Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Football] Oystons get their comeuppance







Weststander

Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
63,903
Withdean area
TangerineArmy said:
Not sure how it is gonna pan out for us but personally I don't care at moment... I'm just glad the oystons are gonna lose a shed load of cash... Karma

A brilliant song that really does give you our plight and is funny as hell

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cHXAYIbZOUs
Click to expand...

A lot still to happen, but do supporters feel this is the beginning of the end for their regime?

They'll never beat the legal system or High Court Judges, is my personal feeling.
 


B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
I may have misread it but thought that the claim was that they were taking money from Blackpool FC and paying into their own companies. In which case I would think a lot of it will be in offshore untouchable accounts. It would if I was doing it and they will be more clued up than me on these matters.
 


G

Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,336
Uffern
BensGrandad said:
I may have misread it but thought that the claim was that they were taking money from Blackpool FC and paying into their own companies. In which case I would think a lot of it will be in offshore untouchable accounts. It would if I was doing it and they will be more clued up than me on these matters.
Click to expand...

It's irrelevant what they did with the money - they could have bought 50m bags of licorice allsorts for all the judge cares. What matters is that they have to pay Belokin a shedload of dosh or lose control of the club. They can't say "it's all off-shore" as that would mean nothing
 


clapham_gull

clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,301
BensGrandad said:
I may have misread it but thought that the claim was that they were taking money from Blackpool FC and paying into their own companies. In which case I would think a lot of it will be in offshore untouchable accounts. It would if I was doing it and they will be more clued up than me on these matters.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what the money was used for or where it went.

..and no-one is chasing the money.

The taking of the money doesn't appear to be such the problem but more how it was accounted.

Judge deemed it as disguised dividends that should have been paid to other shareholders.

They didn't do that.

The Judge has decided that Belokon actually owns 50 percent of the club and decided that the Oystons should buy him out.

Under the circumstances the Judge has set the figure at the money he originally put in plus the money the Oystons "paid" themselves.

They've stuffed themselves. It's hilarious.

Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
 




LlcoolJ

LlcoolJ

Mama said knock you out.
Oct 14, 2009
12,982
Sheffield
clapham_gull said:
Doesn't matter what the money was used for or where it went.

..and no-one is chasing the money.

The taking of the money doesn't appear to be such the problem but more how it was accounted.

Judge deemed it as disguised dividends that should have been paid to other shareholders.

They didn't do that.

The Judge has decided that Belokon actually owns 50 percent of the club and decided that the Oystons should buy him out.

Under the circumstances the Judge has set the figure at the money he originally put in plus the money the Oystons "paid" themselves.

They've stuffed themselves. It's hilarious.

Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Correct. About time these wankers got their comeuppance. It's funny, to say the least...
 


R

rippleman

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2011
4,563
BensGrandad said:
You show more faith than I do as I would be fairly certain that they will have made provisons should they lose the case. I would think that the vast majority of their wealth is in a tax haven that the UK cannot touch and if needed they would follow it there.
Click to expand...

The Blackpool fans don't give a shit about the Oyston scum and their money. They want them out of the club. If they have squirreled away all their funds overseas then the only realisable asset they have is the football club....so they will have to sell it. They will have to take the best offer. Then the Oystons are gone from the club forever.

Cue the great tangerine party!!
 


Bwian

Bwian

Kiss my (_!_)
Jul 14, 2003
15,898
clapham_gull said:
Doesn't matter what the money was used for or where it went.

..and no-one is chasing the money.

The taking of the money doesn't appear to be such the problem but more how it was accounted.

Judge deemed it as disguised dividends that should have been paid to other shareholders.

They didn't do that.

The Judge has decided that Belokon actually owns 50 percent of the club and decided that the Oystons should buy him out.

Under the circumstances the Judge has set the figure at the money he originally put in plus the money the Oystons "paid" themselves.

They've stuffed themselves. It's hilarious.

Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If only something similar had happened to Archer and Stanley. More so Archer. Nothing dodgy about the sale of The Goldstone I guess!
 




C

Cheeky Monkey

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
23,033
One of just many, frightening stuff:

On 30 January 2015, another Blackpool fan, Stephen Sharpe, agreed to make a £5,000 donation to the club's Community Trust in lieu of damages and legal costs after posting defamatory messages about the Oystons on a website forum the previous year.
 


B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
I dont really understand this if they dont have the money as per the judgement yes they would lose ownership of the club but they wouldnt have to pay £31m for it. Would that be considered good business paying that for Blackpool FC? Wouldnt they be better off just walking away with what money they have made and not paying the judgement amount maintaining that they do not have that kind of money.
 


brightonrock

brightonrock

Dodgy Hamstrings
Jan 1, 2008
2,482
BensGrandad said:
I dont really understand this if they dont have the money as per the judgement yes they would lose ownership of the club but they wouldnt have to pay £31m for it. Would that be considered good business paying that for Blackpool FC? Wouldnt they be better off just walking away with what money they have made and not paying the judgement amount maintaining that they do not have that kind of money.
Click to expand...

It's not difficult - they are obliged by law to pay over that amount. They either have the money to hand now, in which case they pay it, or if they don't, they will need to sell what assets they have (i.e. the club) to fund that payment.

