Aviva Premiership: something exciting happens

[ronk]

It's an improvement in some ways but it's still tough.

1 year to go from planning permission to double stadium capacity knowing that you could go down anyway. Still a huge risk

[IanD]

BBC News - Worcester Warriors: Crisis club unsure of ability to satisfy RFU's demands
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/63033098

From article above. Staff told to collect personal effects before 16:30 hrs.

Meeting with RFU at 17:00 hrs.

Caretaker and his wife will be evicted from flat they live in above West Stand.

[wixfjord]

Some mad games in the Prem at the weekend.

Quins v Exeter was crazy. Bookended by a very dodgy try started by a moment of ROL genius.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3reVfT0 ... rshipRugby

[naraic]

It's an improvement in some ways but it's still tough.

1 year to go from planning permission to double stadium capacity knowing that you could go down anyway. Still a huge risk

They should have done that a few years ago when they suspended relegation for a few years.

They may suspend it again mind you if wasps and worchester go to the wall.

It's a lot easier to commit to a new stadium if you are guaranteed multiple years in the premiership compared to possibly being a one and done.

[IanD]

BBC News - Worcester Warriors suspended by RFU after failing to meet funding deadline

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/63038335

[IanD]

BBC News - Sam Simmonds: England and Exeter Chiefs number eight to join Montpellier for 2023-24

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/63054221

Apparently ok for World Cup but will stop playing for England at 27.

[paddyor]

Apparently the directors of Worcester warriros were paying themselves 550k in remuneration even as the club was loss making. Gets grubbier and grubbier.

[naraic]

Apparently the directors of Worcester warriros were paying themselves 550k in remuneration even as the club was loss making. Gets grubbier and grubbier.

Digging through various Worcester company accounts 522K for Whittinghma and 30K Goldring in the year ended june 2022.

[wixfjord]

BBC News - Sam Simmonds: England and Exeter Chiefs number eight to join Montpellier for 2023-24

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/63054221

Apparently ok for World Cup but will stop playing for England at 27.

In England terms, it's sort of a direct swap for Mercer, who is coming back to Glos.

For Exeter, it's a very big loss though. They seem to be falling apart a bit.

[paddyor]

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/157 ... XlbkM8IyRA

Relegation on the cards for Worcester. Probably made to sell the P shares

[naraic]

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/157 ... XlbkM8IyRA

Relegation on the cards for Worcester. Probably made to sell the P shares

I think this forced sale of the P shares at a massive discount could be dangerous.

As an accountant I could see an auditor of other club telling them that they can't keep them in their accounts at the current valuation valuation (most clubs are 17.5 million) if only 9.5 million is realisable if they are sold.

Then a half dozen clubs suddenly have massive negative balance sheets and banks cutting credit lines.

[blockhead]

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/157 ... XlbkM8IyRA

Relegation on the cards for Worcester. Probably made to sell the P shares

I think this forced sale of the P shares at a massive discount could be dangerous.

As an accountant I could see an auditor of other club telling them that they can't keep them in their accounts at the current valuation valuation (most clubs are 17.5 million) if only 9.5 million is realisable if they are sold.

Then a half dozen clubs suddenly have massive negative balance sheets and banks cutting credit lines.

You lost me at "I think".

[Oldschoolsocks]

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/157 ... XlbkM8IyRA

Relegation on the cards for Worcester. Probably made to sell the P shares

I think this forced sale of the P shares at a massive discount could be dangerous.

As an accountant I could see an auditor of other club telling them that they can't keep them in their accounts at the current valuation valuation (most clubs are 17.5 million) if only 9.5 million is realisable if they are sold.

Then a half dozen clubs suddenly have massive negative balance sheets and banks cutting credit lines.

You lost me at "I think".

I'm pretty are that a half dozen means six and discount means cheaper, but after that I'm right there with you brother

[naraic]

I think this forced sale of the P shares at a massive discount could be dangerous.

As an accountant I could see an auditor of other club telling them that they can't keep them in their accounts at the current valuation valuation (most clubs are 17.5 million) if only 9.5 million is realisable if they are sold.

Then a half dozen clubs suddenly have massive negative balance sheets and banks cutting credit lines.

You lost me at "I think".

I'm pretty are that a half dozen means six and discount means cheaper, but after that I'm right there with you brother

Ok. Sorry about that. Let me explain my thought process more.

