You are here: darlofc.co.uk » Board index » The Uncovered Forums » Virtual Feethams
It is currently Thu Sep 20, 2018 11:57 pm View unanswered posts | View active topics



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:39 pm
Posts: 154
Team Supported: Darlington
DarloDave40 wrote:
If it is Raj he is either totally thick skinned and stupid or he feels it's unfinished business. If it's unfinished business let's give him the time to tell us why he wants to get involved again.
Put it this way there's no property involved perhaps he wants to just put things right!!


Or hes annoyed at quickly we've got up the leagues and wants too finish us off !

_________________
Help get the club back to Darlo by helping to spread the word about the "Back to Darlo!" fund. The image on the right will be constantly updated with the latest total so please feel free to use the image link below the thermometer on your own signatures, blogs, websites, etc.Image
Image link: http://www.mydarlo.co.uk/img/BTD-therm-350x100.jpg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Posts: 1249
Team Supported: Darlington
tezza wrote:
spen666 wrote:
Lawman3 wrote:

This^

Raj Singh returning is a red line that cannot be crossed.


I can't believe people would want him back, nor that he would want to put money into the football club after losing money last time.

However, as someone has said previously... Imagine a scenario when an acceptable ( to most fans) investor comes along and puts £millions into the club in return for say 51% (or more of club shares). All is fine and accepted.

2 years later new investor has had enough and wants to sell...

There is nothing anyone could do to stop him selling it to Singh, Houghton, Reynolds, or anyone for that matter.

Once you give up control of club it is lost forever


You mean like Spennymoor


Be an idiot and argue about petty "rivalries" or try using your brain like the majority of fans and consider what is best for the club

_________________
_________________________________________________________________
Follow me on

Blog: www.spen666.wordpress.com

Twitter: @spen_666


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Posts: 1249
Team Supported: Darlington
biccynana wrote:
Vodka_Vic wrote:
However, what sort of system/organisation doesn't have a contingency plan for if an individual decides to 'kidnap' an essential document? The FA again.


I have never understood how the football share can be issued and held in an individual’s name. Surely it should be vested in a role in each club: Chairman, Secretary, whatever, rather than a named individual. So when the Chairman leaves it automatically passes to his/her successor.


I have never understood exactly what happened here re the share.

Surely it had to be held by the club. If not how were Darlington playing in the conference if they did not own the share?

Assuming therefore the club held the share, then on administration all the assets of the club vests in the administrator.

The club was purchased from the administrator wasn't it?

Therefore it would seem that either
1. Singh stole the share by not giving it to the administrator, thus making him guilty of theft of the share or contempt of court by not vesting the share with the administrator or holding it to his orders

And/Or

2. The purchase deal was some how defective and either the board or more likely their lawyers failed to ensure the purchase deal included the share.

I have always thought option 2 needs explanation to the fans one way or the other.

If option 1 also applies, then why was no action ever taken against Singh

Those who invested in Darlington have been let down over this and consequently the FA had to treat it as a new club in terms of the pyramid. Sadly too many people turned their hatred on the FA instead of asking the questions above allowing Singh and or the club lawyers to get away with it

_________________
_________________________________________________________________
Follow me on

Blog: www.spen666.wordpress.com

Twitter: @spen_666


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:01 pm
Posts: 24
Location: Durrington Wiltshire
Team Supported: Darlington
All this talk of moving back to the Arena you'll be telling us next that George Reynolds is returning with his worms.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Posts: 3389
Team Supported: Darlington
spen666 wrote:
I have never understood exactly what happened here re the share.


I have doubts about whether or not there even is a "Golden Share" or "share".

It's tempting to imagine some kind of grand gilded certificate, with hand written gold painted words etched into it, stating 'THE HOLDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE IS ALLOWED TO TAKE DARLINGTON FOOTBALL CLUB ON AN EXCITING JOURNEY'..(please don't lose this certificate)

I'm not sure this magical piece of paper even exists.

_________________
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4954
Team Supported: Darlington
theoriginalfatcat wrote:
spen666 wrote:
I have never understood exactly what happened here re the share.


I have doubts about whether or not there even is a "Golden Share" or "share".

It's tempting to imagine some kind of grand gilded certificate, with hand written gold painted words etched into it, stating 'THE HOLDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE IS ALLOWED TO TAKE DARLINGTON FOOTBALL CLUB ON AN EXCITING JOURNEY'..(please don't lose this certificate)

I'm not sure this magical piece of paper even exists.


