Clubs that prosper soon after administration..

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Is it right that we haven't been thoroughly ****** by our recent administrations? Not really, but the problem lies with the relevant governing bodies. .

You haven't but Clubs who did not get promoted or got relegated as a result of the financial cheating of other clubs were thoroughly f***ed over. And your club did it twice. Can't be pleasant to hear that about ones club.

And the last refuge of the rogue is to blame the governing bodies.

 

[El Presidente]

I think Leicester are the worst offenders in terms of gaining an unfair advantage, as they 1) built a new stadium, 2) brought in a team of Premier League players, got relegated, went into admin, cleared off all of the debt from 1) & 2) above, and then proceeded to gain promotion back to the Premier League without any form of penalty. It was this one incident that forced the FA / League to bring in the penalties for going into admin.

But Leicester did have a penalty, they were subject to a transfer embargo after they went into administration.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree but Bloom didn't have his fortune in 97, we had to sell assets, players and were homeless as has been pointed out by Bwian.

I agree, but that is not dealing with the issue, people become very sanctimonious about the Albion always paying their debts etc, the club did not do that, it came to an informal agreement with some creditors and agreed to pay them a proportion of the debts due, rather than enter into a formal insolvency arrangement.

As for Palace and other clubs not 'suffering' due to administration, Pompey are currently slumming it in the third division, and Palace, apart from the last two and a half months, have been fighting relegation battles for the last few seasons.

I have worked in an insolvency practice, if the punishments sought by some on here were administered there would be fewer professional football clubs, and if those rules were extended to other businesses, a lot more unemployment in the economy all round.

 

[Brovion]

But Leicester did have a penalty, they were subject to a transfer embargo after they went into administration.

.

You're not seriously suggesting that was an equitable punishment? Ditto Palace and Portsmouth, 'flirting with relegation' and 'slumming it in the 3rd division'. If you're offering us that in return for an FA Cup I'll bite your hand off, it's not even close to a punishment. I do find your attitude almost incomprehensible.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I agree, but that is not dealing with the issue, people become very sanctimonious about the Albion always paying their debts etc, the club did not do that, it came to an informal agreement with some creditors and agreed to pay them a proportion of the debts due, rather than enter into a formal insolvency arrangement.

What percentage was it. Are we talking about 80% or 1%. I can see how an informal agreement would not be looked kindly on by an insolvency practice - but it seems quite sensible. And the creditors did not have to agree did they ?

 

[Bwian]

But Leicester did have a penalty, they were subject to a transfer embargo after they went into administration.

- - - Updated - - -
As for Palace and other clubs not 'suffering' due to administration, Pompey are currently slumming it in the third division, and Palace, apart from the last two and a half months, have been fighting relegation battles for the last few seasons.

Meanwhile, their gloating trolls are never slow in telling us that they've never been out of the top 2 divisions in 35 years. We even had one of their fans telling us that he was shitting himself for 4 Months. 4 frigging months. Meanwhile, we were languishing around the arse end of football with no home for 14 years, no planning approval, massive rents for Withdean, a first team training ground that is akin to a Sunday League Div 10 pitch (or it was), having to sell everything of value.

Is it any wonder most get annoyed with the trolls?

As for Portsmouth 'slumming it' in the 3rd division, after what that club has done over the years they're damn lucky to be in existence at all. Or did you miss their fans wanting them to spend even more money that they didn't have in hope of making the playoffs?

We know The Albion isn't whiter than white financially but the payments were significantly more than 2p in the pound, we didn't screw the taxman and we really suffered as a club. All a bit different to 'fighting relegation for a couple of years'.

 

[Brovion]

Meanwhile, their gloating trolls are never slow in telling us that they've never been out of the top 2 divisions in 35 years. We even had one of their fans telling us that he was shitting himself for 4 Months. 4 frigging months. Meanwhile, we were languishing around the arse end of football with no home, no planning approval, massive rents for Withdean, a first team training ground that is akin to a Sunday League Div 10 pitch (or it was), having to sell everything of value.

Is it any wonder most get annoyed with the trolls?

As for Portsmouth 'slumming it' in the 3rd division, after what that club has done over the years they're damn lucky to be in existence at all. Or did you miss their fans wanting them to spend even more money that they didn't have in hope of making the playoffs?

We know The Albion isn't whiter than white financially but the payments were significantly more than 2p in the pound, we didn't screw the taxman and we really suffered as a club. All a bit different to 'fighting relegation for a couple of years'.

