How Green And Investors Could Double Their Money

[Frankie 8,383]

I can't listen to the clip but if the CVA fails then it's a newco and the assets get transferred to the newco, presumably for the £5.5m.

 

Who gets the £5.5million? The creditors via the hive down CVA? Why does the 'fee' change?

 

Sorry, I get a bit confused when it comes to part - especially in conjunction with the floating charge stuff!

[caseyjones 0]

Can someone explain the comments from Clark about the club's assets being sold for £5.5million to Green should the CVA fail?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/18250570?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

 

What exactly does that mean?

 

It appears to mean that if the CVA fails, Green gets the assets for the sake of 'continuity' even if someone else offers more. I fail to see how this could be doing the best for the creditors.

[Frankie 8,383]

Surely they have had their chance?

 

I think that's fair comment.

 

I keep hearing three other bidders are waiting to relaunch their bids yet if they couldn't complete a purchase before, why should they get another chance if Green has signed a binding deal (and paid anything up to £3million for the process so far)?

[Bluedell 5,488]

Who gets the £5.5million? The creditors via the hive down CVA? Why does the 'fee' change?

 

Sorry, I get a bit confused when it comes to part - especially in conjunction with the floating charge stuff!

 

Yes, the £5.5m goes into the pot for the creditors of oldco. Not sure about the fee question.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Surely they have had their chance?

 

then your in a situation where green having failed to raise 8.5 million could get the club for less than tbk bid.

 

stewards inquiry surely.

[calscot 0]

Chase off? If asking searching questions makes them scarper, were they right in the first place? It would appear that providing the required funds for a CVA are outwith Green's control at this moment in time.

 

The impression you gave is that we should actively chase off any buyer if we have any slight doubts about them.

 

Whether they would be actually be chased off or not is another story.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

The impression you gave is that we should actively chase off any buyer if we have any slight doubts about them.

 

Whether they would be actually be chased off or not is another story.

 

it would do no harm to put any bidder under severe scrutiny and see how they hold up.

 

if they don't then they are no loss.

[calscot 0]

Who gets the £5.5million? The creditors via the hive down CVA? Why does the 'fee' change?

 

Sorry, I get a bit confused when it comes to part - especially in conjunction with the floating charge stuff!

 

I was under the impression that there is £8.5m offered for the CVA but only £5.5m offered for the assets to start a newco. The differential makes sense, otherwise there's no incentive to take the CVA - plus a newco is not worth as much due to increased costs and reduced income potential.

 

The danger to me is that £5.5m is so low the creditors may decide that they can gain more by selling off the assets separately.

[GovanAllan 0]

then your in a situation where green having failed to raise 8.5 million could get the club for less than tbk bid.

 

stewards inquiry surely.

Can you tell me where TBK had anywhere near that kind of money on their own? They had hee haw and where coming to us to finance them, while including Euro money in a funding plan that we have no chance of getting. It was a jackanory tale from the get go and the only reason it wasn't laughed straight out the door was because they were so called Rangers men, oh and a rugby guy from Edinburgh, ring any bells that one.

[GovanAllan 0]

it would do no harm to put any bidder under severe scrutiny and see how they hold up.

 

if they don't then they are no loss.

 

TBK never got this much scrutiny.