"The ICT Thread - From the Premiership to the Seaside"

[Cowden Cowboy]

2 hours ago, shizzlemanizzle said:

The SFA are not in any position to have opinions on rules and regulations regarding administration given the way they handled Rangers liquidation. According to the SFA, ICT just need to be liquidated and parachuted into league 2. Free of previous financial obligations but with their history intact. Which is obviously bullshit.

But you need a bronze licence to be in the spfl - Caley will now drop down to Entry 

[Cowden Cowboy]

12 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm dubious about the legality of the SFA forcing preference to football creditors over others. If I was an ordinary creditor I'd be well miffed anyway, or one of the sacked non-football employees.

Perfectly legal if administrators agree it and required level of other creditors accept what they are offered of so many pence in the pound.  In the case of Dunfermline zero pence in the pound 

[Fraz]

5 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

But you need a bronze licence to be in the spfl - Caley will now drop down to Entry 

From our current (interim) CEO-

• In response to a question, he confirmed that Administration means the club’s Bronze Licence is changed to entry level automatically, technically for three years. We need to be out of administration before the start of next season and he has been advised that there are derogations to the three year rule, so this issue is not insurmountable.

 

 

[Cowden Cowboy]

30 minutes ago, AtTheBorderGuy said:

I've not had the time to read it in detail, but p61 onwards of this seems to explain the essential debts administration has to cover to retain SPFL status:

https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/images/shares/pdfs/SPFL Rules and Regulations 14-Oct-22 (MASTER COPY) CLEAN.pdf

I've only had a brief skim, so this may be bollocks, but do the infamous "football debts" only mean contracted earnings of players and coaching staff (which can be renegotiated with the administrators)? The only other essential seems to be HMRC, as far as I can see? I'm assuming there's probably something about payments due to other clubs in there somewhere...

I think football debts are amounts due to other clubs or football bodies eg SFA.  Not wages 

[Cowden Cowboy]

Just now, Fraz said:

From our current (interim) CEO-

• In response to a question, he confirmed that Administration means the club’s Bronze Licence is changed to entry level automatically, technically for three years. We need to be out of administration before the start of next season and he has been advised that there are derogations to the three year rule, so this issue is not insurmountable.

 

 

But it creates issues with non league clubs who wish a derogation as the derogation for ICT would be a very significant issue as compared to not having a doctor or such.  Level playing field is the issue - a 3 year derogation would be much more than any other side would expect to be granted.  

[blackislekillie]

1 hour ago, MazzyStar said:

Polworth needs to be reported to the RSPCA. Chinning fat hamsters is beyond the pale. 

[TxRover]

15 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm dubious about the legality of the SFA forcing preference to football creditors over others. If I was an ordinary creditor I'd be well miffed anyway, or one of the sacked non-football employees.

Except that there is likely the consideration that NOT following the SFA preference requirement might result in...

4 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

But you need a bronze licence to be in the spfl - Caley will now drop down to Entry 

...no waiver for the Bronze requirement and an inability of the Club to continue on and therefore...  

1 minute ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Perfectly legal if administrators agree it and required level of other creditors accept what they are offered of so many pence in the pound.  In the case of Dunfermline zero pence in the pound 

...reduce what the other creditors might otherwise receive. Should the Administrator determine ICT can be maintained as an ongoing entity, it's likely the payouts will be better to many creditors than if they dig through the wreckage and determine they need to drag the Club out back and put a bullet in it.

As we've seen before, the SFA and SPFL will contort themselves mightily to make the the rules fit allowing an existing Club to continue in some manner, which plays in ICT's favor right now. I'd expect their thumbs on the scales already.

5 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

I think football debts are amounts due to other clubs or football bodies eg SFA.  Not wages 

Checking the SPFL Rules Definitions, Football Debts is NOT a defined term, but Football is. As such, they can fiddle it a bit, but your interpretation would seem sound.

[Fraz]

6 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

But it creates issues with non league clubs who wish a derogation as the derogation for ICT would be a very significant issue as compared to not having a doctor or such.  Level playing field is the issue - a 3 year derogation would be much more than any other side would expect to be granted.  

For new clubs entering yes. Up to the league to decide I guess for a club already there with all necessary requirements in place. Otherwise might as well just eject any club immediately for 3 years as that would be the effective result. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Fraz

[The Moonster]

36 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I'm no fan of Rangers, but that's not quite true is it? Their demise meant there was a vacant spot in the SPL, which SPL clubs voted against Rangers filling. This then afforded Dundee the opportunity to fill it, leaving a vacant spot within the SFL, which any club, however old, was welcome to apply to fill.

From those that did, the SFL member clubs chose Rangers.

At the time new entrants to the SFL required 3 years of audited accounts in order to be eligible to apply. New Rangers didn't have that and were voted in anyway. 

Edited 2 hours ago by The Moonster

[Cowden Cowboy]

1 minute ago, TxRover said:

Except that there is likely the consideration that NOT following the SFA preference requirement might result in...

...no waiver for the Bronze requirement and an inability of the Club to continue on and therefore...  