Once again, eloquently put. I shall let you make all my posts in future!

 

[Bwian]

edit

 

[Papa Lazarou]

But Leicester did have a penalty, they were subject to a transfer embargo after they went into administration.

But they already had a team full of Premier League players... it certainly didn't prove to be a problem for them either.

- - - Updated - - -

But Leicester did have a penalty, they were subject to a transfer embargo after they went into administration.

But they already had a team full of Premier League players... it certainly didn't prove to be a problem for them either.

- - - Updated - - -

What's going in with the Updated thing?

 

[El Presidente]

Meanwhile, their gloating trolls are never slow in telling us that they've never been out of the top 2 divisions in 35 years. We even had one of their fans telling us that he was shitting himself for 4 Months. 4 frigging months. Meanwhile, we were languishing around the arse end of football with no home for 14 years, no planning approval, massive rents for Withdean, a first team training ground that is akin to a Sunday League Div 10 pitch (or it was), having to sell everything of value.

Is it any wonder most get annoyed with the trolls?

As for Portsmouth 'slumming it' in the 3rd division, after what that club has done over the years they're damn lucky to be in existence at all. Or did you miss their fans wanting them to spend even more money that they didn't have in hope of making the playoffs?

We know The Albion isn't whiter than white financially but the payments were significantly more than 2p in the pound, we didn't screw the taxman and we really suffered as a club. All a bit different to 'fighting relegation for a couple of years'.

Getting annoyed with the trolls is completely different to applying the rule of company law and the Football League though.

I agree entirely that Pompey are lucky to be in existence, as for the taxman, the Albion DID reach an agreement and did not pay the full sum due.

The elephant in the room with regards to Palace, is that despite spending £5 million less than us over the last 18 months, playing in a revolting decaying stadium in a revolting decaying part of London, they are top of the league. By all means claim that is due to them exploiting the insolvency and football rules, but I suspect it is more to do with the Albion gifting them our top scorer from two seasons ago, and replacing him with Alex Revell 2.0 for £2.5 million.

- - - Updated - - -

But they already had a team full of Premier League players... it certainly didn't prove to be a problem for them either.

- - - Updated - - -



But they already had a team full of Premier League players... it certainly didn't prove to be a problem for them either.

- - - Updated - - -

What's going in with the Updated thing?

No idea what is happening with the updated thing. As for Leicester, they were the Premiership players who had taken them down the previous season. Wolves, Bolton and Blackburn went down last season, they are not occupying the top positions this season though.

 

[Nodnol]

You haven't but Clubs who did not get promoted or got relegated as a result of the financial cheating of other clubs were thoroughly f***ed over. And your club did it twice. Can't be pleasant to hear that about ones club.

And the last refuge of the rogue is to blame the governing bodies.

There's a difference between cheating and poor management. Leeds was an attempt to cheat the system, Leicester's also in some respect, but I wouldn't necessarily pigeonhole our predicaments with their's. Both recent administrations under Goldberg and Jordan were down to poor management. Both were trying to buy the club to the BPL and that eventually blew up in their faces. To act as if it was villainous seems somewhat misguided, but then that's the rivalry talking. This thread wouldn't have half the malice it does if it didn't contain or relate to Palace.

And to not see how at fault the governing bodies are is naive. Business is a dog eat dog world, and football is the best example of that. Until someone comes down stronger, clubs will continue to get away with what they can. The fact is, that's true on all fronts in this country. From Policitians expenses, to a tradesman accepting cash in hand, making the most of the system is evident in all walks of life. Granted we are talking of extremes here, but none of us can sit here and claim the moral high ground and wave a finger at the wrong 'uns when it's the system that broken.

I said in my initial post it's nothing to be proud of, and hasn't been without scars, and I've said that something more needs to be done. Those changes though, HAVE to come from the top, and a better micromanagement of English football has to exist. The FA need to man up in general, and that applies to so many issues in the modern game, not just this one. As the governing body of football in this country, the buck stops with them.

Clubs need tougher sanctions regarding their management. You say how is it fair that one club can effect an entire league through receiving a lack of punishment? Is it not equally wrong, that an entire club, consisting of thousands of fans, can be jepordised because of one man's actions? Not to mention most of the clubs mentioned in this thread have been chasing a poisoned chalice, the end trying to justify the mean. Is that not what's wrong with this? That the BPL has become such a draw for league clubs that they are willing to risk it all?

