Transfer Embargo

Think Villa, like Acun, are expecting the ban to be lifted and Barry will still go through. He was that close to done a club employee had sold his player sponsorship. We shouldn't forget that. Both parties had the deal in place. If the ban is lifted as the club expect it wouldn't be a surprise to see both of those players sign.

The usual suspects can argue all they want about where the money is coming from to make it happen but as with the other expenditure immediately prior to the 'issues' Acun is going to keep spending it seems.

 

It's the hope that kills you !

 

Don’t think the ban will be getting lifted with what’s come out lately.

 

If there is any mitigation then there's a decent chance it will be reduced. Before the Fin Burns issue came to light I was more confident it would be a suspended punishment like Oxfords but that seems unlikely now.

And whatever the appeal outcome is, it still doesn't necessarily allay concerns over future sustainability of the club.

 

“The fun burns issue”

I knew you were loving this.

 

I once got fun burns off the carpet

 

Thats the thing though, what has 'come out' are predominantly rumours. The EFL deal in facts.
Mike White saying Acklams and Cranswick are owed some money doesn't bother the EFL. They would act if there were ccj's potentially but to my knowledge these debts didn't get that far and someone said they've been paid now.

22m of future payments would have been lodged at the time of transfers happening with the EFL therefore if that is true then they would have already known about it.

What Acun and the club need to do (still a fair ask but it's not impossible) is to explain why the payment to Villa was late (he has explained that publicly and if Villa back that up it should be fine) and why Burns payment was late. Probably less easy to do but, again, not impossible.

With the mitigation of late payments incoming (we don't know how much obviously) I wouldn't be so sure he isn't getting this lifted.

He would be an absolute clown to be pretending there is nothing else to come out if there is and the EFL know about it. That would be the straw that breaks the camels back with supporters surely as it would be bare faced lying.

 

.edited.

 

"No financial issues" when the club had already been placed under embargo and there being overdue debts all over the place is already bare faced lying.

 

I'm not arsed about arguing the toss and finding timeliness but didn't he mentioned cash flow problems in a statement?
Either way it's time to see what happens. Too much nastiness at the moment based on hearsay.

 

Is this weeks meeting a face to face ...?... if so, I do hope the club see sense and let he clubs CEO do the talking, or will the EFL demand that AI speaks for his actions...?

 

He was **** anyway

 

Was he not meant to be Good or Gooder?

If we're now in the market for **** and ****ter then, well, that's a bit of a ****ter.

 

When facts and figures are quoted and published there has to be evidence. There has been no challenge, therefore it's way past the point of heresay.

And what happens next with the embargo does little to allay concerns over future sustainability without a change in the way the club is being run.

 

But that's what I said. Facts and figures quoted will all have been in the EFL possession at the time of the transfer so likely of no interest. Beyond 'owing suppliers' no facts and figures have been quoted on the local supplier front.

So actually the EFL should he judging us purely on Barry and Burns deals. Unless Acun has lied and something else is involved.

 

It's a fact that multiple suppliers haven't been paid, some owed 6 figures, as reported by multiple outlets.

The FA can't intervene in non football related debts until the outcome of any litigation in relation to these or if we are placed in administration, so it will absolutely come down to football related payments and whether we can prove we can meet future football related obligations

For the time being anyway.

 

Reporting '6 figures' and not even naming them is not fact im afraid. Certainly not as far as an embargo is concerned.

Ccjs are fact.

I'm not arguing, it's bad, it's just not as bad as I think it's being made to look. The EFL should be just looking at two loan fees if Acun has told the truth.

 

Local suppliers are a separate issue to the embargo/fee restriction.

And just because the suppliers in question do not wish to be named doesn't make it any less of a fact.

Especially when the owner writes an open letter accepting local suppliers haven't been paid and feels the need to reassure supporters it is being addressed.

 

Again, I am not arguing about that, late payments were acknowledged but it isn't a crime as far as the EFL are concerned. The suppliers do not appear to have taken any action and now are paid so its dome and dusted. It's not going to effect the embargo decision one bit UNLESS there are ccjs which it doesn't seem to be the case. It will be cold hard facts which as it stands we have only 2 made public, Barry and burns.

That, in my opinion, is why Acun and 'the club' have been quoted as saying they expect the embargo to be lifted.