ipswichowl

I don't think that's strictly true. If somebody bids 100m with 20m upfront and then rest paid in 10m installments for every year we're in premier, that I would say wouldn't be better than 50m up front and 40m when we hit the Premier. Terms of the deal will matter as well. Example above given to illustrate the point.

Didn't hear Barry Bird get a mention

I was there. Absolute pure coincidence that it happened to be an episode about us. Was good fun and the gents did well.

Agree completely. I don't think this would have happened without them getting everybody joining forces.

People aren't going to like this but can't the x50 odd mostly wealthy players and staff contribute this for their employer instead? Such a small amount compared to the bigger picture. Wouldn't it be better to say it's going to a Children Hospice or something instead and players pay their own way or claim it back like most other employees would have to do. I know you're not asking people to donate if they can't afford it but with all the goodwill this one just seems a little off to me. Perhaps I'm just fed up with society as a whole that it's always the little guys helping and not the ones that can afford it. Wingy pathetic rant over - UTOs.

I don't have any reason not to believe in general as past history backs you up. This comment though isn't correct is it? I thought when you mentioned them and it was questioned shortly after, you backtracked and then said you didn't mean to say it was the Waltons, but somebody (accountancy firm?) that represents people including the likes of The Waltons? Sounded like at the time you didn't know it was the Waltons but now you did know it was the Waltons? Not trying to pick a fight, because cos it doesn't really matter. Nothing anybody says on here is going to make a difference to who takes over but just questioning that bit.

was only banned for 1 game. terms of the emergency loan for lumley means he has to play today. based on second half midweek, that's another piece of good fortune.

I was thinking that as well, but then brought back to earth with our current squad depth compared to what he had. That team was poorly managed and underachieving, this team is the opposite. However, this club has the habit of surprising everybody so who knows. Perhaps worth a lay bet on us to get relegated.

Yeah but that's the negative side of Ltd companies in the UK. As well as having to be one over a certain level, if you're a business owner it protects you from personal debts as opposed to say a self employed person without a Ltd company who's house could be taken away to pay off debts. So for all we know he could hypothetically have £100m squirreled away somewhere in personal wealth but the company is brassic and that's all that matters. Hence not being a problem to take his family out for expensive meals. It's a poo move publicly to put photos about when you're choosing not to pay people the salaries they've earnt by doing work for you though. Clearly that isn't the case though or he'd have cut his losses/ran us into the ground for longer due to his business 'acumen'. I think essentially we're saying the same thing but it is hard (at least for me) to think of an alternative punishment that doesn't affect the fans within the rules/laws of the EFL and UK law. It's a rare occurrence though, we just seemed to have been collecting them over the years like they were going out of fashion . Looks like that period is over now thankfully.

It could be argued that if there was no penalty for the club going into administration then 75% of the clubs debts could be written off (min 25p in the £) just by doing so. That doesn't sound particular fair to poor florist down the road or the local brewery etc. What would stop other clubs just doing that? There has to be deterrent. The reason clubs go into administration is because of financial difficulties, not really any point in fining the owner again if he's skint. It's difficult to find another punishment for not being able to follow the same rules as the other 71 clubs without it affecting the fans. Also not forgetting that they are only enforcing rules that we were part of agreeing on. EFL don't just make up rules. They just manage the rules that the other EFL clubs have agreed on by democracy.

Would be frickin hilarious if club was sold for over £100million but he only got 25%

Should probably make sure the North Stand has adequate insurance as it's going to get tested!

no. no he's hasn't.

lumley clearly signed a contract for bonuses per save this half, don't tell him he ain't gonna get paid though!

I can't believe we're not 0-6 down. who knows, might be able to snatch something. Can only player the players we have and can't fault commitment, but this is a mid table league 1 team on this half performance. hopefully this isn't typical of how the games have gone so far this season as it's the first one I've watched. credit for keeping going though.

Why shouldn't he?

Yeah true, let's hope there's some qualified people put in charge for a change with some experience of holding people to account as well as negotiating skills from a neutral standpoint. Certainly a step in the right direction.

She's obviously getting mixed up with Cardiff. It doesnt ooze confidence in their ability to grasp the details if she allegedly spoke to our fans and that is the information that has stuck in her memory.

'Watershed moment' for English football Nandy highlighted some of the future changes supporters will see, now the bill has been passed into law. "For fans like Sheffield Wednesday, who I spoke to at the start of this journey, it will mean you can't have the colours changed without fans being in the room and part of the decision-making process," she said. "For Wimbledon supporters it will mean your stadium can't be relocated without you having a say. It will put fans back in the rooms where decisions are made, it will mean all clubs have to reach the standard of the best clubs." At least the priorities are there and they're on the ball with our issues.

Maybe for a solvent business with no history of failed payments. Not in this situation though. I suspect you held the deposit money and didn't spend it in your business. It's clear DC has run out of money. £5m deposit will likely be used to pay back wages and upcoming bills. Then WHEN he inevitably changes the sale terms, consortium pulls out. Can we have our £5m back now? Where then is DC going to get £5m to pay them back when he can't fund current wages?

Yeah I knew that was always the case but for some reason thought a year or two they changed it which annoyed everybody - doesn't appear to be the case so got that wrong. Probably read it on here .

I thought that changed a year or two ago to be included in all costs? Perhaps not. I'm pretty sure though that if you've got that amount of wealth buying a club you're going to look after the infrastructure. Just because something hasn't been said, doesn't mean it isn't going to happen. Not sure we'll ever see a prospective buyer that can barely get their foot in the door publishing a full business plan to satisfy the inpatient needs of a few.

He also said that members of the consortium are individually worth tens of millions, a few 100's millions and combined a couple of billion. So I don't think that wealth is an issue. He was referring to what is allowed to be spent. No club is allowed to have lose more than £13m per season. So if we have owners that lose £20, per season, we'll be in trouble again for breaching FFP/PSR rules.

Different sport but still banned from being a director due to not paying taxes. Could be around the corner. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn4gpdz0yd2o