Mean while back in court (2 Viewers)

[dongonzalos]

Their minds made up about what? I have no idea if it is state aid, if it is then it's purely down to the council.

Surely that's obvious?

See above, you can't think past that what others post is about making the council look good.

 

---

[Nick]

If you use your logic in a debate
It is the council's fault for everything

Maddison's sale
The move to northampton
It raining today
Traffic on the trip to Port Vale.

You spin whatever others say to suggest that their posts are soley about making the council look good.

So whatever you post is purely to make SISU look good. Let's have whatever post you make spun to suggest it is always sbout making SISU look good.

Astute is wasting his time.

If the Government end up paying out and enables SISU to move on without affecting affecting people in Coventry.

That can't be a good thing just because it actually is a good thing can it?

It's just spin to make CCC council look good!!!!

Have a word with yourself Nick.

Ermm.. I think you are struggling to read things.

Are you saying the quote I posted isnt trying make sisu look bad about the state aid? Nothing to do with Northampton.

There's no guarantee sisu will move on if they win anything.

I'm not spinning anything at all, can you point to where I've tried to blame the council for things like maddison leaving?

Is it actually a good thing if the government have to pay out?

My logic is, if it is state aid it's the councils fault. Might be too simple though, as you can see with the spin already....

 

[dongonzalos]

Ermm.. I think you are struggling to read things.

Are you saying the quote I posted isnt trying make sisu look bad about the state aid? Nothing to do with Northampton.

There's no guarantee sisu will move on if they win anything.

I'm not spinning anything at all

If SISU win and the Government pay out. Does that potentially present more options to SISU or not?

Yes

If it does without affecting the people of Coventry is that possibly a good thing?

Yes.

It the above just bloody obviously?

Yes

if someone posts it because they have just realised that is the now the possible case after the judges threw it in there. Are they posting it because they are surprised by it and it changes their opinion on what they might what as a possible outcome

yes

Are you spinning their post to suggest they are saying that to purely make the council look good

Yes.

So yes Nick you were ironically spinning my original post which was about the above. To suggest I was saying it to make the council look good out of this.

When it fact it was just as above

 

[Astute]

I'm not saying anything, I'm saying just the state aid. Just that one situation / decision.

It's like saying is the councils fault for maddison being sold...

I'm not saying why would anybody be angry with sisu at all, just why about the state aid / tax payer money if it happened.

SISU are not innocent in all of this. They kept forcing the issue using unethical methods. So now they are after recompense because their unethical methods failed. And they are after compensation off CCC. If they succeed and damages are awarded against CCC where does the money come from?

So yes I will be angry if the people who need services have cuts to pay for faceless Investors who have played a part in all of this.

 

[Sick Boy]

SISU are not innocent in all of this. They kept forcing the issue using unethical methods. So now they are after recompense because their unethical methods failed. And they are after compensation off CCC. If they succeed and damages are awarded against CCC where does the money come from?

So yes I will be angry if the people who need services have cuts to pay for faceless Investors who have played a part in all of this.

It's absurd that you claim to blame both sides yet would be angry with sisu if they were awarded compensation. Surely you should be angry that those who were elected by the members of the public have done wrong?

 

[Nick]

If SISU win and the Government pay out. Does that potentially present more options to SISU or not?

Yes

If it does without affecting the people of Coventry is that possibly a good thing?

Yes.

It the above just bloody obviously?

Yes

if someone posts it because they have just realised that is the now the possible case after the judges threw it in there. Are they posting it because they are surprised by it and it changes their opinion on what they might what as a possible outcome

yes

Are you spinning their post to suggest they are saying that to purely make the council look good

Yes.

So yes Nick you were ironically spinning my original post which was about the above. To suggest I was saying it to make the council look good out of this.

When it fact it was just as above

I said it would be spun to make sisu look bad.... Which it was wasn't it?

It wasn't a post I quoted it was a newsletter.

There is no proof anywhere that if sisu get anything they will go.

 

[Sick Boy]

I said it would be spun to make sisu look bad.... Which it was wasn't it?

It wasn't a post I quoted it was a newsletter.

There is no proof anywhere that if sisu get anything they will go.

We were told that they'd most certainly be gone if we got relegated to league 1.

 

[Nick]

SISU are not innocent in all of this. They kept forcing the issue using unethical methods. So now they are after recompense because their unethical methods failed. And they are after compensation off CCC. If they succeed and damages are awarded against CCC where does the money come from?

