Exactly. So there is no chance of us having to pay one, and then also having to pay the other. Ultimately, a court will eventually decide who is owed the money, and then subsequently, Everton will be obliged to pay all or some of the money back.
That’s the level of ‘complexity’ we are dealing with. I don’t think it’s overly complex, and I think it’s something our new owner will simply have to contend with. If they aren’t capable of contending with that, then they aren’t capable of taking over Everton.
The reported concerns about proceeds of crime are just BS in my opinion. Everton will have committed no crime in entering into a commercial loan with 777, even if 777’s money was derived from selling crack to school children.
We wont be paying twice mate, that's for sure. The court will rule on it, i believe there has been some judicial process already but nothing came of it - so far or that is in the public domain, no one really knows the time line - even with a decision you could be looking at an appeal process as well.
When a decion is made, we can negotiate around a haircut or repayment, in a way you prob have a better chance with ACAP. But the face ache is we cant restructure the debt until we know the outcome and that would be high on the list of any investor.
Theoretically yes its not impossible to overcome, but in another way i would query the competency of someone who would do it as its a risk - what i mean by that is something like this opens the door to chancers like 777. They were willing to take on huge amounts of risk and give a great deal for Moshiri - to get a seat at the table and now look where we are. I think any competent owner isnt throwing unnecessary money at this. You also have to remember if they are paying 200 for escrow thats 200 mill less then they have for the club.
Its also complicated by the fact that if ACAP lets say agree to hair cut of 100 mill - who gets the benefit of that? That will be an argument between the buyer and Moshiri - he will want an increased price because the club just made 100 mill and the buyer will want the benefit so the club is cheaper. Its not as straight forward as it all suggests. Therefore id have a concern about someone willing to take this on by just paying the 200 mill.
I agree there is a lot of projecting and maybe sensationalising around this that is unhelpful, theoretically, this could escalate to those criminal things, equally in most cases it does not, essentially you have to deal with what we have at the moment which is a civil case and a dispute over security of debt and who ownes what, anything else is speculation.
My own take is the Fredkin's were right to pull out and id query anyone else as competent if they were taking on the risk profile such as it is at the moment. I think the Fredkin's could be back - one thing that is telling is they now have skin in the game, they've gone, but not far.
