Reply With QuoteDoesnt seem so. More concerning is future and extended embargos if we are late with the next installments.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Can it be bought off?
Doesnt seem so. More concerning is future and extended embargos if we are late with the next installments.
Presumably that would be avoided if we pay on time.Originally Posted by Hilts
Does anyone have any idea when the next installment is due?
Is it one year after the first payment, if the payment clock was reset after all the appeals, so second payment in January 2024 and final payment in January 2025?
Or are all the fee installments to Nantes overdue?
The original transfer agreement from January 2019 was based on three annual payments which should have been done by January 2022 - I think?
No one from the club, the local media, the EFL or FIFA has made a clear statement on this.
The only way to get the embargo lifted is to persuade the EFL board of directors to reverse their decision to keep the embargo in place even if CCFC pay the remaining transfer fee instalments. The club are trying to do this but the very dodgy Peter Ridsdale is one of those board members and he has a grudge against the club.
The grudge came about after PR left the club, having just paid himself through his consultancy company W H Sports Ltd. a ｣500k share bonus for getting the new stadium planning permission (he actually took the bonus before the planning was formally granted). When WH Sports went into liquidation owing many hundreds of ｣000s to HMRC , the shares were missing from his sworn statement of assets and liabilities. The liquidator of the company them did some investigation work and made enquiry of CCFC who were duty bound under the law to provide him with dates and amounts details about the shares PR had received . It resulted in the liquidator taking legal action against PR and eventually recovering about ｣250k in cash from him.
In addition to having to pay back the money PR`s conduct was reported on by the liquidator and he was disqualified by the court for 7 years as being unfit to be a director or involved in the management of a limited company. ( don`t start me off on why he continued as such at PNE by just changing the name of his role to "advisor to the owner" or why the EFL then considered him fit to be one of their main board directors after his disqualification period ended).
So CCFC`s information to the liquidator which, as I said, they were obliged to provide, got PR into trouble and he is likely to do anything he can to cause trouble for the club - including recently acting as a witness for Sam Hammam in his legal action against the club.
Allegedly, CCFC have also written to PR recently requesting that he desist from "leaking" confidential information that he receives about CCFC and its legal actions in his role on the EFL board.
This is so unbelievable it's hilarious. How that man is on the EFL board of directors is insane. Guessing he shared his dodgy wealth with a few officials
I should have clarified.
The share bonus issue is recorded in the relevant Cardiff Council committee minutes and the hiding of assets and disqualification matters are recorded in the liquidator`s reports filed on the public record at Companies House. PR`s change of job title as his effort to get round his disqualification is available to read online. Neither PNE nor the EFL seem to have acted on this even though the Company Director Disqualification Act and the EFL rules say that this is not an acceptable way to get around the disqualification.
Peter Ridsdale aside( it is a total joke hes on the board of directors) the embargo due to the late payment lies 100% with those running the club.
Just another act of complete incompetence from them.
19 of the 24 Championship clubs voted for him when he was up for election.
Incredible.
Thank you for this!
Hilarious that this can be allowed to happen. Hilarious but not surprising.
Incredible.
Thank you for this!
Hilarious that this can be allowed to happen. Hilarious but not surprising.
A great response but is the PR vote / action fact or supposition?
What's his grudge
You are quite right Dave.
Interesting though that clubs in which he had previously had an involvement were in the 5 who didn`t vote for him and that in his election application to clubs he "forgot" to mention his disqualification as a director.
See the detailed explanation set out earlier in this thread
Duplicate post
Hadn't read the clarified post when I asked though still not much the wiser!! Apart from he's bent as!
I知 guessing he was no longer disqualified at that stage.
It would be interesting to know where Cardiff City would have ended up if Ridsdale had never got involved. Would the new stadium have come to fruition? Would the club have retained its Championship status for as long as it did? We値l never know, but I知 doubtful on both counts.
All of the Ridsdale actions are facts which can be evidenced by the links I put into the post.
Dave S`s point about PR receiving election support from 19 of the 24 Championship clubs is also factual.
A further point of concern is why the EFL CEO Trevor Birch didn`t raise concerns about Ridsdale getting on to the EFL main board (even though he was voted in by clubs rather than the rest of the EFL board). Trevor is a very experienced Licenced Insolvency Practitioner so would have been aware of how serious an offence Ridsdale would have committed in order to get a 7 year banning order
It sums up football at the moment though in terms of moral baselines or absolute lack of them - money talks not integrity
There is little doubt that the new stadium would not have been completed without Ridsdale`s involvement as the Council minutes show that Sam`s financial plans did not stand up to scrutiny despite several updates requested and provided as at no time did they show where the money was coming from to complete the project. Ridsdale provided that evidence.
Yes
But it is supposition that he would vote against us although it would be understandable given the facts.
It's supposition that there would be any vote in the first place. City broke the rules, which are pretty clear, so I don't know how any vote would come about.
I’m more interested in knowing why they broke the rules - I still don’t understand why they got themselves in a position where they paid up, yet took so long about it that they received what I understand is an automatic embargo.
someone must have decided to apply this rule, and seemingly they only did so after the appeal of the CAS decision failed (although not the subsequent appeal in the Swiss high court)
Cardiff City and its owner and directors made several errors throughout the whole matter of the Emiliano Sala transfer, including the following
1. Allowing Neil Warnock to promote and push for the transfer in the first place with his friend Willie McKay because the transfer fee was well above what Nantes were expecting from the deal and the salary being offered to Sala was 4 times what he was being paid by Nantes. No-one at the club had the football knowledge to spot this straight away or ,if they did, failed to prevent the deal happening
2. In addition to the over inflated fee and wages the club knew (or most certainly should have known with about 5 minutes of research) that Willie McKay was not a licenced intermediary and was also subject to a 5 year bankruptcy. Neil Warnock certainly knew as he had previous experience of dealing with the McKay family - with Willie at QPR and with his son at CCFC (Sol Bamba`s agent was McKay`s son`s company which subsequently went into liquidation in the Scottish courts)
3. The club made an error in the transfer agreement with Nantes by not having a clause that said the transfer fee only became payable when Sala`s contract terms were accepted by all the football authorities for all competitions that CCFC played in. The CAS ruling notes show that the Premier League (in which we were playing at the time) said that some of the contract terms were unacceptable to them but he tragically died before the necessary adjustments could be made. Again an example of football contract details knowledge which the club didn`t have.
4. Despite being given warning of a deadline, the club appeared to miss a payment before that deadline lapsed
After all of the above is said , there is a large degree of unfairness(in my opinion) in the EFL decision to impose a three window transfer restriction even if the club pays the rest of the transfer fee due to Nantes. The specific breach which the club is being penalised for is to prevent clubs failing to pay for a player who enhances their playing squad. For tragic reasons the club could never have gained such a playing advantage and this , as I understand it, is the basis of the club`s appeal to the EFL to have the decision reversed.
Posting Permissions
