I know there isn't much we can do about it but it wasn't empty when the council voted on whether they should even sell it or not.
I know there isn't much we can do about it but it wasn't empty when the council voted on whether they should even sell it or not.
1. Joy has said she was targetted by a Council PR Campaign
2. SISU said everything was one transaction
3. Council bloke said he would understand that but Higgs were involved too
4. SISU said they want Wasps to pay loads of money to the council, if not they would have half the stadium
5. Didn't learn anything "new" or what the "new evidence" seemed to be. Pretty boring.
- Astute argues with Grendel
- Grendel Argues with Astute
- Astute argues with Nick
- Nick argues with Astute
- Various people ask for summaries of what's been happening
Can we designate someone to post a different thread just summarising whats happened, save reading through pages of shite
Fuck me this is depressing.
You always do this.
Why cant we all just get along.
WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN !!!!!
You always do this.
Why cant we all just get along.
WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN !!!!!
I want to sleep with Beyoncé but neither has any realistic chance of happening.
Prediction - the case will conclude this morning and the learned judges will provide their decision in "x" weeks time. The outcome will be that SISU/CCFC will lose again and they will look for another court to appeal to .....ultimately the European Court. In the interim there will be civil case taken against WASPS to increase the pressure on them.
Or am I being cynical??? I just hope the season starts soon, so we can be distracted by whats on the field.
Or am I being cynical??? I just hope the season starts soon, so we can be distracted by whats on the field.
Welcome back John, hope you're well. Did you enjoy Wembley?
ACL if struggling could have applied to extend its lease at the Ricoh to make itself more attractive to a takeover, particularly if Higgs wanted out.
It would also mean credit would be easier to get so that they could get better terms doesn't it?
So the crux of the argument seems to be how can the valuation be based on the arena having a short lease if once you’ve purchased ACL you can simply extend the lease without cost and effectively add value?
What was the scenario SISU were offered, was it different to what Wasps were offered?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What was the scenario SISU were offered, was it different to what Wasps were offered?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To extend the lease - would the Higgs Charity be required to provide any funding?
I think that's about right , however the lease was owned 50/50 with the council and his charity , both party's had to agreed to the sale or it was no deal , SISU had fell out with the charity leaving the council to find someone they and the charity could deal with , the problem seems to be why was it so secret, I think its been explained that the council did not have to take the highest money offer only , there are other factors that can come into play
The council is arguing that money isn't necessarily an important factor so not necessarily. The lease could have been extended for very little or even with the expectation of some sort of peppercorn rent.
Charity Commission legislation is quite clear regarding investment and it is the duty of the trustees to seek a maximum return, If Sisu's offer was more in financial terms than Wasps they have arguably failed their duties as trustees of registered charity, a preference over who they deal with does not come into it.
Council's argument seems a bit mixed up. Is the QC implicitly admitting that they might have done wrong, but it doesn't matter because the claimant hadn't made an offer anyway?
