oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
of course you were Mr Reid....... perhaps you can explain to me exactly what you understand it all to mean ..... am guessing it would be a short blank conversation on your part :facepalm:
Telegraph Investigation into ARVO (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter WillieStanley
- Start date
of course you were Mr Reid....... perhaps you can explain to me exactly what you understand it all to mean ..... am guessing it would be a short blank conversation on your part :facepalm:
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Quote Andy Turner 'No, I was not aware of this. Thanks for letting us know.' Liars.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Wish I hadn't bothered e-mailing them now!
kingharvest
New Member
@CovTelEd @CovTel_CCFC @Lesreidpolitics haha-I and many many others beg to differ. It's a fool who feels they can learn nothing from others
From: @CovTelEd: No. It's a fool who sits in a plane and tries to tell the pilot how to fly it.
and with that, he proved my point and i wished him well. The arrogance is almost as glaring as the ignorance. No wonder we all think they're shite.
From: @CovTelEd: No. It's a fool who sits in a plane and tries to tell the pilot how to fly it.
and with that, he proved my point and i wished him well. The arrogance is almost as glaring as the ignorance. No wonder we all think they're shite.
BurbageSkyBlues
New Member
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
TheRoyalScam
Well-Known Member
funnily tho the word ARVO in finnish means "benefit, worth". :thinking about::thinking about:do not think there will be much worth or benefit for the cov fans after all these problems are sorted
PERVERSE or WHAT?
As perverse as SISU translates to 'having the guts to see something through'..........
Wrenstreetcarpark
New Member
Not that perverse surely
Seppala sees it through to the end holding on to any worth or benefit she can and bugger everyone else.
Seppala sees it through to the end holding on to any worth or benefit she can and bugger everyone else.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
It would be a fool who sits in a plane and the pilot has no idea where it is heading or how to land it !
Last edited:
You're absolutely right Burbage at least its out there for all players ,keep the focus boys ,there will be more in this,the working relationship between prospective parties would surely be untenable if the agreement were made.I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
kingharvest
New Member
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
I think its important to note ACLs role in all of this. Remember, they were the ones making noises about the Ricoh being able to survive without the club, essentially saying - we'll never reduce the rent, so go f*ck yourselves.
Diehard Si
New Member
I realise some of you feel cheated that the CT have reported this without giving credit, but for the rest of us I'm glad it's out there much more publically now. National press might start to take an interest. It will add pressure to SISU, more so than a few posts on a message board would do.
To the people that alerted them: Take pride in knowing what you did, I'm sure you did it for the benefit of CCFC and not for the attention and the praise.
Now lets all pray to Messi ( football gods ) that things work out ok.
To the people that alerted them: Take pride in knowing what you did, I'm sure you did it for the benefit of CCFC and not for the attention and the praise.
Now lets all pray to Messi ( football gods ) that things work out ok.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Whole thing for me is to get the info out there ........ just my sense of fairness says when someone profits financially that the source of info is recognised. There are plenty that have contributed and SBT should be recognised for the contribution. Just reinforces my opinion of journalism at CT and certain journalists in particular
Moving on ......... there are more important things
Moving on ......... there are more important things
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Of course not Si, but that is exactly what the Telegraph looks to be doing-and the condescending dishonesty about it is especially frustrating.
Wrenstreetcarpark
New Member
The more everyone knows the better: if it takes "people power" to get the story out there so be it, at least it is not just the PR porridge that Sisu peddle.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
This is the point that needs to get out into the open and to mutton
To add a little to this, Brendan Guilfoyle who was quoted in the Telegraph article was on the Shane O'Connor programme this morning and although covered basically what was said in the Telegraph, there was one interesting question that O'Connor asked.
O'Connor : “Are the players considered an asset?”
Guilfoyle: “The Football League would have a lot to say about that! In my work at Crystal Palace I was appointed by a hedge fund who tried to claim the proceeds of the player sales and the Football League were very unhappy and an alternative route was found, so no not really”
O'Connor: OK, so there's no precedent no say that would happen”
I don't know how similar our predicament is to that of Palace but could his comment indicate that SISU might try to cash in on Player assets prior to any liquidation proceedings?
O'Connor : “Are the players considered an asset?”
Guilfoyle: “The Football League would have a lot to say about that! In my work at Crystal Palace I was appointed by a hedge fund who tried to claim the proceeds of the player sales and the Football League were very unhappy and an alternative route was found, so no not really”
O'Connor: OK, so there's no precedent no say that would happen”
I don't know how similar our predicament is to that of Palace but could his comment indicate that SISU might try to cash in on Player assets prior to any liquidation proceedings?