Sitting all high and mighty because you're not the ones this thread is about is not the way to approach this. Remove Palace, and Brighton, from this because this is bigger than both clubs. This is all the byproduct of a fundamentally flawed and disillusioned system. I wonder though, would half the people in this thread still hold the same attitude IF you were in this position? I doubt that, because it's human nature to look after yourself. That said I stand by the fact that individuals need to be held accountable for the running of their respective clubs, and not just when the administrators are called in.

- - - Updated - - -

You haven't but Clubs who did not get promoted or got relegated as a result of the financial cheating of other clubs were thoroughly f***ed over. And your club did it twice. Can't be pleasant to hear that about ones club.

And the last refuge of the rogue is to blame the governing bodies.

There's a difference between cheating and poor management. Leeds was an attempt to cheat the system, Leicester's also in some respect, but I wouldn't necessarily pigeonhole our predicaments with their's. Both recent administrations under Goldberg and Jordan were down to poor management. Both were trying to buy the club to the BPL and that eventually blew up in their faces. To act as if it was villainous seems somewhat misguided, but then that's the rivalry talking. This thread wouldn't have half the malice it does if it didn't contain or relate to Palace.

And to not see how at fault the governing bodies are is naive. Business is a dog eat dog world, and football is the best example of that. Until someone comes down stronger, clubs will continue to get away with what they can. The fact is, that's true on all fronts in this country. From Policitians expenses, to a tradesman accepting cash in hand, making the most of the system is evident in all walks of life. Granted we are talking of extremes here, but none of us can sit here and claim the moral high ground and wave a finger at the wrong 'uns when it's the system that broken.

I said in my initial post it's nothing to be proud of, and hasn't been without scars, and I've said that something more needs to be done. Those changes though, HAVE to come from the top, and a better micromanagement of English football has to exist. The FA need to man up in general, and that applies to so many issues in the modern game, not just this one. As the governing body of football in this country, the buck stops with them.

Clubs need tougher sanctions regarding their management. You say how is it fair that one club can effect an entire league through receiving a lack of punishment? Is it not equally wrong, that an entire club, consisting of thousands of fans, can be jepordised because of one man's actions? Not to mention most of the clubs mentioned in this thread have been chasing a poisoned chalice, the end trying to justify the mean. Is that not what's wrong with this? That the BPL has become such a draw for league clubs that they are willing to risk it all?

Sitting all high and mighty because you're not the ones this thread is about is not the way to approach this. Remove Palace, and Brighton, from this because this is bigger than both clubs. This is all the byproduct of a fundamentally flawed and disillusioned system. I wonder though, would half the people in this thread still hold the same attitude IF you were in this position? I doubt that, because it's human nature to look after yourself. That said I stand by the fact that individuals need to be held accountable for the running of their respective clubs, and not just when the administrators are called in.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

There's a difference between cheating and poor management. Leeds was an attempt to cheat the system, Leicester's also in some respect, but I wouldn't necessarily pigeonhole our predicaments with their's. Both recent administrations under Goldberg and Jordan were down to poor management. Both were trying to buy the club to the BPL and that eventually blew up in their faces.

The impact was that other well run clubs suffered. You can call it bad management I call it cheating. Cheating - because they knew the potential fallback position. And once, you can maybe explain away. But twice ? Anyway - whatever the description the impact is the same.

I am not sitting all high and mighty at all - although I do think there has been a moral credibility in the Albions approach. Not that we knew it at the time. It just seemed that was what we had to do and most of us knew that post-Archer we had good people in charge. Of course we knew other clubs had different standards - but that was down to them.

And blaming football governance does not sit well with me. It is too easy.

- - - Updated - - -

edit

Thatis the most sensible post you have made for a while.

 

[COYP]

First administration occurred because an idiot bought the club off Noades without any assets other than players and the name. He then spent the entirety of his fortune trying to buy success whilst getting taken advantage of right, left and centre by fairly unscruplous individuals such as El Tel. His financial mismanagement almost cost me my club, he lost his entire fortune, several players went months without wages, several local businesses run by palace fans almost went bankrupt (I'm not aware of any who actually did) and several people at Selhurst lost their jobs. I'm pretty sure all those people got punished. At that stage there was no ten point deduction for administration but we certainly didn't enter it as a means of cheating our way to success ala Leeds.

Second administration, Simon Jordan lied about having bought Selhurst Park off Noades and as such like Goldberg before him actually had no assets other than the players and the name. He took out a ridiculous loan from Agilo, professional loan sharks posing as a hedgefund investment company and frequently involved in financially ruining companies. They got the old twitchy finger and put Palace into administration. That was a hugely different administration to the likes of Leeds et al.

