SIMON JORDAN has ben banging on about this for days on TS. He says, the only way the EFL will get what its wants is to stand firm (and to stop the little clubs bleating with the oh whoa is me) and to force the Premier League hand, because if an independent government arbiter is appointed the PL will have to pay much more than they has been offered . He says its brinkmanship and a case of who blinks first. He says that is it goes to a court or arbitration it will never get there because the Premier League will give in on the steps of the court.
They altered their name decades before going into administration so it had nothing to do with those events. It was to appear trendy and continental with the added bonus of making them the first football league club alphabetically. Administration and wound up are two entirely different things. We were in administration but were not wound up. If you are wound up you are out of the football league and have to restart. Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Newcastle United, Birmingham City all altered their names for non money reasons in the past. Agree about pulling up the ladder. Disappointed to see their names on that list.
Agree. But they did not change their name because of financial problems. It was done in 1971 and nothing to do with financial problems which came over 25 years later.
Swansea got City status in 1969, and in 1970 Swansea Town changed their name to Swansea City. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Breaking - UK signs-off legislation to establish an independent football regulator, after the Premier League failed to agree on a deal to share revenues with smaller clubs.
A Leeds fan, but he makes some good points about the PSR stuff. The gap between the top few and the rest will ever widen and the chances of a club going up and establishing themselves in the top division, as was possible years ago, will ever diminish.
One nil to you, and I know the differance of being wound up or placed into administration, but both mean you are at the wrong end of the football ladder and up to your eyes in debt. The clubs you name who changed their names for 'non money' reasons did so over 100 years ago. My point was who do Bournemouth think they are voting against this deal when they themselves have been members, and at the lower end, of the Football League far, far longer then they been in the Premier League. I expected it from the likes of Arsenal but Bournemouth?
As I said, nobody can avoid repaying a loan just by changing their trading name, a company would have to go into administration or liquidation.
MFI dicked me early in my career for some design work, invoiced to MFI only to be told they don’t exist now we are now howden joinery…it was a masssive set back for me at the time. Still makes me mad now. Legal theft!
With basically the same people running it? Its the same company, but under a differant name, and probably left a lot of creditors it their wake whilst doing so. I was conned by one company, paid a big deposit for work to be caried out, as did many others, only for this company to later declare themselves bankrupt. This one person got away with just short of £60k locally, driving about in a big Range Rover etc, never paid a penny back to anyone, then six months later he starts up again going exactly the same line of work but under a differant trading name. I came across this type of scam several times in my 30 odd years of being self employed in business. You know it goes on. As the poster above rightly says....legal theft.
I agree it is disappointing they would vote against, my disagreement was about saying that was why they changed their name which it wasn’t. Their owner is an American who only got involved recently and will know nothing about the history of the club and their days in the lower leagues. We had owners who claimed we were always known as Hull City Tigers.
