No deal !

[slack_pie]

People making stuff up about Hardy making stuff up; one sentence posts from illiterates; posters "in the know" or have a friend of a friend who works at Meadow Lane or did work at Paragon but who daren't say any more; no deal and never was; I heard a rumour...; no buyers in the first place; there were buyers but they have backed out; HMRC will not tolerate any timewasting; no proof of funds; all the best players will have gone; points deduction before season starts; relegation again next season; ground to be sold to land developers.

Is that the headline for Scoop's next EEEEVNIN POH! article?

[slack_pie]

And only a Cairns bogan would drink Bundy!

Calm down colonial pies.

[leeh769]

No need now, all there to see in the papers, unfortunately

[nw6pie]

No need now, all there to see in the papers, unfortunately

But the May bid was never the front runner. After these revelations (which shouldn’t come as a surprise given other rumours about who else was allegedly involved in the second consortium), it now seems we have just two options: SA bid or admin.

Now I’m waiting to hear that Oscar Pistorius is involved in the SA bid - which really will leave us without a leg to stand on.

[ncfcog]

But the May bid was never the front runner. After these revelations (which shouldn’t come as a surprise given other rumours about who else was allegedly involved in the second consortium), it now seems we have just two options: SA bid or admin.

Now I’m waiting to hear that Oscar Pistorius is involved in the SA bid - which really will leave us without a leg to stand on.

we would be well and truly stumped!

[McCullochisGod]

The £6m is paying the debt. We owe about £1.4m to paragon interiors and £4.5m to paragon leisure, that kind of equates to £6m... Hardy won't see a penny but I suspect he's trying to get more so he will. The new owners will also have to pay HMRC and other creditors on top of that. They seem happy to pay the debts it seems but Leigh Curtis has said that they want Hardy on the hook for any debts they find in the future that relates to before the takeover. It's complicated and to be fair, the group seem to be doing everything by the book, hopefully we can have decent owners if this is anything to go by

Ah. So Hardy is expecting the so called SA's to pay off the money he spunked up the wall? All the best with that one.

[iamITK]

Ah. So Hardy is expecting the so called SA's to pay off the money he spunked up the wall? All the best with that one.

Are you being intentionally negative?

The deal of £6m is agreed to buy the club, on the proviso that all debts are revealed and then signed over to Hardys responsibility, putting Notts back to £0 on the books. Any further debt discovered after the sale is also on Hardy if he ran it up. Thats the deal. What Hardy does with his £6m is up to him, you'd assume he pays off all those debts or puts his own businesses in admin/bankruptcy, which will hurt Hardy and not the football club. The club would be the healthiest it has been for years, on the books anyway.

The deal will also see the SA get the lease, that's been done, and redevelopment ML, Cattlemarket (needs it) London Road, etc etc. No doubt that's their real intention. They will most likely move Notts to a new stadium (Riverside the suggested location as they may be looking to redevelop that area too.)

Ask yourself, is £6m to get rid of all the debt and responsibility of those debts, a lot to pay out for the gain in the long run....no.
Hardy holds all the debt repayment responsibility, they get a blank balance sheet, a prime bit of land or two, and will make a killing.
Can Hardy afford to turn down £6m....no.

The deal IS AGREED, the final bit from Hardy to deliver the full list of debt disclosure was done last Friday, that has all be made legal and papers prepared for the debt to transfer to him after the takeover.

The group are in UK tomorrow to try to get it all signed and done. Its all agreed, the final deliverables, i understand, have since been completed.


The May revelations proves how dodgy Hardy may be. If he didnt know, thats a mess, but if he did its ten times worse. Either way, the club cannot continue to deal with that group, certainly whilst he is involved. Thats not an issue though as they were very much second choice. Maybe someone in the SA group has dropped the bomb intentionally to push it over the line this week. Timing is spot on.

Simple equation now. Hardy needs to sign over to the SA group and move a long way away from Meadow Lane

[McCullochisGod]

Are you being intentionally negative?

The deal of £6m is agreed to buy the club, on the proviso that all debts are revealed and then signed over to Hardys responsibility, putting Notts back to £0 on the books. Any further debt discovered after the sale is also on Hardy if he ran it up. Thats the deal. What Hardy does with his £6m is up to him, you'd assume he pays off all those debts or puts his own businesses in admin/bankruptcy, which will hurt Hardy and not the football club. The club would be the healthiest it has been for years, on the books anyway.

The deal will also see the SA get the lease, that's been done, and redevelopment ML, Cattlemarket (needs it) London Road, etc etc. No doubt that's their real intention. They will most likely move Notts to a new stadium (Riverside the suggested location as they may be looking to redevelop that area too.)

Ask yourself, is £6m to get rid of all the debt and responsibility of those debts, a lot to pay out for the gain in the long run....no.
Hardy holds all the debt repayment responsibility, they get a blank balance sheet, a prime bit of land or two, and will make a killing.
Can Hardy afford to turn down £6m....no.

The deal IS AGREED, the final bit from Hardy to deliver the full list of debt disclosure was done last Friday, that has all be made legal and papers prepared for the debt to transfer to him after the takeover.

The group are in UK tomorrow to try to get it all signed and done. Its all agreed, the final deliverables, i understand, have since been completed.


The May revelations proves how dodgy Hardy may be. If he didnt know, thats a mess, but if he did its ten times worse. Either way, the club cannot continue to deal with that group, certainly whilst he is involved. Thats not an issue though as they were very much second choice. Maybe someone in the SA group has dropped the bomb intentionally to push it over the line this week. Timing is spot on.

Simple equation now. Hardy needs to sign over to the SA group and move a long way away from Meadow Lane

They will not get the land it is owned by the council and lease will not be negotiated with Hardy it is in the Haydn Green estate name. Do you know for sure they will sign it over as they might want their £3m back. The object of due diligence is for lawyers/advisors to ascertain the debt which they have had enough time to do by now. Do you honestly think the council will give up the land for that amount.

[McCullochisGod]

They will not get the land it is owned by the council and lease will not be negotiated with Hardy it is in the Haydn Green estate name. Do you know for sure they will sign it over as they might want their £3m back. The object of due diligence is for lawyers/advisors to ascertain the debt which they have had enough time to do by now. Do you honestly think the council will give up the land for that amount.

By the way, are you Hardy's irate daughter by any chance?

[iamITK]

You have questioned my info on stuff I've not actually said?


I am sure they can buy land from the council, for an agreed price.
The lease can also be bought from the HG Estate too, no reason that cant have happened (I understand it has). Maybe they gave them £3m for it?

They do know the level of debt, but lets just say, its complicated between all the different parent companies and shell companies, shares etc etc etc who is owed what, thats what the delay was.Thats what the DD was for and it took a while as things kept cropping up.
Did you not read that the final list was handed to them last Friday?

As for the council not selling the land for that amount......what amount? I've not mentioned any figure paid to the council for the land?