I don't understand it fully to be honest, however the DFCSG currently holds a "Golden Share" and there only is one.

It's on the list of shareholders and shareholdings.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:38 am
Posts: 373
Team Supported: Darlington
super_les_mcjannet wrote:
I don't understand it fully to be honest, however the DFCSG currently holds a "Golden Share" and there only is one.

It's on the list of shareholders and shareholdings.


ah, right. So is it an actual physical thing?!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4954
Team Supported: Darlington
biccynana wrote:
super_les_mcjannet wrote:
I don't understand it fully to be honest, however the DFCSG currently holds a "Golden Share" and there only is one.

It's on the list of shareholders and shareholdings.


ah, right. So is it an actual physical thing?!


If that share is linked to the Football Share/Golden Share or whatever it is then yes. I don't fully get it to be honest but a golden share in the shareholding exists.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Posts: 248
Team Supported: Darlington
The golden Share is 10% of the voting rights and nothing to do with the football Share

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 4954
Team Supported: Darlington
Undercovered wrote:
The golden Share is 10% of the voting rights and nothing to do with the football Share


Cool, that makes more sense as if the Football Share was an actual share then the administrator would have had this anyhow.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:38 am
Posts: 373
Team Supported: Darlington
Undercovered wrote:
The golden Share is 10% of the voting rights and nothing to do with the football Share


I see. I was wondering about the football share, then. Whose name is it in, for example. Is it a physical thing? (Not sure why I’m quite so fascinated by the minutiae of this, but there you go...)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 4:03 pm
Posts: 215
Location: 53°22'N, 0°01'W
Team Supported: Darlington FC
Thinking this over I can't help but think that this consortium and any deal would involve the MG academy and a move back to the Arena. It would be cheaper to purchase it back from a struggling DMPRFC and then develop the surrounding land into the once fabled sports village. Maybe this explains MG's enthusiasm for this investment rather than just him being excited about being able to manage a NL or FL club (which he could do ordinarily and wouldn't be a secure existence). The Arena must be an option or these characters wouldn't be interested surely - what's the incentive to invest in BM?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Posts: 3389
Team Supported: Darlington
Image

Here you go Biccy

_________________
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:38 am
Posts: 373
Team Supported: Darlington
theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Image

Here you go Biccy


:D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 2103
Team Supported: Darlington
I still don't think there's such a thing as a "golden share". Surely, you have to agree a CVA to come out of administration or else you're considered a new club in footballing terms. We couldn't, as Singh was the main creditor and he wouldn't sign it.

So in that sense he controlled our footballing destiny but not through the lack of handing over a tangible football share, just because he wouldn't allow a CVA.

From a financial point of view I think he'll have ended up better off accordingly, as he'll have received a cut of the transfer clauses we had, as opposed to a few pence in the pound of the money we paid for the assets.

At least I think that's correct!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7784
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
spen666 wrote:
1. Singh stole the share by not giving it to the administrator, thus making him guilty of theft of the share or contempt of court by not vesting the share with the administrator or holding it to his orders

And/Or

2. The purchase deal was some how defective and either the board or more likely their lawyers failed to ensure the purchase deal included the share.


Singh transferred the golden share into his own name. In the same way I think that Coventry were unable to find ownership of theirs...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/22571496

In the same way the FL withheld Leeds'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... hheld.html

If I am not mistaken there is actually a football share which belongs to the league. So there are 72 shares which make up membership of the Football League, 20 shares in the Premier League etc. etc.

Clearly this share transfers between holding companies - in our situation it was transferred to Raj Singh, who was owner and 100% shareholder of the holding company Darlington FC 2011 Ltd or whatever it was...

It is definitely a thing. It is basically a shareholding in a company (in this case the league you are a member of) and it can definitely be transferred like any other share.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Posts: 1201
Team Supported: Darlington
What a shame there isn't a highly qualified solicitor on here who could have helped us to clarify all of this and make our world a better place. In fact with so much knowledge and attention to detail I'm surprised they didn't see the seats issue and let us know well in advance of 31st March.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Posts: 1249
Team Supported: Darlington
lo36789 wrote:
.....

Singh transferred the golden share into his own name. In the same way I think that Coventry were unable to find ownership of theirs...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/22571496

......
If I am not mistaken there is actually a football share which belongs to the league. So there are 72 shares which make up membership of the Football League, 20 shares in the Premier League etc. etc......


Thanks for this very helpful explanation.


If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

The FA/ League or whoever should be looking at the rules around this to prevent the situation Darlington were in ever re-occurring.