Its well known that Brighton themselves were financially mismanaged and paid back percentages of their debts. I heard a figure around 20% but who knows whats true in the murky world of sports ownerships. No one still knows who owns Leeds. If you really need to quote a team that paid back 100% of their debts from administration that you should look to Carlisle United, well known as being the only club to have paid £1 in every £1 back to the creditors.

 

[WeScored3...]

My understanding is that Palace under administration paid off all the creditors in FULL...this was achieved by various cost cutting activities including bonfire sales of players that we didn't want to sell (i.e. Victor Moses for peanuts). Palace well and truly suffered as a result of Jordan's mismanagement, we almost went down after being deducted 10 points, and for the last few years have had to rebuild the club and operate on a very tight budget. We haven't gone to the dogs because of sound management by the new owners (for once) and Freedman...plus the academy is producing young players worth millions which has saved our backsides.

So my point is, why should have Palace be punished any further?

 

[Nodnol]

The impact was that other well run clubs suffered. You can call it bad management I call it cheating. Cheating - because they knew the potential fallback position. And once, you can maybe explain away. But twice ? Anyway - whatever the description the impact is the same.

I am not sitting all high and mighty at all - although I do think there has been a moral credibility in the Albions approach. Not that we knew it at the time. It just seemed that was what we had to do and most of us knew that post-Archer we had good people in charge. Of course we knew other clubs had different standards - but that was down to them.

And blaming football governance does not sit well with me. It is too easy.

- - - Updated - - -



Thatis the most sensible post you have made for a while.

We are talking about two different individuals at fault here. I know and appreciate that we all address a club as individual identity, but the reality is very difference. The Club itself wasn't at fault, but two different people were. Doesn't excuse it, but it's not exactly the case that the same person deliberately put the club into administration twice.

I don't get the cheating thing, especially in regards to us. Who in their right mind would deliberately put their club through that!? That makes no sense. In Leed's case, they deliberately put the club into admin once their relegation was confirmed. THAT, in my opinion, is cheating.

We were slowly ground down, bleeding money over a number of years. When promotion wasn't won for the nth time, the bottom fell out of the club, and it wasn't sustainable. Goldberg and Jordan, the two individuals responsible for our troubles, both lost out. Why would they deliberately direct the club and completely disregard the pitfalls of administration? No sane individual would manage a club and actually disregard their own finances and investment purely because they know administration won't impact the club that severly. It seems the difference between my bad management and your cheating would be down to intent, and I simply don't think Goldberg nor Jordan would have ever intended to go about things the way they did.

I can completely appreciate the position that some clubs feel agreived by a club in administration taking their position in a league that they feel they should be still in. Case in point, our final game of our administration season against Shef. Wed. This is a bit of a grey area to be honest, and I don't think we will come to an unianomous verdict, even if we surveyed every fan from every club. Who deserves to be relegated more? The club that simply isn't good enough on the pitch, or the club that isn't run well off the pitch? Given that the leagues illustrate how well a team plays football, I'm inclined to edge towards the latter, but I will not turn a blind eye to the punishment clubs ran badly should receive. I've said numerous times now that MORE needs to be done.

And I am not blaming governing bodies in regards to them taking responsiblity for our, or any other club's, failings on a financial front. It's not a case of wasters sitting around doing nothing, blaming their goverment because they have nothing to show for their lives. I'm not trying to say that, nor intend to come across that way. My point was, that the FA has to take responsibility in ensuring the future of the game in this country, and they simply aren't. Ask ANY football fans in this country, and I bet you anything they will moan about the FA if asked. It's the clubs fault they are in the state they get into, put who is responsible for the punishment? You honestly expect ANY business to be harder on themselves then they have to? Only companies who will benefit from the positive PR will do something that is detrimental to them financially in the short-term. Football clubs just don't have the sustainability to opperate like that. Clubs like BHA who have handled the relevant situations as they have should be applauded and made example of though, because going to administration and narrowly avoiding liquidation/relegation etc should NEVER be the standard.

I can't make excuses for the past, because they were not times we are proud of, but to continually and retrospectively degrade and attack any club because of the individual actions of a few is not productive. You can't undo mistakes, and besides, lessons are there to be learnt. Touch wood, we won't be going anywhere near administration for a long long time. I still say that fundamentally we have not prospered from our adminstrations; in all regards they have hindered and held us back, but ultimately this recent administration has benefitted us because the club is now in safe hands and has had a slap in the face and wake-up call.

