Peter Billing Eyes
Well-Known Member
Like paying to have the interior decorated whilst the roof is pissing in water.
Like paying to have the interior decorated whilst the roof is pissing in water.Got a feeling the grant for the "new atruim" (porch) may well have paid for the shop..... whilst probably some of the millions have also found their way into the debt black hole....
hang on, does that mean they've had taxpayers money to sort out a club shop?Update - new shop to open in new atrium- kit to be announced.....
Quite possibly CD, .....but that will fly totally under the radar and not even be questioned, as usual.. .hang on, does that mean they've had taxpayers money to sort out a club shop?
hang on, does that mean they've had taxpayers money to sort out a club shop?
Wasps confirm dialogue with HMRC over unpaid tax bill
Premiership club Wasps follow Midlands neighbours Worcester's lead by confirming ongoing dialogue with HMRC over an unpaid tax bill.www.bbc.co.uk
There's a key bit in that article that I'd missed before.
The £13m that they're now begging the Council/WMCA for, is in effect the bailout that the Council gave ACL in 2013 (that they voted for in secret, as you'll recall).
So what Wasps are actually asking for is that the Council are put back on the hook for the stadium debt.
The primary justification people use to support the sale (also in secret) to Wasps, was that it got the taxpayer off the hook for the stadium.
Surely those same people will now be against risking public funds against the stadium again? Anything else would be hugely hypocritical, surely?
I thought that the bond money had paid that back, along with paying back Richardson and paying the first 3 years bonds interest.
The bond money did pay it back - but the problem now is that they can't repay the bond.
So in essence they're asking to borrow the 13m again, so that they can repay the bond! It's madness.
And the last one (promise). This time the 13m can't even be secured against the stadium, the bond holders now have the first charge against that.
We (the public) are being asked to lend money to a business that has never turned a profit, that has already been bailed out twice, and that has the threat of action against them from the bondholders on one side and HMRC on the other. Without security.
That it's even being considered is ludicrous.
It basically goes back to the initial loan the council took out to finish the stadium. Ccfc rent reduced the original amount but that loan basically hasn't been cleared in 17 years of stadium management. In one guise or another it remains.The bond money did pay it back - but the problem now is that they can't repay the bond.
So in essence they're asking to borrow the 13m again, so that they can repay the bond! It's madness.
The council were absolutely stupid incumbering a company with no trading history with such a large debt from day 1, I've said the same previously. I wouldn't mind but all ACL got in exchange was a 50 year lease.It basically goes back to the initial loan the council took out to finish the stadium. Ccfc rent reduced the original amount but that loan basically hasn't been cleared in 17 years of stadium management. In one guise or another it remains.
Probably the only useful post ever on here.Couple of ways, either 12ft.io or archive.today
English clubs to get cash injection at time of crisis for Worcester and Wasps
English rugby top clubs are to receive a much needed £20m cash injection this season thanks to their eight year funding deal with...www.rugbypass.com
It's a pittance and won't help Wasps in the slightest.So that's 20m split across 13 clubs, if I've read it right, with the level depending upon how many players from each club play for England. I'm not sure that this will get Wasps out of the hole they're in. A real pity, I know.
6million sounds nowhere near as bad as Wasps situation (35m not being paid to bondholders) and begging for 13m, after already being gifted millions for the Commonwealth games.....
How is administration more or less nailed on for Worcester and not Wasps!!??
So purely based on what they owe in Tax to HMRC?Because HMRC have petitioned a winding up order
So purely based on what they owe in Tax to HMRC?
So because wasps owe shed-loads elsewhere but are generally OK (ish?) with HMRC, they can plod along?
What happens if bondholders don't say yes?...They have to present this month a proposal to the bond holders with terms that need to be agreed - this is different as that’s a speculative investment - they can vote against it but no it’s not the same
What happens if bondholders don't say yes?...
And can they (Wasps) just tell them again, "it's OK, we'll pay you back soon!"??
What effectively has to happen for them to be put into administration??
Lots of questions, I know, but seems like Worcester are in a bit of bother quite out of the blue (?) ....and Wasps have been swindling and shafting people for money left right and centre (this has until recently, flown a bit under the radar) and are still ok to carry on.... and carry on as you frequently say, losing 10-18m year on year!!
How do we know what Wasp owe HMRC if they don't file their accounts though?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?