OSB can you straighten one thing out for us,ARVO exists to potentially recoup for all the investments made to March,to recoup for this season to March as its concievable A.N Other has funded this season,Will recoup for all investment this season if there has been any made since March/:facepalm:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
the charge is a continuing thing wingy, ARVO have a charge over all assets at any time (now or in the future) to the full amount of the debt at the time it is called in or settled
SkyblueBri
Well-Known Member
Burbage hope you don't mind but I think we need all the attention we can get, so I sent your quote above to the Daily Mail asking them to look at the situation raised by SBT and finally printed in the CTI suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
kingharvest
New Member
I don't think people are directly defending them, but i think what some people are saying is, unless there is an alternative - what choice is there? Right now, they are the owners. We might not like it, or want them here, and we can try as much as possible to force them to sell. But unless someone is ready to buy, we're all out of options. Some people, who are yet to believe Hoffman is in a position to step in, believe that the club will be liquidated unless they get at least part ownership of the ground.
For some, they can't accept that - and don't want us to start again, and they are also willing to forgive SISU, should appropriate measures be put in place by the council that ensure the sustainability/growth of the football club by SISU.
No need to call em cunts!
smouch1975
Well-Known Member
Great work OSB
This does not look good :-(
This does not look good :-(
smouch1975
Well-Known Member
No, there is no need for anybody to speak like that. You are correct.
Can you please cite me any, just one, experience you have had where a council have forced the hand of a conglomerate? Just one. Please
kingharvest
New Member
It does happen more often than you think. But probably not on this scale. The council, after all, are a local authority - and local authorities have people inside them with very big ego's. Sometimes these ego's just run away with themselves and they can make it bloody difficult for major multi-nationals to operate.
However, i understand the point you're making. In situations like this you actually need people to leave their ego's at the door and use their brains to come to a solution. If that means the council need to stand firm and put measures in place to manage the relationship with SISU, then lets just pray that they've got the stomach for it.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
questions - which of course our "friends at CT" will have thought of because they are certain they know what they are doing.....
If the debt is from ARVO per TF what debt does he mean ? What is going in now or all of it from day 1? Were ARVO always the creditor because the audited accounts make no mention of them up to 2010? Transparency ?
What was the purpose of Sconset who apparently own the shares in the club..... what debt are they owed ? Do they still own us ?
Have SISU and ARVO had previous relationships in other companies (the answer is yes and just a google away .... but apparently according to Mr Reid there is no further evidence)
Why is it that currently the charge that SBS&L had dated March 2011 still appears to exist over all the assets of CCFC Holdings ? Can both SBS&L and ARVO have a first charge over the same assets ?
Funding requirement nearly 3m in close season - well yes that would make sense if annual costs were between 9 and 12m .... but what is the annual funding requirement ? that will put us way over £40m in debt come start of season surely ? What has happened so that the cost savings have made no difference ?
Does the charge by ARVO seperate the assets of the club from its liabilities ? why and what purpose? (- effectively yes it does and wards off any other creditors from taking action against the club )
Why didnt Mr Mutton know of the ARVO charge surely when entering discussions you find out as much as you can about the other side ?
where has the £40m gone ? do they mean the money put into CCFC or the money put in SBS&L ?
What happened to the prozone money (7m) ? has it been used as an inter company loan to CCFC or paid out elsewhere? If so to who?
just a few that came to mind........... reporting what we already know is not enough ..... dig and then dig some more
If the debt is from ARVO per TF what debt does he mean ? What is going in now or all of it from day 1? Were ARVO always the creditor because the audited accounts make no mention of them up to 2010? Transparency ?
What was the purpose of Sconset who apparently own the shares in the club..... what debt are they owed ? Do they still own us ?
Have SISU and ARVO had previous relationships in other companies (the answer is yes and just a google away .... but apparently according to Mr Reid there is no further evidence)
Why is it that currently the charge that SBS&L had dated March 2011 still appears to exist over all the assets of CCFC Holdings ? Can both SBS&L and ARVO have a first charge over the same assets ?
Funding requirement nearly 3m in close season - well yes that would make sense if annual costs were between 9 and 12m .... but what is the annual funding requirement ? that will put us way over £40m in debt come start of season surely ? What has happened so that the cost savings have made no difference ?