The football share should only be capable of being owned by the football club and not be transferable to anyone else.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down

_________________
_________________________________________________________________
Follow me on

Blog: www.spen666.wordpress.com

Twitter: @spen_666


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:39 pm
Posts: 974
Team Supported: Darlington
spen666 wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
.....

Singh transferred the golden share into his own name. In the same way I think that Coventry were unable to find ownership of theirs...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/22571496

......
If I am not mistaken there is actually a football share which belongs to the league. So there are 72 shares which make up membership of the Football League, 20 shares in the Premier League etc. etc......


Thanks for this very helpful explanation.


If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

The FA/ League or whoever should be looking at the rules around this to prevent the situation Darlington were in ever re-occurring.

The football share should only be capable of being owned by the football club and not be transferable to anyone else.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down


thanks for the confirmation - I thought the share was vested in name of Mr Singh. He owned all of the share capital in the holding company owning the club. Was it not unreasonable for him to hold the share in his sole name in those circumstances?

I agree the rules should prevent this but clearly they do not. However that assumes one clear corporate identify owns the club. I doubt, these days, it is as cut and dried as in past years.

It is a bold claim to suggest negligence. You assume Singh was prepared to enter into negotiations to transfer the share. He may well have not been prepared to do so, perhaps misunderstanding what it was that he actually controlled, he may have placed unconscionable conditions or an un affordable level of consideration on such a transfer, or perhaps in a fit a pique was determined to damage the remains of the club.It was, after all, his property to control.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7784
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
spen666 wrote:
If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down


They did. At the time Spen there were radio interviews, newspaper articles and significant debate on here that we needed Singh to hand over the share.

We knew we had bought all 'intangible' assets of the old club, and all the football debt from the old club (we left behind unsecured debt and Singh's £2million). We also knew that we didn't have the golden share.

Singh repeatedly said he would sign over ownership to the new club but went missing. He repeatedly said he didn't want a penny for it then I am sure he hit us with a £2million bill to buy it off him.

I think the remarks at the time were he could either hand it over and the club survives for nothing or he keeps hold of it - sees our demotion - and gets nothing. He chose the latter option.

It wasn't that he made a mistake, lost a bit of money, so maybe now he wants to make up for that. He made an extremely conscious decision to leave consign us to demotion when he could have been in an identical financial position but we would have been in Conference North with a points deduction...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 2103
Team Supported: Darlington
lo36789 wrote:
spen666 wrote:
If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down


They did. At the time Spen there were radio interviews, newspaper articles and significant debate on here that we needed Singh to hand over the share.

We knew we had bought all 'intangible' assets of the old club, and all the football debt from the old club (we left behind unsecured debt and Singh's £2million). We also knew that we didn't have the golden share.

Singh repeatedly said he would sign over ownership to the new club but went missing. He repeatedly said he didn't want a penny for it then I am sure he hit us with a £2million bill to buy it off him.

I think the remarks at the time were he could either hand it over and the club survives for nothing or he keeps hold of it - sees our demotion - and gets nothing. He chose the latter option.

It wasn't that he made a mistake, lost a bit of money, so maybe now he wants to make up for that. He made an extremely conscious decision to leave consign us to demotion when he could have been in an identical financial position but we would have been in Conference North with a points deduction...


That last bits just not true. If he, as the majority creditor, had accepted the CVA that Harvey Madden had offered he would have received a (very) small amount of his money back and we'd have been in the Conference North.

He didn't - so received a much larger amount as the half of legacy transfer clauses came in. Remember, the administrator kept half as part of the deal in the hands of the old company.

I don't much like the fella at all but he didn't refuse the CVA (or equate that to a football share if you'd prefer) out of pure spite, it was a clinical financial decision to give him the best chance of getting something back.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:37 am
Posts: 2270
Team Supported: Darlington
m62exile wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
spen666 wrote:
If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down


They did. At the time Spen there were radio interviews, newspaper articles and significant debate on here that we needed Singh to hand over the share.

We knew we had bought all 'intangible' assets of the old club, and all the football debt from the old club (we left behind unsecured debt and Singh's £2million). We also knew that we didn't have the golden share.

Singh repeatedly said he would sign over ownership to the new club but went missing. He repeatedly said he didn't want a penny for it then I am sure he hit us with a £2million bill to buy it off him.

I think the remarks at the time were he could either hand it over and the club survives for nothing or he keeps hold of it - sees our demotion - and gets nothing. He chose the latter option.

