DemonUK wrote:
That's almost rfl spin like lol. £1.5 million lost by creditors he picks it up for a tenth of that and even if he gets a reduced income from sky of say 800k for next 2 years, there's his 150k nicely stuffed in his back pocket straightway. Told rfl he has 6 mill to spend at the same time sticking 2 fingers up to creditors. WRONG WRONG WRONG.......just an opinion
I really don't see why it is any fault of the new owner. He wasn't involved in the old company so why should he be liable for their debts?
DemonUK wrote:
You're bang on Demon, the administration process is an absolute farce in any walk of business and a bit like the stigma being removed by bankruptcy, it's seen as an easy out. As long as the administrators get paid they're just there by the 'right people's' wish to tick the official boxes.
Without some form of process to deal with the failure of a Limited Liability Company no-one would ever take a commercial risk (it all goes back the the South Sea Bubble).
Administration in itself is not perfect but it can be a good way of saving a business from the scrapheap, preserving jobs and returning some value to creditors. It has got a bad name over the years due to some very high profile cases involving "pre-packs" where the same people end up owning the assets after the process but with the debt removed, but that is a product of the behaviour of individuals rather than a failure of the principle. Chapter 11 in the USA has a similar problem and they are also looking to close loopholes.
I have contributed to various working parties looking into how to improve the management of a company's failure and it is constantly reviewed - the removal of Crown Privilege as recently as 2002 for example - but unfortunately there are always very clever people looking for ways to get an advantage by sharp practice.
For what it's worth I think the Bulls are just victims of bad management and incompetence by the previous regime and there are no shenanigans going on.