I suppose what I am saying is, no it's not right, but why single out Palace? It was that thought that brought me onto the governing bodies, because they have ultimately sculpted the footballing community that exists among clubs by creating what English football has become. THAT is what is ultimately flawed; just look at the big picture rather than a stone's throw north. There is a LOT wrong with English football at the highest level, and I know plenty will agree with me there.

We are doing what we can to right the wrongs of the past, but it will take time and it will be a long time before we forget, let alone anyone else.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

First administration occurred because an idiot bought the club off Noades without any assets other than players and the name. He then spent the entirety of his fortune trying to buy success whilst getting taken advantage of right, left and centre by fairly unscruplous individuals such as El Tel. His financial mismanagement almost cost me my club, he lost his entire fortune, several players went months without wages, several local businesses run by palace fans almost went bankrupt (I'm not aware of any who actually did) and several people at Selhurst lost their jobs. I'm pretty sure all those people got punished. At that stage there was no ten point deduction for administration but we certainly didn't enter it as a means of cheating our way to success ala Leeds.

Second administration, Simon Jordan lied about having bought Selhurst Park off Noades and as such like Goldberg before him actually had no assets other than the players and the name. He took out a ridiculous loan from Agilo, professional loan sharks posing as a hedgefund investment company and frequently involved in financially ruining companies. They got the old twitchy finger and put Palace into administration. That was a hugely different administration to the likes of Leeds et al.

This has the right of truth. Palace is a club supported by idiots and shysters.

- - - Updated - - -

Touch wood, we won't be going anywhere near administration for a long long time.

I am sure I read that after the first one.

We are doing what we can to right the wrongs of the past, but it will take time and it will be a long time before we forget, let alone anyone else.

I suggest you don't come on here if you do not like to be reminded.

 

[Nodnol]

This has the right of truth. Palace is a club supported by idiots and shysters.

Very constructive.

Given the stereotypes that get bandered around in relation to BHA, I would have thought you would appreciate how childishness making such a broad comment towards thousands of people would be. It's 2012 for Christ' sake. There was me thinking that I would register here not to troll or wind people up, but to actually try and represent who I support constructively. I can appreciate that 90% of the Palace fans on here (and the BBS/HOL) are idiots and it gets annoying, but not all of us are the same. Debates and constructive arguments shouldn't be too much to ask for between rivals, even inbetween the keyboard warriors and angry teenagers.

- - - Updated - - -

This has the right of truth. Palace is a club supported by idiots and shysters.

- - - Updated - - -



I am sure I read that after the first one.



I suggest you don't come on here if you do not like to be reminded.

You can't compare Jordan to CPFC2010. For a start you have four individuals working together, rather than one, and thus it's a lot easier to keep a level head and make the right business decisions.

And as to the second comment, I'm a little confused. I never came into this thread bragging, giving it the big 'un, gloating or systematically ignoring the facts of the last ten years. I do believe at one point I said it's important NOT to forget the past.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Very constructive.

It was a joke for the apparently dwindling number of Albion fans on here.

 

[Paul Skinback]

This is not a hate fest. There are many things discussed here that are morally wrong, yet legal..

People who steal donations from outside charity shops are morlly wrong/corrupt but it doesn't stop it happening.
Had to comeback and answer, some of you are decent! Anyway, as has been said, 42 clubs have gone into admin', you'll be able to add Charlton to that list at the end of this season...you heard it here first.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I do believe at one point I said it's important NOT to forget the past.

Like we need a reminder.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Getting annoyed with the trolls is completely different to applying the rule of company law and the Football League though.

I agree entirely that Pompey are lucky to be in existence, as for the taxman, the Albion DID reach an agreement and did not pay the full sum due.

The elephant in the room with regards to Palace, is that despite spending £5 million less than us over the last 18 months, playing in a revolting decaying stadium in a revolting decaying part of London, they are top of the league. By all means claim that is due to them exploiting the insolvency and football rules, but I suspect it is more to do with the Albion gifting them our top scorer from two seasons ago, and replacing him with Alex Revell 2.0 for £2.5 million.

We didn't gift Murray but offered him double his wages which he rejected because Palace offered him a signing on fee and double what we were offering. That is why they started getting into trouble in the first place by paying excessive wages. Poyet confirmed last week that we could only offer 50% of Murray's wages from Palace. As for the dig at CMS, I always thought that Hoskins was Murray's replacement as his signing was announced within 24 hours.