What's it going to take for some people to get that we're not going to be put into administration?
One more time:
The point of going into administration is to protect yourself from your creditors.
We have only one major creditor, his name is Mike Ashley.
Why would Mike Ashley want to protect Mike Ashley from Mike Ashley?
As far as I'm concerned the absolute duty of an administrator is to get as much back for the creditors as possible.
So what does that mean? It means selling off the whole shebang, the players, facilities, knocking the stadium down for some other development for which money may be paid, the whole lot going into the pocket of Ashley, the bloke people wanted 'cos he was better than Fred. He could hardly just go ahead and do it off his own back with the club a going concern.
Erm, did you miss the point when he bought the club outright? He could have done that from the moment he bought the club, why would he bring an administrator in to do that when he could simply have done it himself? The fact that he hasn't done anything like that, kinda suggests that he's not going to, don't you think?
Also, I think you have "administrator" and "liquidator" mixed up. The first duty of an administrator is to rescue the company as a going concern, whereas the role of a liquidator is similar to what you describe. However, the question remains as to why Mike Ashley would do that and you've not answered that I notice.
I'd have thought that someone who's followed the club for as long as you have would know that it doesn't own the land the stadium is built upon and therefore couldn't sell it off for redevelopment even if it wanted to. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?
1. It kinda takes the pressure off him if someone else does it. It's called "passing the buck" in some circles. I'm sure you've heard of it.
2. An administrator only has to justify to the creditors why the company can't be maintained as a going concern before it is liquidated.
2a. "You've not answered that I notice" ..... Hmm, that's a rather dumb remark. Why would I answer something I haven't read? I hadn't answered earlier because I've just seen your post. I'm not joined at the hip with my laptop. Obviously.
3. Yup, fair point. However, don't get complacent about what Ashley may do to the club. People like you got complacent about regular European finishes, thinking it was s**** so you wanted Ashley 'cos he could only do better. Well, it seems you're going to try to cling to the bitter end onto the idea he's better than the previous lot. You're wrong, cos he's not. This bloke might do anything to this football club and as he doesn't give a damn about it that's scary to a supporter like me. He no doubt has very clever people advising him on the economic side of things, people far cleverer than you, if there is a way for him to get rid of the club and get enough money back he'll do anything to achieve that imo. Anything. No amount of wriggling on your part is going is to change that fact.
1. Yeah, right.
2. I give up, continue believing that the masochistic fantasy that is NUFC going into administration is likely, if you wish. In the real world it's never going to happen.
2a. It was a question I asked in the post you quoted. Do you usually not read the posts you reply too?
3. That's just a ridiculous thing to say, it would be like me saying people like you got complacent about Fairs Cup winning campaigns when you welcomed SJH's take over of the club. I'd say it was much more complacent for people to whitewash the failings of the latter part of the Shepherd regime, due to fond memories of European finishes in the past. Those European finishes were history and the club was heading in only one direction, Ashley came in and failed to change that direction, ranking each regime in order of who failed more is pointless and irrelevant. I have no special bond with Mike Ashley, I have no interest in him whatsoever outside of him owning NUFC, so when that no longer applies I'll pay him no attention. I certainly won't be banging on and on about how good he was and wasting my time arguing with those who disagree for years afterwards, I certainly would hate the next owners due to some kind of love of him. As for wiggling, well that's somewhat ironic coming from someone who has in one breath accused Ashley of being an incompetent and in the next portrayed him as some kind of evil mastermind who's going to take the club for all it's got. In the end I think it's pretty much certain that it'll be the club that's taken Ashley for a hefty chink of what he's got, rather than the other way round.
just read this, and it isnt as far fetched as you would think.