...reduce what the other creditors might otherwise receive. Should the Administrator determine ICT can be maintained as an ongoing entity, it's likely the payouts will be better to many creditors than if they dig through the wreckage and determine they need to drag the Club out back and put a bullet in it.

As we've seen before, the SFA and SPFL will contort themselves mightily to make the the rules fit allowing an existing Club to continue in some manner, which plays in ICT's favor right now. I'd expect their thumbs on the scales already.

Checking the SPFL Rules Definitions, Football Debts is NOT a defined term, but Football is. As such, they can fiddle it a bit, but your interpretation would seem sound.

I can’t recall fully though but think maybe players wages might be covered by football debts but that is impacted if they sign as a free agent for another club which 

[TxRover]

3 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

But it creates issues with non league clubs who wish a derogation as the derogation for ICT would be a very significant issue as compared to not having a doctor or such.  Level playing field is the issue - a 3 year derogation would be much more than any other side would expect to be granted.  

However, you're talking about a Club who met the standards, but now is out of compliance due to an event that causes no impact to all the Standards except one financial one. Granted, this is a serious one, and causes concern on the FFP aspect, but the waivers other non-league Clubs sought were seemingly more related to other physical items where this is an full compliance Club who had a cash flow issue. Now, if this was a case of overspending to gain advantage within the League, that would be a larger concern, but this was generally poor decision making while in the middle of the Leagues, so there was no significant advantage gained from the spending.

2 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

I can’t recall fully though but think maybe players wages might be covered by football debts but that is impacted if they sign as a free agent for another club which 

As an aspect of "Football" in the Regs, it probably is. There is, of course, the consideration of if the players can become free agents (as the registered Club is still a going concern...although the provisions for mutual termination might come into play) prior to January, plus the number of Clubs played for this year rules.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, Fraz said:

From our current (interim) CEO-

• In response to a question, he confirmed that Administration means the club’s Bronze Licence is changed to entry level automatically, technically for three years. We need to be out of administration before the start of next season and he has been advised that there are derogations to the three year rule, so this issue is not insurmountable.

 

 

I got the impression from reading the rules that the 3 years without an insolvency event applies to new entrants to the SPFL only, as in from tier 5, otherwise the 15/5 points penalty for bronze license holders would be pointless as they would automatically be expelled from the SPFL upon entering administration and entry level licensing. I heard what the CEO said and it sounds like the SFA/SPFL are making it up on the hoof having left enough ambiguity in the rules for any eventuality. Caley will be fine so long as they come out of admin before the end of the season.

[Cowden Cowboy]

5 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

At the time new entrants to the SFL required 3 years of audited accounts in order to be eligible to apply. New Rangers didn't have that and were voted in anyway. 

But then only entry level licence was required and clubs voted it through 

[Cowden Cowboy]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

I got the impression from reading the rules that the 3 years without an insolvency event applies to new entrants to the SPFL only, as in from tier 5, otherwise the 15/5 points penalty for bronze license holders would be pointless as they would automatically be expelled from the SPFL upon entering administration and entry level licensing. I heard what the CEO said and it sounds like the SFA/SPFL are making it up on the hoof having left enough ambiguity in the rules for any eventuality. Caley will be fine so long as they come out of admin before the end of the season.

No any club who is licensed and goes into admin drops to entry level (at best) for 3 years if the SFA agrees to grant a licence.  The licensing decision is an SFA matter.  Clubs who are not bronze need to apply for derogation/period of grace from the SPFL by 31 March initially 

[Cowden Cowboy]

Just now, Cowden Cowboy said:

No any club who is licensed and goes into admin drops to entry level (at best) for 3 years if the SFA agrees to grant a licence.  The licensing decision is an SFA matter.  Clubs who are not bronze need to apply for derogation/period of grace from the SPFL by 31 March initially - all SPFL clubs were bronze in time last season but Edinburgh City cut it fine.  Bonnyrigg too have now gone to entry level 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Cowden Cowboy

[northstander]

The man tasked with our recovery 

[welshbairn]

18 minutes ago, Fraz said:

For new clubs entering yes. Up to the league to decide I guess for a club already there with all necessary requirements in place. Otherwise might as well just eject any club immediately for 3 years as that would be the effective result. 

I think ejection of any SPFL club for whatever reason would require a high threshold vote (70%?) from an all member vote. I very much doubt enough clubs are confident enough to set that precedent should they get into financial bother in the future. If a scary challenger from tier 5 had any kind of bother with the HMRC though, they'd be straight on the blacklist for 3 years.

[The Moonster]

20 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

But then only entry level licence was required and clubs voted it through 

The point stands that rules were bent in 2012. 

[Carmel Wafer]

21 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

 

I think the other thing worth remembering is that there are other factors needed for a bronze licence, 500 seater stand, match day doctor etc so it's no just a  finance thing.

[Skyline Drifter]

58 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm dubious about the legality of the SFA forcing preference to football creditors over others. If I was an ordinary creditor I'd be well miffed anyway, or one of the sacked non-football employees.

Its the SPFL, not the SFA, and you can be as miffed as you like. Its a members organisation and perfectly entitled to set the rules of its own membership.

The administrator is at liberty to ignore it if he so wishes but the club would be expelled from the league. Good luck in selling it as a going concern if they take that course of action.