So yes I will be angry if the people who need services have cuts to pay for faceless Investors who have played a part in all of this.

Only the council would be to blame with the state aid surely? That was purely their decision and down to them.

Is there any proof that if money was to go from Coventry council then any services would be cut etc? Wouldn't there be a reserve or insurances.

Should we be angry with the council because of Madison going? Were they in the board room at the time making decisions like sisu were with the state aid?

 

[dongonzalos]

sisu are no angels, but a council is supposed to be above that sort of shit and held to higher standards. I want those bastards exposed in the same light as sisu have been. No doubt a majority of people will still be fine with this as Sisu end up screwed, failing to see the bigger picture that it has caused untold damage to the club.... but lets not worry we have wasps in the city now so its all good....:facepalm:

Specs how have SISU been exposed exactly?

Their emails are not on display at court?
I think the council are getting exposed as you say and evidence wise you only really get council documents disclosed, because as you say they are a public entity.

However we have not seen SISU's emails about this matter.

We have not seen the documents taken in SISU's strategy meetings about this matter.

We have not seen what SISU's media strategy was.

The council have been stripped bare.

SISU in terms of exposure unless you work for them I don't think you actually know anything in comparison to what has been exposed in relation to the council

 

[dongonzalos]

I said it would be spun to make sisu look bad.... Which it was wasn't it?

It wasn't a post I quoted it was a newsletter.

There is no proof anywhere that if sisu get anything they will go.

Is it a possibility = yes.
Is it more likely to happen if they recoup their losses = yes

Was that the point I was making = yes

Was the point I was making that if that can happen without it affecting the people of Coventry that is my preferred option = yes

Was I making that point in order to make the council look good = no

Here is a shocker for you Nick I think the council are idiots over merging with Brum. It's wrong and the way they have gone about it is very wrong. How the public of Coventry have not been allowed to vote in it is an utter disgrace. Ann Lucas has a hell of a lot to answer for on that one. In my opinion. The decision is totally political and I don't believe the people of Coventry would have voted for it if they were given a chance.
It is such an important decision we should have been allowed to vote.
The council's actions in this matter are a little short if a disgrace!

 

[dongonzalos]

We were told that they'd most certainly be gone if we got relegated to league 1.

That wouldn't be the case as they made the decisions that led us to division three.

 

[dongonzalos]

I said it would be spun to make sisu look bad.... Which it was wasn't it?

It wasn't a post I quoted it was a newsletter.

There is no proof anywhere that if sisu get anything they will go.

When I pointed out that this case just sets case law that council's cant use money in this way and that's it really.
Which is something you actually agree with. As you point out it doesn't address each sides behaviour in this sorry affair ( well actually you just said it doesn't address the council's Behaviour). However a reasonable person would want it to address both sides behaviour but it doesn't.

It soley addresses is this state aid or not. It is the first case of its kind. It will set a precedent for case law for this council and future ones in state aid.

You suggested that's just spinning it to make the council look good!!!

That for me shows how ridiculous you are getting.

 

[Nick]

When I pointed out that this case just sets case law that council's cant use money in this way and that's it really.
Which is something you actually agree with. As you point out it doesn't address each sides behaviour in this sorry affair ( well actually you just said it doesn't address the council's Behaviour). However a reasonable person would want it to address both sides behaviour but it doesn't.

It soley addresses is this state aid or not. It is the first case of its kind. It will set a precedent for case law for this council and future ones in state aid.

You suggested that's just spinning it to make the council look good!!!

That for me shows how ridiculous you are getting.

If it was border line, surely they should have got help and advice before doing it?

There is difference between trying to make them look good, and trying not to make them look bad.

So what's that got to do with the trust's email? Interesting diversion back to you.

 

[dongonzalos]

If it was border line, surely they should have got help and advice before doing it?

There is difference between trying to make them look good, and trying not to make them look bad.

So what's that got to do with the trust's email? Interesting diversion back to you.

I don't know what you are talking about regarding the trusts email? So I can't comment on that.

I am talking about you suggesting that whatever people post is spin to make the council look good.

So do you agree that if SISU win this case and the government pay out. Which doesn't directly impact on the people of Coventry. If that happens and if it puts SISU in a better position to either support the club or sell to someone who may be in a better position to help the club.

