snorbens_caleyman

Interesting. I have generally reckoned for years that if you average one point per game, then no matter what league you're in, then you are very probably safe from (automatic) relegation. Of course, that didn't save us last season. But I haven't studied a number of old tables to confirm or refute this, like you have done - and it appears that 1 point per game is not enough in League One! On the face of it, around 30 points from 27 games doesn't look like a big ask - but given our current form, it looks to be beyond our grasp.

Will be interesting if we are in administration by then. This must be why your graphic shows a number of enthusiastic fans cheering on an empty stadium from the side of the A9

So much speculation about where we can get players and a new manager from. That we'll be in League 2. That the club will continue. There are no guarantees. Morrison might reclaim his stadium - though what good to him an empty stadium would be, I don't know. Redevelopment costs would be enormous and would require a change to the ground lease. And we couldn't afford to pay rent to him. More concerning is the question of who would want to take over and invest money into the club. Others have cited Dundee and Hearts, but they are in much larger, football-orientated cities, even though they have the disadvantage of other Premiership clubs very close by. We have that problem, too, but don't have the support to mitigate it. Obviously Savage knows infinitely more about the situation than I do. But I fear for the future of the club.

The charge document at Companies House was signed off by Scott Young, and witnessed (presumably he didn't have sign-off powers) by Gardiner. As for Carlisle - as CEO Gardiner would have had some financial powers with, one would expect, an upper limit on how much he could spend or commit without consulting the Board. I suspect that no one will have thought about him turning down potential income!

Ain't that the problem?

What time would visiting teams have to set off, in winter, to be in Sneck for a 12:00 kick-off?

You haven't missed anything. The deadline date appeared in the 2nd October communication from Panos Thomas, which says "Unless the Appeal can raise £200k immediately, and certainly by Wednesday, 16th October, then Administration is inevitable, because the Club would be insolvent." The HMG definition of "insolvent": "A company is insolvent when it can’t pay its debts. This could mean either: it can’t pay bills when they become due it has more liabilities than assets on its balance sheet" My guess is that there is some payment due by the 16th, and if we don't make it, then we become insolvent in accordance with the first HMG bullet point. It may be that the payment is £200K, or it may be more that that, with the club needing a further £200K to pay the total amount. I have no idea what the payment is actually for. I hope there will be honesty and clarity tonight!

Savage has done what he said he would do - lift up the drain covers to discover exactly how bad the situation is. At 74 years old, he may not have the desire or the energy to actually run the club for any length of time - and he may also have higher priorities for his money. From what I've seen, I don't think that he can be criticised. It's not Savage who is asking fans for money. The need for the £200K was identified by his work, but the actual plea came in the communication from Panos Thomas on 2nd October. (And, of course, Thomas promptly resigned on the very next day.) That note also suggests that Savage's work is done - "Whilst Alan Savage’s temporary financial lifeline has undoubtedly saved the club from insolvency in the last few months, now that he has reported in depth to the Board, it would be unrealistic to expect that lifeline to continue." One can only hope for more clarity at the meeting tonight.

Because averting your gaze doesn't mean that something has gone away.

Down to 9th. Remember, folks - especially on Monday night - that the Board's financial projection for this season assumes that we will finish in 2nd place

BBC website: "Fourth official has announced %injmins% minutes of added time." (When the ref was injured recently, couldn't the 4th official have taken over the line? Do they have to have a 4th official?)

Just what we need right now, personal abuse. My tolerance levels are low at the moment, so I'll call it out - surely this is against the rules of the forum?

Indeed. So how should we interpret the news that it was Morrison who re-introduced Makanwa into the mix this week?

It cannot be said often enough that there is no guarantee that the club would survive administration. Yes, the administrators would try to prevent the club from going under. But if they can't come to a deal with its creditors, or find a buyer, then if the club can't pay its debts it gets liquidated. We know that without £200K by the 16th, the club will be in that situation exactly, i.e. insolvent. Given the sums of money - the debts - that have been mentioned over the last few weeks , together with fact that the club appears to have very few assets which could be sold, then liquidation must be a very real possibility.

The club is owned by the shareholders. Not Savage. It's not his to sell.

No. 100% of a donation goes to the club. Only the profit from merchandise goes to the club.

Oh s**t!!! Sorry folks

I wonder what payment is due by 16th August that would take us into insolvency if we can't pay?

I originally read that as Ketwana being the seller - selling his finance services to the club - and therefore the club being the buyer. That would make sense, meaning that the Board eventually realised that he was a fantasist with nothing behind him. However, I suppose it could mean that he, as buyer, found out that the club, as seller, didn't have the assets that he thought, such as the land around the stadium. Either way, we dodged a bullet. But there's heavier artillery incoming now.

The thought had occurred to me.... what if he came back now with his offer?

I don't think anyone's saying that. We're saying "save the club first, ask questions later". Or, to adapt Flash Gordon: "Board, we hate you, but we only have nine days to save the club!". (That's nine days after the meeting.)

Whilst I agree that the Board has to account for their (in)actions - see umpteen of my past posts - Monday's meeting is not the time to do that. Start on that, and the meeting will get nowhere. The only topic for discussion must be how the club could be saved. Everything else is just noise. If a miracle happens, there will be time to ask other questions at a later date.

Yes. Because, despite the temptations, the meeting has to be "forward looking".

I wouldn't be at all sure of that. But note that administation is not just a "reset". There is no guarantee that the club could continue as a going concern, even if it dropped down to League 2 or to the Highland League. Someone would then have, for example, the expense of maintaining the stadium, with only peanuts for income.

Pretty sure he'd say he only knows what we know. And that he can't give anyone any assurances. Players may be top of the creditors' list (if they haven't been paid), but I don't think they are "protected". Indeed, one of the first things that an administrator will look for is star players who can be sold. Ummmm.....