Bury gone (1 Viewer)

Grendel said:

Do you really think anyone potential owner would buy a club on that basis

I just don’t get the hysteria - businesses in other industries collapse all the time - the fact these are the first in the league for a long time suggests the current system is working surely

Click to expand...

You know as well as I do it’s different Grendel. Owners might treat football clubs as businesses but we (fans) all know they are more than that. Also going into administration and being docked points is one thing (ie business collapsing)....being chucked out the league is another. By all accounts Dale has been trying to manufacture a position where he personally benefits significantly or the club goes out of business (have you seen the rumours about the acquired debt for £70k ?!). By the way I appreciate he wasn’t the start of the problems for Bury.

Why wouldn’t someone buy still a club.... unless they already knew/thought they were unlikely to be able to meet some basic criteria in future ? ie like not being able to leave wages unpaid for months ?! If so, are these the owners that should be allowed to buy clubs in the first place ?

I’m just advocating putting something in place to dissuade this type of thing from happening and/or allowing EFL to properly intervene earlier.

Ps I think there’s more to come !

chiefdave said:

People are confusing two things, the rules of a competition and company law. The EFL can't override company law so the sort of changes people are talking about would require the law changing to create a new category of business that doesn't abide by the same laws everyone else does and can go bust every few years with little to no consequence.

Click to expand...

I think they already have differing laws. The football creditor rule being one ie football creditors to be given preference over non football creditors in a CVA/administration ie football creditors need to be repaid in full.

CCFCSteve said:

I think they already have differing laws. The football creditor rule being one ie football creditors to be given preference over non football creditors in a CVA/administration ie football creditors need to be repaid in full.

Click to expand...

Never really understood why HMRC seem to allow that.

Evo1883 said:

'FIT AND PROPER OWNERS'

Bag of cunts that rule over football

Click to expand...

Those who rule over football are not FIT AND PROPER.

BornSlippySkyBlue said:

Never really understood why HMRC seem to allow that.

Click to expand...

It has been tested in court and HMRC lost on more than one occasion. The rules of the closed competition that is the efl appears to take precedence. Those rules specifically put the agreement to the football creditors as a condition of membership. It wont change because the clubs owners would have to vote against it.... and self interest would stop that

CCFCSteve said:

I think they already have differing laws. The football creditor rule being one ie football creditors to be given preference over non football creditors in a CVA/administration ie football creditors need to be repaid in full.

Click to expand...

The reason HMRC have lost their challenges is because the football creditors rule is in line with the law.

What people are talking about here is changing the law on who can own companies or even people being forcibly removed from ownership without having broken the law.,

chiefdave said:

The reason HMRC have lost their challenges is because the football creditors rule is in line with the law.

What people are talking about here is changing the law on who can own companies or even people being forcibly removed from ownership without having broken the law.,

Click to expand...

Only talking about the golden share (ability to compete in a competition). Which I honestly think should be able to be removed from dodgy owners. Even the threat of the EFL having the ability to do this may dissuade certain people getting involved in the first place.

Not saying it’s an ideal solution but something needs to change (as OSB indicated any changes are unlikely to be voted in anyway, especially as most clubs are in debt !!! If the balance changed though....why not)

CCFCSteve said:

Only talking about the golden share (ability to compete in a competition). Which I honestly think should be able to be removed from dodgy owners. Even the threat of the EFL having the ability to do this may dissuade certain people getting involved in the first place.

Not saying it’s an ideal solution but something needs to change (as OSB indicated any changes are unlikely to be voted in anyway, especially as most clubs are in debt !!! If the balance changed though....why not)

Click to expand...

Define dodgy owner

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT said:

Those who rule over football are not FIT AND PROPER.

Click to expand...

To be honest fans have a responsibility too. They fuel a lot of over spend too with their unrealistic demands. They applaud reckless spending when the team is winning then moan when it goes tits up.

Fans follow a week to week kneejerk business plan.

CCFCSteve said:

Only talking about the golden share (ability to compete in a competition). Which I honestly think should be able to be removed from dodgy owners. Even the threat of the EFL having the ability to do this may dissuade certain people getting involved in the first place.

Click to expand...

But what would that do? The owner you've taken the golden share off would still own everything a fan would consider to be the club including the players and stadium. And if you've just taken the share off them they aren't likely to be in a mood to cooperate in handing them over.

You'd have the people you're trying to get rid of able to hold the new owners to ransom.

Grendel said:

Define dodgy owner

Click to expand...

Dodgy was a flippant word. Basically what the fit and proper person check should weed out (have insufficient funds to effectively run the club, not have a history of insolvencies etc etc). Unfortunately as things stand, once they have ‘passed’ the fit and proper test the EFL can’t do anything ! That’s just wrong

Ps Unfortunately we’re also starting from a position where most clubs are run poorly/at a loss !

chiefdave said:

But what would that do? The owner you've taken the golden share off would still own everything a fan would consider to be the club including the players and stadium. And if you've just taken the share off them they aren't likely to be in a mood to cooperate in handing them over.

You'd have the people you're trying to get rid of able to hold the new owners to ransom.

Click to expand...

Player contracts would likely terminate (we are also talking about players who haven’t been paid for months so could terminate anyway). Stadium. Depends on its value for alternative use. As we’ve found there are other short term options if the owner didn’t want to sell....and they might well be left with a white elephant if they didn’t.