A number of sources are suggesting that the Premiership will force Worchester to sell their P shares for 9 million.

An auditor is someone that signs off on a set of accounts and says they are somewhat correct.

Most of the Premiership clubs are basically saying the P shares are worth 17 million or more in their financial accounts.

If Worchester are forced to sell their P shares for 9 million (as apparently threatened) an auditor might say to Bath Wasps Newcastle and other clubs that you can't claim that the P shares are worth 17 million as Worchester's are being sold for 9 million.

So to take Bath for example. They say that the P shares are worth 20 million.

At the moment the Bath accounts says that the owe 13 million more to creditors than they own assets.

If the P shares go from a value of 20 million to a value of 9 million then the Bath accounts will say that they own 24 million more to creditors than they own assets.

People who lent Bath money will be scared if they can get their money back.

If a set of accounts says that a company owes a lot more money than they own assets lenders will stop lending them money.

They won't renew the loans and suddenly Bath will be struggling like Wasps is (unless the owner steps in to a greater extent). This will happen because Premier Rugby forcing Worcester to sell the P shares cheaply triggered a change in the value of the P shares on the Bath accounts.

There is at least 6 clubs in that kind of position.

[Oldschoolsocks]

You lost me at "I think".

I'm pretty are that a half dozen means six and discount means cheaper, but after that I'm right there with you brother

Ok. Sorry about that. Let me explain my thought process more.

A number of sources are suggesting that the Premiership will force Worchester to sell their P shares for 9 million.

An auditor is someone that signs off on a set of accounts and says they are somewhat correct.

Most of the Premiership clubs are basically saying the P shares are worth 17 million or more in their financial accounts.

If Worchester are forced to sell their P shares for 9 million (as apparently threatened) an auditor might say to Bath Wasps Newcastle and other clubs that you can't claim that the P shares are worth 17 million as Worchester's are being sold for 9 million.

So to take Bath for example. They say that the P shares are worth 20 million.

At the moment the Bath accounts says that the owe 13 million more to creditors than they own assets.

If the P shares go from a value of 20 million to a value of 9 million then the Bath accounts will say that they own 24 million more to creditors than they own assets.

People who lent Bath money will be scared if they can get their money back.

If a set of accounts says that a company owes a lot more money than they own assets lenders will stop lending them money.

They won't renew the loans and suddenly Bath will be struggling like Wasps is (unless the owner steps in to a greater extent). This will happen because Premier Rugby forcing Worcester to sell the P shares cheaply triggered a change in the value of the P shares on the Bath accounts.

There is at least 6 clubs in that kind of position.

Hey sorry about that Naraic. I was just messing with you, I'm pretty sure Blocky was too, good post though...

[heno]

You lost me at "I think".

I'm pretty are that a half dozen means six and discount means cheaper, but after that I'm right there with you brother

Ok. Sorry about that. Let me explain my thought process more.

A number of sources are suggesting that the Premiership will force Worchester to sell their P shares for 9 million.

An auditor is someone that signs off on a set of accounts and says they are somewhat correct.

Most of the Premiership clubs are basically saying the P shares are worth 17 million or more in their financial accounts.

If Worchester are forced to sell their P shares for 9 million (as apparently threatened) an auditor might say to Bath Wasps Newcastle and other clubs that you can't claim that the P shares are worth 17 million as Worchester's are being sold for 9 million.

So to take Bath for example. They say that the P shares are worth 20 million.

At the moment the Bath accounts says that the owe 13 million more to creditors than they own assets.

If the P shares go from a value of 20 million to a value of 9 million then the Bath accounts will say that they own 24 million more to creditors than they own assets.

People who lent Bath money will be scared if they can get their money back.

If a set of accounts says that a company owes a lot more money than they own assets lenders will stop lending them money.

They won't renew the loans and suddenly Bath will be struggling like Wasps is (unless the owner steps in to a greater extent). This will happen because Premier Rugby forcing Worcester to sell the P shares cheaply triggered a change in the value of the P shares on the Bath accounts.

There is at least 6 clubs in that kind of position.

Can I ask 3 possibly stupid questions

1) how did they arrive at the 9 million figure

2) can you value things differently, ie my shares aren't being sold in a distressed state in a fire sale so I can value them differently to their shares

3) can they not do a maneuver like issue 1bn new shares but only to clubs not in administration therefore everyone else gets a new asset at the same old value but Worcester only has the same old shares who's value has now evaporated

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[blockhead]

I'm pretty are that a half dozen means six and discount means cheaper, but after that I'm right there with you brother

Ok. Sorry about that. Let me explain my thought process more.

