| "We want Evans Out"... 07:05 - Mar 4 with 32344 views | IPS_wich |
Genuinely curious - what's to stop Evans winding us up as a going concern?
There seems to have been a number of indications over the years that he has tried to sell the club but hasn't found anyone interested.
What's to stop him in May, after 2-3 months of growing protests and vitriol aimed at him (because sadly I'm resigned to a mid-table finish), just thinking f**k it, I'm sick of subsidising this nonsense, the fans don't want me, so I'm out...and just putting us into receivership, selling Playford Road and cashing out??
Not that this should temper our protest, but just thinking about the consequences of a sustained campaign of "Evans out" |  | | |  |
| (No subject) on 18:26 - Mar 4 with 1117 views | jeera |
| (No subject) on 18:19 - Mar 4 by jaykay |
no idea about the money side of things but i thought the only thing that we were safe on , is we wouldn't lose the ground what ever evans did. |
No, the ground is certainly not Evans to make any decisions on at all.
Aside from being owned by the council there are also covenants on it to maintain it stays as a sports venue for public gain or something or other too. [?]
I suppose he does own the stands that sit on the ground though, which may be another matter?
Dunno. That would be a particularly unpleasant move to have those removed! [Post edited 4 Mar 2020 18:47]
|  |
| |
| (No subject) on 18:31 - Mar 4 with 1112 views | jaykay |
| (No subject) on 18:26 - Mar 4 by jeera |
No, the ground is certainly not Evans to make any decisions on at all.
Aside from being owned by the council there are also covenants on it to maintain it stays as a sports venue for public gain or something or other too. [?]
I suppose he does own the stands that sit on the ground though, which may be another matter?
Dunno. That would be a particularly unpleasant move to have those removed! [Post edited 4 Mar 2020 18:47]
|
that what i thought . just there was a long list in that post on whats right or wrong with other posts but spoilt it by saying we could be without a ground. |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| (No subject) on 18:32 - Mar 4 with 1112 views | jas0999 |
| (No subject) on 09:42 - Mar 4 by monytowbray |
Evans needs to put it up as an attractive prospect to get them. And he has the power to do so. He’s choosing not to.
If you put an item you want shot of on eBay and the price is too high so no one bids you tweak your starting bid. In this case however Evans is saying no one wants to buy the item but he's not even uploaded the listing.
Say you have a car you can no longer afford as the running costs are too much. Do you stick it on Autotrader and whack a FOR SALE sign in the window? Or do you just keep driving it around in the hope someone randomly offers to buy it from you on the off chance?
This really isn't rocket science. Hell, it's not even that complex in business terms as far as making a decision goes. "This investment is losing me money so I'm going to stop investing in it and sell it to someone else who may be able to turn it around." Sensible people with capitol do it all the time. [Post edited 4 Mar 2020 9:49]
|
Exactly this. We know there has been interest in the past, but suspect Evans wants a lot more than the club is now worth. Perhaps Evans needs to reduce his valuation - but he doesn’t want to.
The irony is with a small investment in January, we would have stood a great chance of maintaining a promotion push. His continued ineptness will cost Evans the chance to sell the club for more in the championship. | | | |
| (No subject) on 18:47 - Mar 4 with 1102 views | agentp |
| (No subject) on 10:43 - Mar 4 by daisyisabaddog |
The only people who know about the tax situation are Evans and his advisors and HMRC. That information is not required as part of the information included in the accounts. Having recently retired after 40 years in the taxation/accountancy business I would think it highly unlikely that the clubs losses are being offset elsewhere within the Evans group of companies. One of the many restrictions to group tax loss relief is that the companies concerned must be run with a view to making a profit. That's a bit of a stretch in the current situation.
I have no inside knowledge of the club or other Evans companies but the fact that he stopped charging interest on the loan to ITFC may indicate that HMRC had some input into the loss situation.
Others in this thread have suggested that minority shareholders can stop liquidation. That's nonsense I'm afraid. If Evans stops funding losses it would be illegal for the club to carry on trading. The club would be put into Administration and would then be totally under the control of the Administrator. Their job would be to find the best deal available to the creditors, which in our case would be 90% Evans. If no one could be found to guarantee to fund the losses going forward the club would be liquidated. At that point, it is possible that Evans or one of his companies may be entitled to tax relief on the loan write off. It is impossible to judge without being able to see all the group accounts but if the loan has come from an offshore company tax relief would definitely not be available.