It wasn't that he made a mistake, lost a bit of money, so maybe now he wants to make up for that. He made an extremely conscious decision to leave consign us to demotion when he could have been in an identical financial position but we would have been in Conference North with a points deduction...


That last bits just not true. If he, as the majority creditor, had accepted the CVA that Harvey Madden had offered he would have received a (very) small amount of his money back and we'd have been in the Conference North.

He didn't - so received a much larger amount as the half of legacy transfer clauses came in. Remember, the administrator kept half as part of the deal in the hands of the old company.

I don't much like the fella at all but he didn't refuse the CVA (or equate that to a football share if you'd prefer) out of pure spite, it was a clinical financial decision to give him the best chance of getting something back.


There have been two dividends paid out to creditors of Darlington Football Club 2009 Ltd (inc Raj Singh companies) totalling 16.5p in the £. Raj Singh companies have received approx £136k.

_________________
Robbie Painter - http://twitter.com/RobbiePainter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 2103
Team Supported: Darlington
Robbie Painter wrote:
m62exile wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
spen666 wrote:
If Singh owned the football share in his own name, then on what basis were Darlington playing in the Football League / Conference?

Darlington apparently did not hold the football share then

If Singh owned the share, what was to stop him offering it to another club.

I would have expected the law firm dealing with the purchase of the club from the administrator to have identified exactly what was being purchased. I still think there is a good argument that either the directors ( at the time) or the law firm representing the club were negligent and let the fans down


They did. At the time Spen there were radio interviews, newspaper articles and significant debate on here that we needed Singh to hand over the share.

We knew we had bought all 'intangible' assets of the old club, and all the football debt from the old club (we left behind unsecured debt and Singh's £2million). We also knew that we didn't have the golden share.

Singh repeatedly said he would sign over ownership to the new club but went missing. He repeatedly said he didn't want a penny for it then I am sure he hit us with a £2million bill to buy it off him.

I think the remarks at the time were he could either hand it over and the club survives for nothing or he keeps hold of it - sees our demotion - and gets nothing. He chose the latter option.

It wasn't that he made a mistake, lost a bit of money, so maybe now he wants to make up for that. He made an extremely conscious decision to leave consign us to demotion when he could have been in an identical financial position but we would have been in Conference North with a points deduction...


That last bits just not true. If he, as the majority creditor, had accepted the CVA that Harvey Madden had offered he would have received a (very) small amount of his money back and we'd have been in the Conference North.

He didn't - so received a much larger amount as the half of legacy transfer clauses came in. Remember, the administrator kept half as part of the deal in the hands of the old company.

I don't much like the fella at all but he didn't refuse the CVA (or equate that to a football share if you'd prefer) out of pure spite, it was a clinical financial decision to give him the best chance of getting something back.


There have been two dividends paid out to creditors of Darlington Football Club 2009 Ltd (inc Raj Singh companies) totalling 16.5p in the £. Raj Singh companies have received approx £136k.


Exactly Robbie, funded mainly by transfer clause monies.

I don't at all respect the guy for the way he handled the situation in any way shape or form - but I think his refusal to agree a CVA wasn't pure spite with no financial implication as lo had suggested, he was trying to get a bit of his money back (albeit at the expense of the best interests of DFC)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Posts: 7784
Location: Liverpool
Team Supported: Darlington
m62exile wrote:
That last bits just not true. If he, as the majority creditor, had accepted the CVA that Harvey Madden had offered he would have received a (very) small amount of his money back and we'd have been in the Conference North.


That is not true. The distribution of money received would have been equivalent now as in the previous circumstance. Unless of course the only offer on the table was the hand over the share and forego your claim of £2million.

It makes no sense that the two would go hand in hand. He held all the power to agree to the CVA. He would have always been entitled to 0.89% of any dividend of debtor money received as part of the admin.

The opportunity to transfer ownership of the golden share could have been treated entirely independent of that. Why would he have to sacrifice what he is owed in return for the golden share?

Remember he publicly went on record and said there was no debt. He publicly went on record and said "I don't want a penny back". It was then publicly on record that Harvey Madden received a £2million claim from Raj Singh.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 20959
Team Supported: Darlington
m62exile wrote:

I don't at all respect the guy for the way he handled the situation in any way shape or form - but I think his refusal to agree a CVA wasn't pure spite with no financial implication as lo had suggested, he was trying to get a bit of his money back (albeit at the expense of the best interests of DFC)


Hmmm, that sounds like spite to me, considering he had said previously that he'd walk away without a penny - and then wants a penny at the expense of the club.

