Front page telegraph (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
That'll be why Valiant was scrubbing his hands and incinerating his clothes earlier then!
skyblueman
New Member
Pink Parrot anyone ?
Let's say you're right (and you could very well be!) - would the council allow sisu to take over ACL completely?
Could the council not buy the Higgs shares and own ACL 100%?
Maybe the club (not sisu) would be allowed to take over ACL (or the 50%) on the cheap. Wouldn't that be like a reverse situation to when the club was forced to sell the land and developing rights back in the Richardson/Robinson era?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
There's not a great deal of new information here though is there? I guess the CET has run a story after the comments on CWR last week.
We know SISU aren't paying rent and as such it's only a matter of time before ACL have to take some sort of action, surprised they've waited this long to be honest.
The new information that was of interest was the mention that financial situation of ACL, it's been stressed all along that ACL don't need CCFC but now there's mention of ACL being in financial difficulty and debt restructuring. From the quote given it looks like Jacky Issac didn't answer the question. If it was false surely there would have been a denial.
The other thing that interested me was the statement that no payment has been made, I was under the impression that SISU were covering match day costs.
We all know SISU will play hard ball and I don't think this will bother them in the slightest. They've shown all along they don't really care what the fans think of them and I would imagine they have some idea of how they want this to play out. I suspect they will keep pushing to the very limits until either they get the rent agreement they want or ACL get into serious financial difficulties and they can pick up the ground at a bargain basement price.
We know SISU aren't paying rent and as such it's only a matter of time before ACL have to take some sort of action, surprised they've waited this long to be honest.
The new information that was of interest was the mention that financial situation of ACL, it's been stressed all along that ACL don't need CCFC but now there's mention of ACL being in financial difficulty and debt restructuring. From the quote given it looks like Jacky Issac didn't answer the question. If it was false surely there would have been a denial.
The other thing that interested me was the statement that no payment has been made, I was under the impression that SISU were covering match day costs.
We all know SISU will play hard ball and I don't think this will bother them in the slightest. They've shown all along they don't really care what the fans think of them and I would imagine they have some idea of how they want this to play out. I suspect they will keep pushing to the very limits until either they get the rent agreement they want or ACL get into serious financial difficulties and they can pick up the ground at a bargain basement price.
skybluejelly
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I would imagine there is a legal process they have to go through but they could start that process and then potential lock the club out. Would another option be for ACL to push the club into administration?
The issue could be that the options open to ACL would impact more on CCFC than SISU and could make them seem the bad guys.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
new ball game really Godiva if say ACL went into administration. The decision making is taken away from the directors and the shareholders are last in line. The administrator has to get the best deal for the creditors so that doesnt necessarily mean that the shareholders get or keep control. Could SISU outbid a counter offer from the council for example ?
Bluegloucester
New Member
I think that forcing CCFC into administration may help to clarify the current situation. At present the fans are being drip fed information by the club via the CT. If SISU are serious about investing in CCFC for the long term they will stump up the cash. If not, it's administration and the chance to start afresh under new ownership. Come on Hoff!
cloughie
Well-Known Member
The club taking over ACL would in effect be the same as sisu taking it over.
Sisu own and control ccfc.
So ccfc could then sell on the stadium at a profit after buying it on the cheap and rent it back off the new owners thus pocketing a large profit. Sisu then calls in its debt on ccfc and we are back to square 1 with no money renting our ground and sisu still owning us
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I think the situation is this (happy to be corrected)
ACL have judgement over the rent debt due from CCFC
The size of the rent and whether it is a valid lease etc has never been challenged in court
CCFC owe the debt not SISU - at least £1m
ACL have deferred collecting on that judgement until 30th November
ACL have a decision to make as when and how to collect the debt.
They can issue a statutory demand which gives 21 days for the debt to be paid or a payment scheme agreed
CCFC can challenge that statutory demand and the chalenge stops the clock
If challenge successful then ACL back to square 1 but its hard to see grounds for a successful challenge other than a clerical error.
