ACL bid (1 Viewer)

[hitmanhearns]

Why?

I can see three reasons

1- Acl is one of the creditors of ltd, as is SISU, if acl can match SISU´S bid for SISU´s part of the debt they should be considered as equally proper future owners by the administrator provided prof of funds are ok.

2- Acl then has something to trump SISU´s bid -THE RICOH- sisu having nowhere to play should weigh heavily if the administrator, by law, must look at the future of the club.
Sisu can of course block any sale as main creditor

3-or maybe Acl can block a sale of ltd to sisu?, as Acl also are a main creditor the actual reason for the adminstration , if they themselves bid higher then SISU for the acl part of the debt in ltd it should give them grounds to not accept sisus lower bid?. Which should have forced sisu to place a bid significantly higher for the acl debt then they would have liked to, ACL kinda milking sisu a bit?

The administrator must consult any sale with the creditors, one of which is acl....

Where is Mattlock when you need him?:facepalm:

 

---

[lordsummerisle]

ACL overcharged the club for the rent to such a level that it became unsustainable and then forced them into administration in order to distress the price and pick the club up on the cheap.

 

[CovFan]

....which is exactly what SISU are trying to do to ACL.

 

[Sub]

then sell on the club and the stadium as a complete package?

 

[fernandopartridge]

....which is exactly what SISU are trying to do to ACL.

But haven't. Whereas ACL have. I personally wonder if ACL are a proxy bid for another party.

 

[lordsummerisle]

....which is exactly what SISU are trying to do to ACL.

It's a morally reprehensible thing to do though isn't it?

 

[Otis]

Depends which side you're on.

It's fine if you're on the right side.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

And I'm guessing that in THIS Animal Farm it's the usual "SISU-out" is good, anything else is bad!?

 

[Jack Griffin]

ACL overcharged the club for the rent to such a level that it became unsustainable and then forced them into administration in order to distress the price and pick the club up on the cheap.

What? The contract hasn't varied since it was negotiated & signed in the days when Fletcher was in charge of ACL. We all agree the rent was set to high & I personally think the historical rent should have been seen as paying off a mortgage, so that over the years CCFC was buying back an interest in the stadium, but essentially the CCFC board agreed with it at the time.

 

[CovFan]

It's a morally reprehensible thing to do though isn't it?

Indeed, both sides will be as bad as each other.