We of course can't judge if it was spite or simply a hard nosed business decision to try and recoup a percentage of his losses - not without a full breakdown of what happened and why from RS himself. He's never made a peep since 2012 so we're all in the dark as to his motivations then and now.

_________________
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 2103
Team Supported: Darlington
lo36789 wrote:
m62exile wrote:
That last bits just not true. If he, as the majority creditor, had accepted the CVA that Harvey Madden had offered he would have received a (very) small amount of his money back and we'd have been in the Conference North.


That is not true. The distribution of money received would have been equivalent now as in the previous circumstance. Unless of course the only offer on the table was the hand over the share and forego your claim of £2million.

It makes no sense that the two would go hand in hand. He held all the power to agree to the CVA. He would have always been entitled to 0.89% of any dividend of debtor money received as part of the admin.

The opportunity to transfer ownership of the golden share could have been treated entirely independent of that. Why would he have to sacrifice what he is owed in return for the golden share?

Remember he publicly went on record and said there was no debt. He publicly went on record and said "I don't want a penny back". It was then publicly on record that Harvey Madden received a £2million claim from Raj Singh.


I agree with your opinion about Singh's morals but our understanding of company law and football insolvency is a quite a bit different. His actions were to try and get as much of his money back as possible and to a certain extent it worked.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 2103
Team Supported: Darlington
Quakerz wrote:
m62exile wrote:

I don't at all respect the guy for the way he handled the situation in any way shape or form - but I think his refusal to agree a CVA wasn't pure spite with no financial implication as lo had suggested, he was trying to get a bit of his money back (albeit at the expense of the best interests of DFC)


Hmmm, that sounds like spite to me, considering he had said previously that he'd walk away without a penny - and then wants a penny at the expense of the club.

We of course can't judge if it was spite or simply a hard nosed business decision to try and recoup a percentage of his losses - not without a full breakdown of what happened and why from RS himself. He's never made a peep since 2012 so we're all in the dark as to his motivations then and now.


Ha, yes, and I'm certainly not a Singh apologist, quite the opposite!

I could be persuaded that he probably said all that stuff about not wanting a penny back in good faith, maybe someone sat him down and explained what that would mean in cold hard cash he maybe changed his mind.

Reprehensible of course, if he goes forward with a proposal then he'll have to explain it all and we can judge him at that.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
Posts: 3997
Team Supported: Darlington
44 years wrote:
Given that we have made a loss each season (pulled out of trouble several times by generous short term loans from individuals and the transfer clause cash). It may be as a fan owned and run club our sustainable level is possibly Evostick Division 1?


Sorry but I disagree entirely.

I think in the midst of all this, a number of people are forgetting that we have a significant proportion of revenue tied up in the 5-year Season Ticket deal introduced with effect from the 2015 / 2016 season.

We sold 287 packages in March 2015, and didn't a limited number become available in March 2016?

287 x £210 = £60,270.

However, this won't be realised until the summer of 2020.

Crowds, I accept, have been fairly disappointing at Blackwell Meadows. However I think that it can be attributed down to the poor facilities and match-day experience at BM. A number of issues have been rectified since the Halifax game, and I think further improvements will be made with the improvement of the pitch (dreadful to watch in Feb / March) and the installation of another c210 seats. I also believe that another food kiosk is due to be installed.

Then I think we have to look at installing step terracing behind the open-end.

I do believe that there is scope to grow attendances and the commercial side of the club at BM.

Realistically, I do think that as a fan-owned club we can sustain ourselves as a mid-table Conference National side over the next 5 years.

The issue that we are facing now is, is that we have a fantastic manager who's ambition is in danger of being greater that what this football club can achieve as a fan-owned entity. What Gray has done for this football club since 2012 has been remarkable, and you can only imagine what he could achieve if he was heavily backed financially.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 1138
Team Supported: Darlington
Someone suggested that they thought the investor/s were looking at the arena as a possibility but if that was the case surely we would not be spending money on the pitch so looks like ground may be able to reach FL standards


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Raj Singh
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Posts: 501
Team Supported: Darlington
darlo reborn wrote:
Someone suggested that they thought the investor/s were looking at the arena as a possibility but if that was the case surely we would not be spending money on the pitch so looks like ground may be able to reach FL standards


We have no plans to make BM up to FL standard. The only way it will be able to get up to FL standards is via a millionaire owner who is prepared to put an awful lot of money into it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group