If the sale of the club does not cover the amount, i.e. if a prospective buyer does not value the club at the level set by the judge, then presumably they will have to sell at the given price and fund the deficit in some other way (by the sale of other assets or surrender of other cash reserves). That would mean the sale (or seizure) of other assets, or even bankruptcy, were there no other recourse, and were it to be filed for by the creditor(s).

In essence their position is no different from any indebted person with a CCJ against them for the value of that debt - they need to pay up, surrender goods/assets, come to an agreement with the creditor, or face bankruptcy.

In this specific case the judge has essentially forced them to buy out Belokon's share, so if they can't afford it, they will have to find a way to fund it. The end result (hopefully) will be them out of the club and Blackpool finally able to rebuild under new ownership.
 






Kalimantan Gull

Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,923
Central Borneo / the Lizard
brightonrock said:
It's not difficult - they are obliged by law to pay over that amount. They either have the money to hand now, in which case they pay it, or if they don't, they will need to sell what assets they have (i.e. the club) to fund that payment.

If the sale of the club does not cover the amount, i.e. if a prospective buyer does not value the club at the level set by the judge, then presumably they will have to sell at the given price and fund the deficit in some other way (by the sale of other assets or surrender of other cash reserves). That would mean the sale (or seizure) of other assets, or even bankruptcy, were there no other recourse, and were it to be filed for by the creditor(s).

In essence their position is no different from any indebted person with a CCJ against them for the value of that debt - they need to pay up, surrender goods/assets, come to an agreement with the creditor, or face bankruptcy.

In this specific case the judge has essentially forced them to buy out Belokon's share, so if they can't afford it, they will have to find a way to fund it. The end result (hopefully) will be them out of the club and Blackpool finally able to rebuild under new ownership.
Click to expand...

Triggaaar said:
Presumably the concern is that they just pay up, meaning they keep the club?
Click to expand...

Yep, or they could wind up the club, selling off the assets - players, ground, equipment. That may not cover the debt, but they could do that first and then declare bankruptcy; rather than declare bankruptcy and surrender the club as a going concern.

If they claim they will raise the money by selling off the clubs assets, then presumably the judge wouldn't stop them trying - and the only way for someone to buy the club as a going concern would be to pay the full amount for the club
 


Triggaaar

Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,162
Goldstone
Kalimantan Gull said:
Yep, or they could wind up the club, selling off the assets - players, ground, equipment. That may not cover the debt, but they could do that first and then declare bankruptcy; rather than declare bankruptcy and surrender the club as a going concern.

If they claim they will raise the money by selling off the clubs assets, then presumably the judge wouldn't stop them trying
Click to expand...
Well they've been ordered to buy out the other person - not sure that selling the ground etc would be allowed in that? I doubt the players are worth that much, but it doesn't matter if they're sold, as they can afford to drop a division and still be in L2.

What timescale have they been given to pay the money, and are they appealing the decision?
 




B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
Either way I am sure they will do everything possible to avoid paying £31m and even if they do either pay or avoid paying I would love to be a pound behind them in wealth.
 


GT49er

GT49er

Well-known member
Feb 1, 2009
46,715
Gloucester
Triggaaar said:
Presumably the concern is that they just pay up, meaning they keep the club?
Click to expand...

Yes, worst case scenario. They get to keep the club, and will presumably keep syphoning off money (though that would take many years to recuperate their £31M) and the club - and the supporters - keep being shafted. Plus, a Latvian money launderer waltzes off with a £27M profit from his £4M investment, courtesy of the British legal system.
 
Last edited:


Easy 10

Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,748
Location Location
I like that the Oystons saw a draft of the Judges decision and summing up, and decided not to attend the hearing.

Lovely stuff.
 


Kalimantan Gull

Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,923
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Triggaaar said:
Well they've been ordered to buy out the other person - not sure that selling the ground etc would be allowed in that? I doubt the players are worth that much, but it doesn't matter if they're sold, as they can afford to drop a division and still be in L2.

What timescale have they been given to pay the money, and are they appealing the decision?
Click to expand...

I can't imagine there is any restriction on where the money comes from - they own the club, they can sell it, they own the ground they can sell that. I wouldn't be surprised if the Oyston's follow a scorched-earth policy from here, especially if they are going to end up bankrupt regardless.
 




C

Cheeky Monkey

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
23,033
image.jpg
article-1126738-03261D50000005DC-286_468x641.jpg
 


clapham_gull

clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,301
BensGrandad said:
I dont really understand this if they dont have the money as per the judgement yes they would lose ownership of the club but they wouldnt have to pay £31m for it. Would that be considered good business paying that for Blackpool FC? Wouldnt they be better off just walking away with what money they have made and not paying the judgement amount maintaining that they do not have that kind of money.
Click to expand...
Blackpool hasn't been valued at that.

It's made up of

1) Paying back the original shareholding in total because Belokon was cut out.

2) Since he now been deemed a 50 percent shareholder paying him the same dividend the other shareholders got.

Effectively (in a way) turning back the clock and looking at the value of the club in the Premier League.

That's my take on. The case was about a shareholder being treated unfairly, not about who owns Blackpool or it's value.

Belokon could simply say, I'll buy the club for it's present value. But the Judge can't recommend that because of his football ban.


Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here