That the scenario above maybe a good thing and suggesting it maybe a good thing, isn't spinnjng to make the council look good. It's just a different way to think about things because the Government have just been dragged into this?

 

[Grendel]

The argument put forward if the council fail is stupid. They have procedures to follow and if they don't then they are to blame.

Why anyone believes sisu will actually win anything is beyond me. It's pretty clear the judgement at best (or worst) will be they used the aid improperly but only due to the actions if their main customer who directly influenced their actions by non payment of rent.

Its not going to be any more than that. There is no case to obtain damages as little seems to have changed in the argument from day one.

The council have been shown to be prepared to deceive the electorate at every turn but hey I'm sure the usual excuses will be trolled out for them.

 

[dongonzalos]

The argument put forward if the council fail is stupid. They have procedures to follow and if they don't then they are to blame.

Why anyone believes sisu will actually win anything is beyond me. It's pretty clear the judgement at best (or worst) will be they used the aid improperly but only due to the actions if their main customer who directly influenced their actions by non payment of rent.

Its not going to be any more than that. There is no case to obtain damages as little seems to have changed in the argument from day one.

The council have been shown to be prepared to deceive the electorate at every turn but hey I'm sure the usual excuses will be trolled out for them.

I agree with you, as I understand it if the claimant was found to have caused the situation that led to the public entity making an incorrect decision then damages are highly unlikely as a JR remedy.

However if SISU win the JR can they not then use that in evidence to persue separate civil action for damages, not JR remedies?

Not too sure about your last paragraph though. If the council were attempting to deceive people I don't think their primary target was us the electorate. We may be collateral damage though.

 

[Sick Boy]

That wouldn't be the case as they made the decisions that led us to division three.

You actually backed the main contributor

 

[Astute]

It's absurd that you claim to blame both sides yet would be angry with sisu if they were awarded compensation. Surely you should be angry that those who were elected by the members of the public have done wrong?

So it's absurd that I would be angry with SISU and CCC if money ends up being taken away from the people who need it and given to faceless investors?

I would be angry with SISU and CCC for the way that they have conducted matters. Just like I am now but even more so. But whatever decision that the judges make both sides are still guilty of the way things have been done. The technicality of state aid or not will not make either side innocent.

Or are you just playing at being a WUM? If so I will be delighted for SISU if they somehow get awarded money that ends up being taken away from the people who need it.

 

[Sick Boy]

So it's absurd that I would be angry with SISU and CCC if money ends up being taken away from the people who need it and given to faceless investors?

I would be angry with SISU and CCC for the way that they have conducted matters. Just like I am now but even more so. But whatever decision that the judges make both sides are still guilty of the way things have been done. The technicality of state aid or not will not make either side innocent.

Or are you just playing at being a WUM? If so I will be delighted for SISU if they somehow get awarded money that ends up being taken away from the people who need it.

So a elected council is now held up and compared to a hedge fund? Do you not believe the council should be held to higher standards than that?

Would you be angry with the council if sisu ended up having to pay compensation?

 

[Nick]

So it's absurd that I would be angry with SISU and CCC if money ends up being taken away from the people who need it and given to faceless investors?

I would be angry with SISU and CCC for the way that they have conducted matters. Just like I am now but even more so. But whatever decision that the judges make both sides are still guilty of the way things have been done. The technicality of state aid or not will not make either side innocent.

Or are you just playing at being a WUM? If so I will be delighted for SISU if they somehow get awarded money that ends up being taken away from the people who need it.

I don't think anybody is saying to be delighted for SISU, but that is solely down to CCC for their decision for the loan isn't it? Of course people will be angry at SISU for the situation as a whole, but to get outraged at SISU if the council are found to be in the wrong is a bit strange. Even the most hardcore "CCC Haters" don't get worked up at CCC when our ticket system is crap, we sell a player or something like that do they?

Then there is the question of if it will actually come from people who need it directly even if they do get millions.

There is also a difference between how a council and a dodgy hedge fund should act isn't there? Nobody is excusing SISU for being shady, but then they aren't answerable to tax payers and playing with their money are they?

 

[Jack Griffin]

So a elected council is now held up and compared to a hedge fund? Do you not believe the council should be held to higher standards than that?

Would you be angry with the council if sisu ended up having to pay compensation?

Hedge funds should be more accountable & held to higher standards, don't you agree?

 

[Nick]

Hedge funds should be more accountable & held to higher standards, don't you agree?

