt-free. There will not be any great investment in the team from either buyer, despite promises.

The issue for the Allans is that they will 'make' more money putting the club in administration, as Cheats surmises, than selling it for £10 million and potentially getting the flak anyway for it later down the road. Basically, my source guesses that if they don't get the minimum 25 million, in which they will loudly announce as selling the club at a huge loss to follow the demand of the people of Hull, they will make the money back taking the parachute payment and putting the club in administration in summer 2019, having it run by as cheap an accountant as possible, Martyn Fish style and using the 'loss' as a tax write-off.

Senior Allan is angry and reproachful at Junior for rejecting serious bids when he was ill, stating that they could have walked away in profit, with his legacy to the city still intact.

Doesn't bode well for the future.


ESSEX GULL 

New Back To Top

essexgull

8849 posts
First used 12/01/17

#29
08/11/2018 at 17:20

Quote Quote by potential on 08/11/2018 at 11:33
Is repaying the debt to Allamhouse the same as trousering, or depositing the money into a personal account?

Or is this answer to this question not quite a simple yes, no?



It's not the same as trousering in this case, as it will be taken to pay back a loan..

The HMRC/inland revenue will not be able to successfully argue to strip two people of director rights if theyve used money to pay back debt, even if it is to a company they themselves own.

There was always two reasons why the Allans would have wanted the club to be in debt to them - the interest they receive from the loan and also the tax and exit benefits.


ESSEX GULL  

New Back To Top

Obadiah

User Image

6420 posts
First used 09/01/17

#30
08/11/2018 at 18:35

Quote Quote by essexgull on 08/11/2018 at 17:20


It's not the same as trousering in this case, as it will be taken to pay back a loan..

The HMRC/inland revenue will not be able to successfully argue to strip two people of director rights if theyve used money to pay back debt, even if it is to a company they themselves own.

There was always two reasons why the Allans would have wanted the club to be in debt to them - the interest they receive from the loan and also the tax and exit benefits.


ESSEX GULL


I thought you were reasonably knowledgeable but it seems you're not. 

116 posts. < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > Show 15 30 50