PH4 to buy Ricoh (1 Viewer)

[chiefdave]

I agree, on first analysis it seems crazed. However, quotes and figures are all about context.

If, for example, that was proposed as a way of clearing the rent arrears over time, it would be a valid proposition; wouldn't it?

My guess is that the rent arrears have been part of the issue, wasn't it reported at one point that an agreement was close but ACL wanted arrears in full and SISU wanted them at the new reduced rate? Sure I read that somewhere. If it's accepted that £1.2m is too high and £400K is reasonable then you could also make an argument that prior to SISU going on the rent strike CCFC overpaid rent to the tune of around £5.6m

 

---

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

My guess is that the rent arrears have been part of the issue, wasn't it reported at one point that an agreement was close but ACL wanted arrears in full and SISU wanted them at the new reduced rate? Sure I read that somewhere. If it's accepted that £1.2m is too high and £400K is reasonable then you could also make an argument that prior to SISU going on the rent strike CCFC overpaid rent to the tune of around £5.6m

Remind me who negotiated on Acls behalf originally er Fletcher wasn't it he thought it was quite reasonable. That is till he came to work for the club or was it after he left:thinking about:

 

[chiefdave]

Remind me who negotiated on Acls behalf originally er Fletcher wasn't it he thought it was quite reasonable. That is till he came to work for the club or was it after he left:thinking about:

The way the deal was done, as in who was representing who and people being involved on both sides, doesn't sit well with me. There's been talk on here of side deals with associated companies getting other work at the stadium. To be honest, with the benefit of hindsight, the whole thing looks dodgy on all sides and, as when Richardson left, I doubt we'll ever get the full story.

BTW wasn't saying that was my point of view, was just saying you could make that arguement. I think the sensible option would have been to put the arrears to one side as a seperate problem and get a deal moving forward done first but we're well past that stage now.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I agree, on first analysis it seems crazed. However, quotes and figures are all about context.

If, for example, that was proposed as a way of clearing the rent arrears over time, it would be a valid proposition; wouldn't it?

The context is crucial I agree, but taking it at face value, and not part of an arrears payment I can see why the deal was walked away from.

Does raise more questions about Fisher's judgement though with the fact that he was willing to agree to it until overruled from Head Office.

Would raise questions from both sides really, as wouldn't seem to be to anybodys advantage, either the club or ACL.