Ps it was only an off the top of my head suggestion, not a fully legally reviewed plan ready to be implemented

When you think of how few other businesses from 50-100 years ago are still around, it's a miracle that so many football clubs still exist.

Gazolba said:

When you think of how many other businesses from 50-100 years ago are still around, it's a miracle that so many football clubs still exist.

Click to expand...

Quite a few have gone bust....just not disappeared. I think it’s becoming more and more difficult though and while I’ve said there needs to be changes in relation to the EFL, possibly regarding the golden share, there needs to be more sweeping changes in terms of football in general and how clubs are run. I read the other day that championship clubs combined debt is over £1bn....I mean WTF ?!!!

Hobo said:

To be honest fans have a responsibility too. They fuel a lot of over spend too with their unrealistic depands. They applaud reckless spending when the team is winning then moan when it goes tits up.

Fans follow a week to week kneejerk business plan.

Click to expand...

I don’t really buy that. Just because the fans want something doesn’t give the owners a reason to put the business / club they run at risk by recklessly spending money they don’t have.

Fans will always have unrealistic expectations, someone that takes on the responsibility of owning a club (which is a community asset) should run it appropriately, regardless of the fans’ wishes. They know when they take it on what the fans will want and how much money they’ll need.

Have either been expelled yet?

I have more sympathy with Bury to be honest. Bolton relegated around 2012 with 90m worth of parachutr payments. A benefactor wrote off 171 million worth of debt and put in a further 15 m to go forward with. He pumped in a further 5 m about a year ago before his death. Yet Bolton still seem to have debts of 170 m? How irresponsible.

Fans need to get a grip and insist on clubs being run to budget or dont moan when it all goes tits up...145 year history or not.

Johhny Blue said:

Is Christmas still a go?

Click to expand...

Go anyway, Bury has one of the best markets in the country and plenty of good pubs. Dead easy on the team from central Manchester. Make a day of it, whatever happens.

Terry Gibson's perm said:

Have either been expelled yet?

Click to expand...

No. Today is deadline but with talks on going extensions will be given. If EFL pull carpet I think they still give 14 days notice of final expulsion from league.

oucho said:

Go anyway, Bury has one of the best markets in the country and plenty of good pubs. Dead easy on the team from central Manchester. Make a day of it, whatever happens.

Click to expand...

Love to see how that one plays out.
I'm off to Bury boxing day love.
Oh, are City playing in Bury?
No, I'm just going to spend the day drinking and arsing about round the market!

clint van damme said:

Love to see how that one plays out.
I'm off to Bury boxing day love.
Oh, are City playing in Bury?
No, I'm just going to spend the day drinking and arsing about round the market!

Click to expand...

not sure what's shorter odds for not being there on boxing day, the football team or the market

BornSlippySkyBlue said:

I don’t really buy that. Just because the fans want something doesn’t give the owners a reason to put the business / club they run at risk by recklessly spending money they don’t have.

Fans will always have unrealistic expectations, someone that takes on the responsibility of owning a club (which is a community asset) should run it appropriately, regardless of the fans’ wishes. They know when they take it on what the fans will want and how much money they’ll need.

Click to expand...

Yes and fans then stop attending and wreck the business model. Fans are one of the most unstable assets in a football club. When you are in League 1 that unstable asset is about all you have; because the media and sponsorship revenue streams will be minimal.

clint van damme said:

Love to see how that one plays out.
I'm off to Bury boxing day love.
Oh, are City playing in Bury?
No, I'm just going to spend the day drinking and arsing about round the market!

Click to expand...

I bet she is up for it.

Hobo said:

I bet she is up for it.

Click to expand...

She's not coming!

clint van damme said:

She's not coming!

Click to expand...

I doubt she would at Bury market

oldskyblue58 said:

It has been tested in court and HMRC lost on more than one occasion. The rules of the closed competition that is the efl appears to take precedence. Those rules specifically put the agreement to the football creditors as a condition of membership. It wont change because the clubs owners would have to vote against it.... and self interest would stop that

Click to expand...

But if that's the case why don't all industries (or at least other sports) do it with governing bodies? Make it a closed system so you have to agree to their governing body 's rules, one of which is pay industry creditors first, to trade? Loads of professions need to have accreditation?

Who's rule is it anyway? I assume it's in both the PL and EFL statutes, but in those cases is it really a closed system.

Officially had their membership withdrawn now. Sad times for the Shakers.

Just been announced that Bury have been expelled

Football is broke, Fuck the EFL

Very sad. Bolton have been given 14 days.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I feel sorry for Bury. Bolton have been given extension after extension. Yet sadly Bury bite the bullet first.

I hope the ground can be saved. I’m sure the vultures are circling already to turn it in to houses

Very sad indeed

And yet 10 miles away in Manchester there are two clubs in millions and millions of pounds of debt and the EPL won't touch them.

Fuck modern football!

Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk

I feel gutted for Bury fans Young and Old. What a disaster, a tragic outcome and again as always it is the loyal fans who get heartbroken and pay the price.

The EFL should be ashamed to have allowed a situation like this get anywhere near this point. Very Sad.

Real shame for Bury. Football governance isn't good enough, it's not the EFL's fault as such though imo. You can't look beyond Dale and the c**t before him.