Has the Langston agreement been signed?

I'm confused about this.

First we hear from Ridsdale and the club that an agreement has been reached to negotiate the amount owed by approx £10m.

Then we hear that we've missed the first payment of £83k due to Langston and that Langston have received no money in relation to the negotiated agreement.

Then the story is that are beloved former chairman has made a mistake and hasn't finalised the new deal with Langston. This makes a mockery of the above story, as how could the club miss a payment on an agreement that hadn't been finalised and signed?

Finally the club say in their meeting with the trust that we are on track with our payments due to Langston as part of the new agreement.

So where are we in relation to the repayment of the debt to Langston and the actual amount owed?

Do you honestly believe you'll get the correct answer on here?

Do you honestly believe you'll get the correct answer on here?

I've always avoided commenting on your posts, no particular reason, I don't know you an I understand that you have issues with certain members of this forum...BUT making posts like this just make you seem like a bitter little man... why bother... what help is that comment to the original poster ?

I am assuming Stavross, that the planned meeting with TG an Sam's team is to sort out the Langston issue once and for all, you have to remember that TG's group are having to sort out one hell of a mess left by previous people.

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Do you honestly believe you'll get the correct answer on here?

I've always avoided commenting on your posts, no particular reason, I don't know you an I understand that you have issues with certain members of this forum...BUT making posts like this just make you seem like a bitter little man... why bother... what help is that comment to the original poster ?

I am assuming Stavross, that the planned meeting with TG an Sam's team is to sort out the Langston issue once and for all, you have to remember that TG's group are having to sort out one hell of a mess left by previous people.

Well said i dont know why he bothers.

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Before someone shoots me down, I failed to mention that if the club sells the naming rights or gains promotion then langston will receive an additional £5million bonus but it is solely on one of these things happening not both, so Langston can only get one bonus of £5million.

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Before someone shoots me down, I failed to mention that if the club sells the naming rights or gains promotion then langston will receive an additional £5million bonus but it is solely on one of these things happening not both, so Langston can only get one bonus of £5million.

We certainly aren't going to get promoted by 31/12/2010 .

I still don't understand why the 2nd agreement was trumpeted if it was never signed. Although I'm sure if it WAS all tied up then the club would be shouting from the rooftops about it by now surely, and there owuld be no need for a discussion (unless TG is going to offer a flat sum for immediate settlement, which in the light of our other financial commitments seems unlikely)

You obviously don't have to answer this Carl, but it would clarify things if you could - this 'unsigned' agreement, have you been informed of this from both sides, or just Sam ?

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Before someone shoots me down, I failed to mention that if the club sells the naming rights or gains promotion then langston will receive an additional £5million bonus but it is solely on one of these things happening not both, so Langston can only get one bonus of £5million.

We certainly aren't going to get promoted by 31/12/2010 .

I still don't understand why the 2nd agreement was trumpeted if it was never signed. Although I'm sure if it WAS all tied up then the club would be shouting from the rooftops about it by now surely, and there owuld be no need for a discussion (unless TG is going to offer a flat sum for immediate settlement, which in the light of our other financial commitments seems unlikely)

You obviously don't have to answer this Carl, but it would clarify things if you could - this 'unsigned' agreement, have you been informed of this from both sides, or just Sam ?

The promotion would have counted if we had gone up in May though Tim

Yes Tim it has been confirmed from both sides.

We certainly aren't going to get promoted by 31/12/2010 .

I still don't understand why the 2nd agreement was trumpeted if it was never signed. Although I'm sure if it WAS all tied up then the club would be shouting from the rooftops about it by now surely, and there owuld be no need for a discussion (unless TG is going to offer a flat sum for immediate settlement, which in the light of our other financial commitments seems unlikely)

You obviously don't have to answer this Carl, but it would clarify things if you could - this 'unsigned' agreement, have you been informed of this from both sides, or just Sam ?[/quote]

The promotion would have counted if we had gone up in May though Tim

Yes Tim it has been confirmed from both sides.[/quote]

'If' we'd gone up I think we'd be having an entirely different conversation. Just pointing out that that clause is no longer relevant.

Taking your word for the agreement then it must therefore be the case that the malaysians are confident that if they can't come to a new agreement then they will be able to pay Sam the £10m. (Which I don't think is entirely out of the question through a combination of refinancing -without this hanging over us and additional share sales).

On the other hand they may well just say, wait until 2016 and you can have the £15m. By making the payments up to date however they seem to be attempting at least to keep the goodwill .

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Thanks for that Carl.

So has the club paid any of the £83k installments?

There is an interim agreement which was put in place with the Malaysian investment in mind, this is an agreement that says the club will pay £83.000 per month and have the option to pay the loan note of £10 million in full by 31/12/2010. In this interim agreement it is also noted that if the loan is not settled in full by March 2010 then the club will meet with Langston before 31/12/2010. The loan note will become £24 million on 01/01/2011 if not settled in full prior to this date. This agreement has been signed by both sides.

There is another agreement, the one in which Peter Ridsdale said that if the £10million is not paid by 31/12/2010 then it will become £11million in 2011 and £12million in 2012 and so on upto a maximum of £15million in 2016 when it then has to be paid in full and during this time there would be scheduled payments of £83.000 per month. But even though this was agreed in prinicipal it has not been finalised with signatures.

Hope this helps you understand the current situation with the club and Langston.

Thanks for that Carl.

So has the club paid any of the £83k installments?

YES Stavros, they are now totally paid up to date, but they were late paying, but it is ALL PAID NOW

If I remember rightly one of the outcomes of the court case in 2008 was a stay of execution between the club and Langston where no legal proceedings could take place until after 1 January 2010. If a solution hadn’t been found by then, Langston were free to resume its legal challenge.

I'm wondering with this 'interim' agreement was connected to this truce as it basically gave another 12 months for the club (with the Malaysians onboard) to work out a new deal.

It would also explain why Carl says that the debt goes back to £24m (in total) because if Langston did go back to court they would obviously be seeking the full amount because that is why they went to court in the first place.