They are by the local media...

 

[Jack Griffin]

They are by the local media...

Obviously I meant by law you fool.

 

[Grendel]

Hedge funds should be more accountable & held to higher standards, don't you agree?

The council wouldn't agree with you - sisu were the preferred bidder.

Malta based ones are flavour of the month now.

 

[Nick]

Obviously I meant by law you fool.

But they will never be held as accountable as a council or government.

The laws would need to be stricter for private companies full stop. Then of course it depends how much scrutiny and of what. Unless it broke laws then nothing would happen would it?

For things like tax which I assume hedge funds play like Google etc I agree. Tighten it right up and scrutinize it.

 

[Hobo]

They are by the local media...

Really? When have they done an article on hedge funds?

 

[Grendel]

I don't think anybody is saying to be delighted for SISU, but that is solely down to CCC for their decision for the loan isn't it? Of course people will be angry at SISU for the situation as a whole, but to get outraged at SISU if the council are found to be in the wrong is a bit strange. Even the most hardcore "CCC Haters" don't get worked up at CCC when our ticket system is crap, we sell a player or something like that do they?

Then there is the question of if it will actually come from people who need it directly even if they do get millions.

There is also a difference between how a council and a dodgy hedge fund should act isn't there? Nobody is excusing SISU for being shady, but then they aren't answerable to tax payers and playing with their money are they?

Lucas and co will be rubbing their hands with glee when reading some of the apologist tripe on here.

Next time they close a care home or a library they can blame either Cameron or now Seppalla - not their own bungling.

Their desire to play at management companies led them to take a risk with taxpayers money to stop their sworn enemy seizing control of an asset that clearly has no value at all to said taxpayer.

But hey "both parties are to blame"

 

[Nick]

Lucas and co will be rubbing their hands with glee when reading some of the apologist tripe on here.

Next time they close a care home or a library they can blame either Cameron or now Seppalla - not their own bungling.

Their desire to play at management companies led them to take a risk with taxpayers money to stop their sworn enemy seizing control of an asset that clearly has no value at all to said taxpayer.

But hey "both parties are to blame"

They had supporters direct working with their pr company, think that's quite telling.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

But they will never be held as accountable as a council or government.

The laws would need to be stricter for private companies full stop. Then of course it depends how much scrutiny and of what. Unless it broke laws then nothing would happen would it?

For things like tax which I assume hedge funds play like Google etc I agree. Tighten it right up and scrutinize it.

Of course hedge funds play, why do you think they bank in the Caymen Islands!

 

[Nick]

Of course hedge funds play, why do you think they bank in the Caymen Islands!

That's what I mean, they can be scrutinised on that and that should be clamped down on

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

I think if you set up a business in the UK. you pay tax to the UK Government. Google, Starbucks etc somehow get away with it. Before anyone says Google pay tax, do you really think £130m is fair when they have made Billions of pounds?

 

[Nick]

I think if you set up a business in the UK. you pay tax to the UK Government. Google, Starbucks etc somehow get away with it. Before anyone says Google pay tax, do you really think £130m is fair when they have made Billions of pounds?

Totally agree, watched that documentary about the local businesses and tax etc. Might make another thread about that though

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Hedge funds should be more accountable & held to higher standards, don't you agree?

I think that goes without saying - plenty of respected journalists uncovered no end of dubious operations of them that play by the law, but the law is an ass and all that.

(as an aside, it's the private equity arm of SISU we're dealing with here of course)

Anyway, am finding this whole thread bizarre. We're talking a narrow point of law, so whoever wins doesn't let the other party off scott free. If, however, the council lose this case then it will absolutely be their fault for not following process. FWIW I fully expect them to win, as there's too much at stake for them not to have checked beforehand but... if I'm wrong, then they're utter morons for leaving an open goal.

And whatever the result, we can still bicker over the rights (not many) and wrong (many!).

 

[Astute]

So a elected council is now held up and compared to a hedge fund? Do you not believe the council should be held to higher standards than that?

Would you be angry with the council if sisu ended up having to pay compensation?

Yes I would. And who is comparing the two other than saying that they have both handled the situation wrong?

And why should I not be angry with SISU just because they are a hedge fund? Then you have a problem with the phrase 'SISU apologist' is used. Just try looking at the excuses being made for them.

 

[skybluetony176]

They are by the local media...

And is that wrong?