If challenge unsuccessful then clock for statutory demand enforcement starts again
ACL & CCFC can agree a scheme of settlement and that stops the statutory demand (would require proof of ability to pay and an agreement of how much)
The time limit runs out, ACL lock the doors and can choose to petition court to appoint administrators or wind up CCFC
SISU could appoint administrators or liquidators in the meantime in the knowledge ARVO have a charge over all the assets of the club
ACL could lock the doors any time they like but havent yet -
Just an opinion - in this wierd world the reality is that ACL Charity and Council want to see CCFC succeed because a viable and successful football club adds to the covenant value of the stadium, reflects well on the city. Would those three back a pheonix team - possibly and there in lies a realisation and problem for SISU..... CCFC under their tenure isnt necessarily a must have, but a football team is . Worried people at SISU? - I do hope so!
ACL have judgement over the rent debt due from CCFC
The size of the rent and whether it is a valid lease etc has never been challenged in court
CCFC owe the debt not SISU - at least £1m
ACL have deferred collecting on that judgement until 30th November
ACL have a decision to make as when and how to collect the debt.
They can issue a statutory demand which gives 21 days for the debt to be paid or a payment scheme agreed
CCFC can challenge that statutory demand and the chalenge stops the clock
If challenge successful then ACL back to square 1 but its hard to see grounds for a successful challenge other than a clerical error.
If challenge unsuccessful then clock for statutory demand enforcement starts again
ACL & CCFC can agree a scheme of settlement and that stops the statutory demand (would require proof of ability to pay and an agreement of how much)
The time limit runs out, ACL lock the doors and can choose to petition court to appoint administrators or wind up CCFC
SISU could appoint administrators or liquidators in the meantime in the knowledge ARVO have a charge over all the assets of the club
ACL could lock the doors any time they like but havent yet -
Just an opinion - in this wierd world the reality is that ACL Charity and Council want to see CCFC succeed because a viable and successful football club adds to the covenant value of the stadium, reflects well on the city. Would those three back a pheonix team - possibly and there in lies a realisation and problem for SISU..... CCFC under their tenure isnt necessarily a must have, but a football team is . Worried people at SISU? - I do hope so!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The ARVO charge presumably makes ACL powerless in terms of liquidating the club, would it not OSB?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If we go with ACL being in some sort of financial trouble (which I appreciate may or may not be true) what are the implications of this? They own the lease but not the freehold don't they?
In a worse case scenario where they go into admin do the council become liable for the debt or does only a fraction of it get paid of by way of a CVA agreed with the incoming owners. Given that there is a large amount of debt does that strengthen SISUs position?
In a worse case scenario where they go into admin do the council become liable for the debt or does only a fraction of it get paid of by way of a CVA agreed with the incoming owners. Given that there is a large amount of debt does that strengthen SISUs position?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
not really ...... their action focuses minds at SISU they might have some assets but then they would have nowhere to play...... what ACL are doing is saying you have to come to the table and you have to settle this.
The charge as such does not stop a petition to wind up...... it secures those assets for a creditor
It has to be sorted out ........... there is no point ACL having a tenant that refuses to pay and they need to free up that part of the stadium to earn some money if CCFC are not going to sort things out.
The charge as such does not stop a petition to wind up...... it secures those assets for a creditor
It has to be sorted out ........... there is no point ACL having a tenant that refuses to pay and they need to free up that part of the stadium to earn some money if CCFC are not going to sort things out.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
They own the long lease not the freehold thats correct chiefdave.
The shareholders in ACL have no further liability in terms of meeting debts unless they havent fully paid for their shares.
So if it goes into administration a deal by way of CVA is done as you say
as to size of debt ...... it may be perceived as a weakness SISU can exploit but that goes on the premise that ACL didnt see this coming and have done nothing about it. I think SISU have a big enough debt for them to be pretty worried themselves because and perceived weakness in ACL is also a perceived weakness at SISU/CCFC. Then you have to ask who actually owns something of substance that may lead to a viable future ........ is that CCFC/SISU ?
key to this is what have ACL been doing in the back ground - they must have seen what was coming and what SISU were trying to do.
Guess it is a case of who blinks first
Last edited:
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
I do wonder which Rugby team would have the resources and attendances to justify paying a million quid or so a year rent for the Ricoh?