A number of sources are suggesting that the Premiership will force Worchester to sell their P shares for 9 million.

An auditor is someone that signs off on a set of accounts and says they are somewhat correct.

Most of the Premiership clubs are basically saying the P shares are worth 17 million or more in their financial accounts.

If Worchester are forced to sell their P shares for 9 million (as apparently threatened) an auditor might say to Bath Wasps Newcastle and other clubs that you can't claim that the P shares are worth 17 million as Worchester's are being sold for 9 million.

So to take Bath for example. They say that the P shares are worth 20 million.

At the moment the Bath accounts says that the owe 13 million more to creditors than they own assets.

If the P shares go from a value of 20 million to a value of 9 million then the Bath accounts will say that they own 24 million more to creditors than they own assets.

People who lent Bath money will be scared if they can get their money back.

If a set of accounts says that a company owes a lot more money than they own assets lenders will stop lending them money.

They won't renew the loans and suddenly Bath will be struggling like Wasps is (unless the owner steps in to a greater extent). This will happen because Premier Rugby forcing Worcester to sell the P shares cheaply triggered a change in the value of the P shares on the Bath accounts.

There is at least 6 clubs in that kind of position.

Hey sorry about that Naraic. I was just messing with you, I'm pretty sure Blocky was too, good post though...

You haven't got a rashers what Nariac in goin on about OSS, stop bluffing.

[Oldschoolsocks]

Ok. Sorry about that. Let me explain my thought process more.

A number of sources are suggesting that the Premiership will force Worchester to sell their P shares for 9 million.

An auditor is someone that signs off on a set of accounts and says they are somewhat correct.

Most of the Premiership clubs are basically saying the P shares are worth 17 million or more in their financial accounts.

If Worchester are forced to sell their P shares for 9 million (as apparently threatened) an auditor might say to Bath Wasps Newcastle and other clubs that you can't claim that the P shares are worth 17 million as Worchester's are being sold for 9 million.

So to take Bath for example. They say that the P shares are worth 20 million.

At the moment the Bath accounts says that the owe 13 million more to creditors than they own assets.

If the P shares go from a value of 20 million to a value of 9 million then the Bath accounts will say that they own 24 million more to creditors than they own assets.

People who lent Bath money will be scared if they can get their money back.

If a set of accounts says that a company owes a lot more money than they own assets lenders will stop lending them money.

They won't renew the loans and suddenly Bath will be struggling like Wasps is (unless the owner steps in to a greater extent). This will happen because Premier Rugby forcing Worcester to sell the P shares cheaply triggered a change in the value of the P shares on the Bath accounts.

There is at least 6 clubs in that kind of position.

Hey sorry about that Naraic. I was just messing with you, I'm pretty sure Blocky was too, good post though...

You haven't got a rashers what Nariac in goin on about OSS, stop bluffing.

so what he's saying is if your mam gives you a two Euro to go the shop to buy a loaf of bread and you bring her 50 cents change, she'll start asking difficult questions if Mary down the street tells her she gets 90 cents change from Gormless Geoge (the dumb fuvk)

[naraic]

Can I ask 3 possibly stupid questions

1) how did they arrive at the 9 million figure

2) can you value things differently, ie my shares aren't being sold in a distressed state in a fire sale so I can value them differently to their shares

3) can they not do a maneuver like issue 1bn new shares but only to clubs not in administration therefore everyone else gets a new asset at the same old value but Worcester only has the same old shares who's value has now evaporated

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

1. No idea. A lot of Worcester fans are seeing this as betrayal of the highest order.

2. You can have quiet a bit of variation in the value. At the moment some clubs value P shares around 17 million while Bath values it around 20 million. The valuation can be debatable at the best of times.

The thing is that the auditor needs to sign off on it being in someway reasonable. Different auditors would have different views but if one shareholder has to sell for 9 million many auditors would not sign off on a value of 17-20 million.

3. Worcester would have legal grounds to object if their value was destroyed by share issues.

[FLIP]

The company which held the player contracts at Worcester has been wound up, and so all their players and staff are now out of a job.

Terribly sad state of affairs.