I'm worried about the current situation but more than worried about the long term. There is a possibility that we may end up out of the Football League without a ground. We are entirely reliant on one man. Several people have said he wouldn't want to damage his good name by walking away but he doesn't actually have a good name or reputation to worry about.
The good news is that Portsmouth got through a similar situation. The bad news is that Portsmouth didn't have a landlord who wanted to sell the ground for development.
In summary, it's unlikely that Evans is getting tax relief for our losses. In the highly unlikely event that he is it's only 20% of the loss. He is also highly unlikely to benefit in terms of tax from folding the club. But there must come a point when he says enough is enough. We are now facing another year in L1 with very restrictive FFP rules. I therefore think we may be getting close to the end. Which hopefully will also be the beginning of something much better. |
Well put. Some won't accept that or your knowledge but hey..... | |
| |
| (No subject) on 18:50 - Mar 4 with 1099 views | jeera |
| (No subject) on 18:31 - Mar 4 by jaykay |
that what i thought . just there was a long list in that post on whats right or wrong with other posts but spoilt it by saying we could be without a ground. |
Unless he means the training ground.
I've no idea what the situation is there and if there's anything to stop him flogging that off.
The fact remains of course that whatever there is to 'asset' strip of ITFC, it would be relative peanuts to the money it owes to the ME group.
There's not enough to make a dent if he did want some return. | |
| |
| (No subject) on 23:22 - Mar 4 with 1065 views | PrideOfTheEast |
| (No subject) on 16:09 - Mar 4 by longtimefan |
”The benefit to ME of ITFC making a loss is therefore currently a mere 19%.”
There is no benefit to ME in making a loss. The tax offset merely reduces the loss to 81% of the headline figure. He would be better off making no loss or a lower loss! [Post edited 4 Mar 2020 16:23]
|
The benefit is 19% of the real cost. | | | |
| (No subject) on 08:06 - Mar 5 with 1037 views | daisyisabaddog |
| (No subject) on 18:26 - Mar 4 by jeera |
No, the ground is certainly not Evans to make any decisions on at all.
Aside from being owned by the council there are also covenants on it to maintain it stays as a sports venue for public gain or something or other too. [?]
I suppose he does own the stands that sit on the ground though, which may be another matter?
Dunno. That would be a particularly unpleasant move to have those removed! [Post edited 4 Mar 2020 18:47]
|
Portman Road is an ACV (asset of community value). My understanding at the time was that means that if the current tenant leaves or is liquidated the council has to give local groups 6 months to buy the freehold at market value. I don't think the council has to offer it for rent on the same terms. The council has previously said it would like it to remain as a sporting venue but one local MP thought otherwise about 5 years ago. I will seek out his name and publicly shame him later.
In the unlikely event that we were liquidated it seems unlikely that anyone would come up with the huge amount that it would take to buy it. Even the rent would be prohibitive to a new club.
We may all love the club but the number of paying supporters living in Ipswich is relatively small and the council represents everyone, not just us.
Someone has posted above about my previous post on tax losses and the possible advantage to Evans of the club going under. It's a relief that the loans come mainly from a foreign company - that removes any potential advantage. That poster also says that the ME group is claiming the club's losses. I'm amazed that HMRC hasn't challenged that but it does make it easier for ME to lend us money!
Thanks also to the same person for confirming that HMRC has applied the thin cap/international debt cap rules with regard to Evans charging interest on the loans. Not sure how he knows this but it makes sense and is a huge benefit to us. It's a boring subject so suffice to say we are better off as a club with the cap in place.
After all that we are still at the whim of ME as to whether he carries on throwing his money at us. The suggestion that he is thinking of appointing Warnock suggests that he is. Good news for the immediate financial future. Bad news as regards the football. We may as well have kept Mick. If someone had said 10, years ago that we would become a bog standard L1 team keen to appoint a 70 year old Neil Warnock I wouldn't have believed it | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
