Insert Name Here aka The Ownership Thread

[borat]

The show cause notice is not an extension it's the final step, first they have to set the benchmarks, 31st deadline, then they need to issue the legal show cause for failing to hit the deadline, he's has a right of reply, then they can hit him with the list of material breaches of the salary cap and elect to withdraw the license as per the participation agreement.

People need to lay off the hysteria and realise the FFA is going about things in due process to ensure once they take the license thinks won't be able to do shit, he'll still have the company debts and the FFA can sell/award the license to a new ownership group debt free.

What do you make of the licence fee and the lack of process and guidelines as to how that was applied to Tinks? By rights he shouldn't have a leg to stand on but I can see this as a potential argument in any injunction.

With Con he never paid a cent for it so I can see the issue of property rights and what Tinkler bought for his money being an issue. Tinkler could prove that regs within the participation agreement are being applied to him unfairly as opposed to others. An example being the unpaid Super being part of the liabilities when the gypos down the road have been doing the same.

The other point I think he will argue in favour of his injunction will be that the actions he is taking are normal administrative functions such as replacing poorly performing staff. Clive completely shot himself in the foot by attempting to set up his Football Australia. It could easily be concluded the damage he was causing to the HAL as he openly was trying to replace the governing body.