From what i can see they were paid for the work they were asked to do, you know when you do a job you are asked to do and you put a price in, well they did more than the brief and the more bit which Salford didn't ask them to do that they want paying for. Maybe they thought that the work needed doing I don't know, but if you asked a bricklayer to build you a wall ten bricks high and he states that it will cost a £1000 he then builds it 15 bricks high and charges you £1500, do you pay the extra or do you dispute it?










/

And there doesn't appear to be any change in ownership of Salford Football Club (1914) Ltd - nothing registered at Companies House since 8th December when the accounts were filed - curiouser & curiouser said Alice!

A Newco usually is independent of the parent, the debts stay with the parent. This is usually after a club goes into administration and a buy out happens.
That's why Rangers NewCo didn't receive any money from players that left.

Was the petition dismissed today?

Not sure but I think all creditors have to agree and have to be treated equally but I could be wrong.
I assume the Wilkinson loans were converted to equity and are lost forever,unlike the creditors who will be paid over 5 years.
I think the carrot is to tell people that,if they don't agree to this,the firm will be liquidated and nobody will receive anything.
The CVA might well have been a RFL stipulation to allow the Rugby franchise to be transferred to a Newco.

Also to avoid a points deduction. I imagine there are benefits for Koukash here if he is indeed paying off the debt. For one, the newco doesn't inherit a bad credit history.

rlDebt negotiations go on for Salford City Redsrl