Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Did I you all knowing self righteous c-nt ?
ACL statement (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter AFCCOVENTRY
- Start date
SkyBlueBlood
Member
Anyone but SISU and I don't blame them.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
It's amazing the ones who were against Sisu now, probably like the 3 million who attended Woodstock.
You're missing a "u" there as well.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Didnt say whether I did or didnt unlike other people Im concentrating on the situation now What you did or didnt say or do or what youre doing now I dont care:jerkit:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
They may have every reason not to want to deal with SISU but if there's a chance that SISU will end up back in control and ACL won't talk to them that's not "doors are open".
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Concentrating on the situation now without looking at future implications exactly why we're where we are now.
You're right, you don't care.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
but they also saved it so its ok just like it is for council
some people....
say sisu are gone...and new owners are forced to build own stadium because council wont give them big enough piece of pie, will you still stand by council?
CCFC PimpRail
New Member
I'd like to see ACL's balance sheet on that, build a business around getting 15-20k fans, then having to restructure because your tenants force half away. Sooner or later it'd be best to evict the whole sorry lot and find a new cash cow, or show some sympathy for the misfortunate and offer a new deal to more understanding owners.
I still think the main stumbling block is SISU's V sign to the outstanding rent, and the atitudes of alot of not very business savvy fans who would rather see megabucks go to underperforming players instead of realising there are other bills to pay.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
the rent is too high for a club to pay and flourish, thus why new owners already talked about owning ricoh or doing a new deal
yes sisu agreed to it 5-6 years ago but that dont mean ACL are charging an acceptable figure.
yes sisu agreed to it 5-6 years ago but that dont mean ACL are charging an acceptable figure.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
I'd like to see a viable business case for running the stadium & club in parallel or together.. so far we have 2 warring parties failing to agree anything and a club that looks like it is dying or settling to an unprecendented lowly level and a stadium that will survive but in a much more challenging business environment. Stage left the fans chorus their disbelief.
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
SISU are in business-they do not care about ccfc , they care only about their business (and none of us understand what that business model is -although surely it is not destroying the key asset - the football club?)
ACL are in business - they also do not care about ccFc (although arguably they should) - they have their own agenda
Council are very short sighted in not caring about CCFC -as a prosperous football team in the premier league can do amazing things for a citys prosperity and image
So until the 3 realise that although their own objectives differ , they will all be enhanced by a successful team playing in the city, then we will not move forward
Fisher/Seppala PWKH/Ann Lucas
I think we need a mixed doubles Tag wrestling match to sort it all out
ACL are in business - they also do not care about ccFc (although arguably they should) - they have their own agenda
Council are very short sighted in not caring about CCFC -as a prosperous football team in the premier league can do amazing things for a citys prosperity and image
So until the 3 realise that although their own objectives differ , they will all be enhanced by a successful team playing in the city, then we will not move forward
Fisher/Seppala PWKH/Ann Lucas
I think we need a mixed doubles Tag wrestling match to sort it all out
I saw an interesting blog today,that suggested that SISU rental debt to ACL may not be the £600,000 to 1.2 million that has originally been mentioned.That maybe the original lease CCFC took to play at the Ricoh may have been a 50 year lease to guarantee the long term stability of the club,and that SISU inherited that very long lease.So that even though SISU subsequently broke that lease,they maybe still liable to owe/pay the remaining 44 years of the lease.This would equate to approximately them owing SISU about £52.8 million (44 x1.2 million).Which would mean CCFC debts would be over £100 million but that ACL would have a far greater say,on accepting or rejecting any offer to move out of administration.Paying ACL circa 1 million would be something SISU would consider,however I doubt if they would be too keen on paying ACL over £50 million.Maybe that is why ACL have apparently started preparing the pitch for next year,surely they would not wish to take on any unecessary expenditure at this juncture.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They'd have no say - you need 75% of creditors to voluntary exit administration. If that scenario was correct we really would be stuffed.
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
The blog (written by Skybluesquirrel) pointed that out, mentioning that if the debt to ACL is the 600k previously stated, then the three SISU companies would easily meet that 75%.
As you say, if the club is found liable for the rest of the lease (which I guess is up in the air at this point, although nothing has been mentioned by Appleton) then things could get very messy indeed.
May also explain why there is the big PR battle between "they kicked us out" and "we welcome CCFC with open arms".
Whatever the case I'm tired of our football club being itself used as a football by these arseholes (everyone included, not just SISU).
Agreed but so would SISU,so if and its a big if,the debt to ACL is around £50 million ,SISU would no longer be 75% of the creditors.
Yes, it has been discussed here too.
The way out could be by a creditor voluntary liquidation. The lease is with ltd and if that company cease to exist ACL would have nowhere to go with their claim for the remaining lease.
Of course that require FL hand over the GS to Holdings.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Now I like the sound of that!
They haven't made the claim to the administrator, so not part of the administration.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
You might not, it might never end with the wrangling!
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Can anyone be certain who the Golden Share would be handed to in that situation, especially if the reason for the liquidation was down to the owners of Holdings.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
FL will have to make a decision before too long about who gets the Golden Share, which might cause changes in the balance of power.
CCFC PimpRail
New Member
The rent agreement was set at a time when dropping a division wasn't considered, if SISU really wanted to pay a fair rate for being in the third tier then that should have been considered (although I doubt they'd have complained at 1.2m had CCFC returned to the premiership). Of course ACL are the bad guys in this for offering a 2/3rds reduction and 10 years to repay the debt when it was clear SISU wanted out....
trondegilsoltvedt97
Active Member
Wasnt the rent agreed well before SISU- thats what it said in the Trust Q&A
Reduced rent yes fair enough- but no access to matchday revenue...
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
The last deal included 80% of matchday f&b revenue (the other 20% is owned by compass). It also included some parking spaces that could be sold on matchday.
The details have been posted on this forum, but I haven't got time now to find them.
trondegilsoltvedt97
Active Member
Where were these lastdeal figures reported? I did a quick search on google and the only place 80% is ever mentioned is on here by other forum members, so maybe its one of the urban myths which have developed over this saga!.
