Our accounts

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 14080
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlo_Pete » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:03 pm

A phoenix club would still be Darlo and it's supporters would still regard themselves as Darlo fans.

shawry
Posts: 2600
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:55 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by shawry » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:21 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:A phoenix club would still be Darlo and it's supporters would still regard themselves as Darlo fans.
Would we? A seem to recall people saying they wouldn't follow a reformed club?

Also, while yes a lot would still see us as Darlo still, it couldn't be looked on as a success if we had to fold and reform in the Northern League again.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Comfortably_numb
Posts: 2074
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:23 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Comfortably_numb » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:13 pm

shawry wrote:
Darlo_Pete wrote:A phoenix club would still be Darlo and it's supporters would still regard themselves as Darlo fans.
Would we? A seem to recall people saying they wouldn't follow a reformed club?

Also, while yes a lot would still see us as Darlo still, it couldn't be looked on as a success if we had to fold and reform in the Northern League again.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
it would be a new club. some fans of the previous club would no doubt support the new one. but it would still be a new club.

very similar to deluded (The) Rangers fans in Glasgow. They are usually referred to as Sevco / Newco up here.

Darlogramps
Posts: 6025
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlogramps » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:45 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:A phoenix club would still be Darlo and it's supporters would still regard themselves as Darlo fans.
Doesn't matter. In a legal, business sense the old club would not exist. It would have been liquidated, wound up, consigned to the history books.

Hereford FC is not the same club as the old Hereford United. And the same would apply here.

If you're trying to argue otherwise you are wrong.
If ever you're bored or miserable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlZohZoadGY

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 6718
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:35 pm

Pete - I'm not sure we have another going bust situation left in us! It would be farcical.

That's why I was dead set against Singh getting involved. A football club is just a business to him, and people like him. Businesses can be bought and sold and asset stripped and abused and used ........

If we have to stay in this league for a little while and live within our means, what's the problem?
Profile pic ↗️
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Quakerz » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:32 pm

Funny thing is, if we HAD gone bust - like many people think we did - we would not have received the Dan Burn money to bail us out.

Having said that, we also wouldn't have started with a 6 figure debt, we'd have started with a clean slate - possibly meaning we wouldn't have needed the Dan Burn money anyway.
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

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13213
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by divas » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:19 pm

I worked out that we ended up about an even net position in the end.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by loan_star » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:03 pm

divas wrote:I worked out that we ended up about an even net position in the end.
But with a slightly more clear conscience that we paid off a lot of the debt left by Singh

Darlo-and-Back
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlo-and-Back » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:50 pm

We only paid off the football debt in an attempt to retain our FA membership, something the FA neglected to take into consideration when treating us as a new club. An expensive folly in hindsight. We got our continuity through the purchase of the assets of the previous company and in particular the rights to the badge, brand, name etc

wizardofos
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:14 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by wizardofos » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:27 pm

Darlo-and-Back wrote:We only paid off the football debt in an attempt to retain our FA membership, something the FA neglected to take into consideration when treating us as a new club. An expensive folly in hindsight. We got our continuity through the purchase of the assets of the previous company and in particular the rights to the badge, brand, name etc
Not an expensive folly at all - net even as confirmed by Wayne.
And what's more our actions to ensure that we completed our final season in the Conference, and have never missed an official fixture (unlike some of the phoenix clubs who folded mid-season) ensured that we are the same Football Club with our 134 year history.
Even if we were forced to use a different name briefly.

Darlo-and-Back
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlo-and-Back » Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:13 am

The payment of the football debt and completing the season were entirely unrelated. The football debt payment was to protect the FA membership under their rules. Ultimately when RS refused to consent to the transfer of the membership he made the repayment of the football debt pointless. A gesture to the players and management for sure but in straight financial terms one that wasn’t necessary.

wizardofos
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:14 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by wizardofos » Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:46 am

Darlo-and-Back wrote:The payment of the football debt and completing the season were entirely unrelated. The football debt payment was to protect the FA membership under their rules. Ultimately when RS refused to consent to the transfer of the membership he made the repayment of the football debt pointless. A gesture to the players and management for sure but in straight financial terms one that wasn’t necessary.
They are not unrelated in terms of preserving our continuity, and therefore history and identity.
Both had to be done.

Darlo-and-Back
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlo-and-Back » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:19 am

Not correct. There were two aspects in play. Continuity in terms of Company Law and continuity of FA Membership. We retained continuity in the sense of a business by buying the assets from the administrator ie rights to the badge, shirt colours, brand, player sell-on rights, pitch covers etc. We could have bought these without having to accept the football only debt, as we did not accept paying the non-football debt.

In FA terms we were deemed a new club because the membership transfer was refused. Hence start at NL and new name.

So there is a valid arguement that we are the same club or a new club depending which stance you argue: FA membership or company continuity.

To me it’s irrelevant, when I walk through the turnstiles it feels to me like the same Darlington FC. My point is we did the previous players and management a favour we didn’t have to, I can live with that and it’s something every player that comes to our club should perhaps be told that in the clubs darkest hour the fans stood by their players... even though we didn’t have to.

wizardofos
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:14 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by wizardofos » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:36 am

Darlo-and-Back wrote:Not correct. There were two aspects in play. Continuity in terms of Company Law and continuity of FA Membership. We retained continuity in the sense of a business by buying the assets from the administrator ie rights to the badge, shirt colours, brand, player sell-on rights, pitch covers etc. We could have bought these without having to accept the football only debt, as we did not accept paying the non-football debt.

In FA terms we were deemed a new club because the membership transfer was refused. Hence start at NL and new name.

So there is a valid arguement that we are the same club or a new club depending which stance you argue: FA membership or company continuity.

To me it’s irrelevant, when I walk through the turnstiles it feels to me like the same Darlington FC. My point is we did the previous players and management a favour we didn’t have to, I can live with that and it’s something every player that comes to our club should perhaps be told that in the clubs darkest hour the fans stood by their players... even though we didn’t have to.
How do you know that we could have bought the assets without paying the football debt? Were you involved in the negotiations with Harvey Madden?
I was - and I can assure you that although the script changed daily, the objective of everyone involved was to save Darlington Football Club. Not to let it die and start again. Players outstanding wages being paid was a happy consequence of that but not the overriding objective.

Darlo-and-Back
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by Darlo-and-Back » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:17 am

The fan offer was the last bid standing so had all the cards. HM knew how to play a hand of cards. Such a shame he’s not with us, a fine man.

The logic behind paying the football debt was fine during a negotiation, just a shame RS wouldn’t assign us the FA membership. The FA just played it by the rule book. We can hold our heads high as fans as to how we treat players which was the real point.

wizardofos
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:14 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Our accounts

Post by wizardofos » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:26 am

Darlo-and-Back wrote:The fan offer was the last bid standing so had all the cards. HM knew how to play a hand of cards. Such a shame he’s not with us, a fine man.

The logic behind paying the football debt was fine during a negotiation, just a shame RS wouldn’t assign us the FA membership. The FA just played it by the rule book. We can hold our heads high as fans as to how we treat players which was the real point.
Generally agree.
Harvey took a big chance when he reversed the decision to close us down on that fateful day. There was a huge risk of racking up extra debt. For him to have then sold the assets without any consideration for creditors would have been harmful to his reputation as an Administrator.
Indeed a good man.

Post Reply