Does the charge by ARVO seperate the assets of the club from its liabilities ? why and what purpose? (- effectively yes it does and wards off any other creditors from taking action against the club )
Why didnt Mr Mutton know of the ARVO charge surely when entering discussions you find out as much as you can about the other side ?
where has the £40m gone ? do they mean the money put into CCFC or the money put in SBS&L ?
What happened to the prozone money (7m) ? has it been used as an inter company loan to CCFC or paid out elsewhere? If so to who?
just a few that came to mind........... reporting what we already know is not enough ..... dig and then dig some more
Last edited:
cloughie
Well-Known Member
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
I have emailed John Mutton with the above points posted by BurbageSkyblues and this is his reply
Hi Barry,
thanks very much for your views which are along the same lines as mine. I have already instructed my officers to employ the best legal brains possible, and should any deals be done, which I am not at all convinced about, then I am determined that public assets will be protected. I am more worried about the future of the football club as it seems that they are still not prepared to invest money in that side of things..
Best wishes,
John
Otis
Well-Known Member
Well what a surprise.
Yet we still have some on here who think we will be paying for players coming in and have a reasonable budget.
To me it all seems to point to freebies only and only those on low wages. Going to be very, very hard for us to compete at the right end of the table for sure.
Yet we still have some on here who think we will be paying for players coming in and have a reasonable budget.
To me it all seems to point to freebies only and only those on low wages. Going to be very, very hard for us to compete at the right end of the table for sure.
TalkSkyBlue
New Member
If Platt doesn't sign guess this will indicate that only players the club are capable of signing are mid to bottom league 2 or non league:-(
BurbageSkyBlues
New Member
Not at all Bri- the more hacks we can get interested, the more should be unearthed.
I can think of one more: Are we still not paying interests on the loans? If so, how long will that continue? If not, how much is being paid?
(Or simply: What are the terms of all the loans given to the club).
I can actually think of another one: How much are the club paying the board and the directors?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
All very amusing in a weird way
Kinda glad it is all out there, unfortunately says a lot about the telegraph the way it has happened.
If they have already been working on it for a long time could somebody inform me what exactly evidence wise they have unearthed other than what OSB has already said? No didnt think so.
OSB how long did it take you to find out the same info? CET have been working on it for a long-time so they are very incompetent or someone is telling porkies. My guess OSB is lying he works for the CET and put the story on here early under the pseudonym OSB for a cheap bit of glory. Always knew you were a fake
Gut instinct tells me Andy Turner read it thought bloody hell this is way over my head and to be fair to him he pretty much admitted this as he tried to recruit BSB's help. Then he asked TF got fobbed off released TF story everybody is happy. He is a sports journo its not his thing..
Then they realised we were not going way. That Reid bloke asked an expert he said word for word what OSB said then they did a 2 page spread. Then are hostile to anyone exposing them as frauds.
However, its out there it is on a 2 page spread. We now have the council getting backing from some of the fans for their stance. We may get the backing of Higgs/ ACL (whoever) and finally the Telegraph have had the guts to do a bad story on SISU.
It shows to me the the fans can make a difference. The Telegraph are starting to realise what we actually think and are starting to realise we are their customer not SISU.
Kinda glad it is all out there, unfortunately says a lot about the telegraph the way it has happened.
If they have already been working on it for a long time could somebody inform me what exactly evidence wise they have unearthed other than what OSB has already said? No didnt think so.
OSB how long did it take you to find out the same info? CET have been working on it for a long-time so they are very incompetent or someone is telling porkies. My guess OSB is lying he works for the CET and put the story on here early under the pseudonym OSB for a cheap bit of glory. Always knew you were a fake
Gut instinct tells me Andy Turner read it thought bloody hell this is way over my head and to be fair to him he pretty much admitted this as he tried to recruit BSB's help. Then he asked TF got fobbed off released TF story everybody is happy. He is a sports journo its not his thing..
Then they realised we were not going way. That Reid bloke asked an expert he said word for word what OSB said then they did a 2 page spread. Then are hostile to anyone exposing them as frauds.
However, its out there it is on a 2 page spread. We now have the council getting backing from some of the fans for their stance. We may get the backing of Higgs/ ACL (whoever) and finally the Telegraph have had the guts to do a bad story on SISU.
It shows to me the the fans can make a difference. The Telegraph are starting to realise what we actually think and are starting to realise we are their customer not SISU.
Last edited:
