Why won't sisu sell? (1 Viewer)

[Astute]

So they bought CCFC because of the Ricoh? Yet upon takover showed no interest. Wasn't until they had invested a bit and realised PL was all but a fantasy, that they switched their attentions to the Ricoh. If their intention was the Ricoh from the start, why was there no rent strike, negotiations or attempt to distress ACL?

RR sold them a dream. When they realised that it wasn't as easy as they were led to believe they came up with the plan of getting the Ricoh as cheaply as they could. So RR got out. Then it all happened.

 

---

[SkyBlueZack]

Thanks. You have just reiterated what I've said. My response was to bumberclart who was insinuating SISU's purchase of the club was to develop land etc. Yet nothing in the first years of their tenure points to this. I have no problem calling a spade a spade but people making things up is tedious. I respect others opinions but explain it and give some thought process as to why you think it. Don't just throw statements out there to get people angry and wound up.

That's not aimed at you. Just explaining my frustration.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

RR sold them a dream. When they realised that it wasn't as easy as they were led to believe they came up with the plan of getting the Ricoh as cheaply as they could. So RR got out. Then it all happened.

So, do you agree with bumberclarts comment that I highlighted then?

 

[Astute]

Seems like they had to change plans when they failed at option 1 ( back to the prem then flip the club to the highest bidder )

So option 2 was to play hardball & squeeze a long lease on the Ricoh out of CCC/ACL. That failed too.

Option 3 is a series of JRs. Still ongoing but doesn't look that great for them.

Who the hell knows what option 4 is? It's not like any of us saw 2 or 3 coming, so it's hard to guess. But it may or may not involve selling the club to someone who cares.

Option 2 was to devalue the arena. It is the only thing that they planned that worked.

 

[rd45]

Option 2 was to devalue the arena. It is the only thing that they planned that worked.

Probably worked a bit too well, being as it let Wasps in.

 

[Astute]

So, do you agree with bumberclarts comment that I highlighted then?

I agree with most of what you have said. But they did see another opportunity once they gave up on the RR dream. It wasn't their first choice though.

 

[Astute]

Probably worked a bit too well, being as it let Wasps in.

Wasps were willing to take the loan on. SISU weren't. Which was what the unencumbered crap was all about.

 

[Liquid Gold]

RR sold them a dream. When they realised that it wasn't as easy as they were led to believe they came up with the plan of getting the Ricoh as cheaply as they could. So RR got out. Then it all happened.

I'll never forgive Ranson for bringing these bastards to the club but some seem to hold him in high regard simply because he fell out with sisu.

 

[oucho]

Wasps were willing to take the loan on. SISU weren't. Which was what the unencumbered crap was all about.

Exactly. The whole JR2 is as much of a fiasco as JR 1, in fact I find it hard to see which one is more ludicrous / spurious. As much as some may dislike it, SISU have no grounds for complaint. Not that this stops them for using the legal action to try to get the council into offering them money to sod off, of course.

 

[6 Generations]

Think Greg Clarke clarified it quite well. They pass a test which is not about their aptitude at running a football club, it's more along the lines of are they criminals? Fraudsters?

It's clear as day if the test was about being good at running a club, a lot of owners throughout the leagues would be gone.

Think Greg Clarke clarified it quite well. They pass a test which is not about their aptitude at running a football club, it's more along the lines of are they criminals? Fraudsters?

It's clear as day if the test was about being good at running a club, a lot of owners throughout the leagues would be gone.

Hi Zack,

Thanks for your response to my post.

It seems, however that you have missed the point of my question, and by your own response, justified that question.

Neither you, I or my least favourite Leicester City fan can possibly have knowledge of any previous criminal or fraudulent acts or involvement when our owners are faceless, nameless and anonymous.

So, I ask again, how can anyone pass such a test if they remain persons unknown?

Oh! And the chap that currently does own Leeds United has got a well documented history of tax evasion in his native Italy. So clearly, it is not a requirement to have a squeaky clean history in the eyes of of The F.A. or the Football League.

Greg Clarke needs to answer my question, and not be allowed to trot out ill informed rot!

 

[Buster]

Sisu were in the mix to aquire Southampton before they were knocked back . We can assume that their motives for that atempt would be the same ambitions that they had (early doors) when they stepped in to take us for a quid .
Anybody Know if Southamptons ground at that time was a cherry ripe for asset stripping ?
Could be a look into Joy's mind.
If it wasnt it seems like she WAS sold a footballing dream

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

RR sold them a dream. When they realised that it wasn't as easy as they were led to believe they came up with the plan of getting the Ricoh as cheaply as they could. So RR got out. Then it all happened.

To this day I still feel that Ranson was made the scapegoat for SISU. Made to sit outside of the directors box and take all the s**t thrown at him. Not condoning the "Practices" he got up to with Cardiff City, and players etc, but the ongoings of Coventry City he was s**t on from a great height.

 

[Warwickhunt]

My post above says that the £60mill of debt was converted into shares, the debt does not exist.

As i said i am not a finance guy! However if the £60million of DEBT has been converted to shares then who owns those shares? cheers

 

[Godiva]

Hi Zack,

Thanks for your response to my post.

It seems, however that you have missed the point of my question, and by your own response, justified that question.

Neither you, I or my least favourite Leicester City fan can possibly have knowledge of any previous criminal or fraudulent acts or involvement when our owners are faceless, nameless and anonymous.

So, I ask again, how can anyone pass such a test if they remain persons unknown?

Oh! And the chap that currently does own Leeds United has got a well documented history of tax evasion in his native Italy. So clearly, it is not a requirement to have a squeaky clean history in the eyes of of The F.A. or the Football League.

Greg Clarke needs to answer my question, and not be allowed to trot out ill informed rot!

Sisu are not nameless, faceless or anonymous. They represent the shareholders and act on their behalf.
(We can agree that in retrospect they are not fit for purpose from the fans perspective, but that is beside the point).

What if the Trust took over the club and financed it by issuing shares for the fans to buy? How would you propose a fit & proper test of all the shareholders then?

 

[skybluebeduff]

As i said i am not a finance guy! However if the £60million of DEBT has been converted to shares then who owns those shares? cheers

SISU do, but that's all they are, shares.

 

[6 Generations]

Sisu are not nameless, faceless or anonymous. They represent the shareholders and act on their behalf.
(We can agree that in retrospect they are not fit for purpose from the fans perspective, but that is beside the point).

What if the Trust took over the club and financed it by issuing shares for the fans to buy? How would you propose a fit & proper test of all the shareholders then?

The Trust haven't taken over, so I'm not really interested in hyperthetical possible future scenarios.So that's fine Godiva, perhaps you can list the names for us of every person involved in the current ownership of our football club.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Sisu are not nameless, faceless or anonymous. They represent the shareholders and act on their behalf.
(We can agree that in retrospect they are not fit for purpose from the fans perspective, but that is beside the point).

What if the Trust took over the club and financed it by issuing shares for the fans to buy? How would you propose a fit & proper test of all the shareholders then?

Not anymore they're not,(Thanks to the extremely bad publicity) and the more that brings out into the open the better.

 

[shy_tall_knight]

To this day I still feel that Ranson was made the scapegoat for SISU. Made to sit outside of the directors box and take all the s**t thrown at him. Not condoning the "Practices" he got up to with Cardiff City, and players etc, but the ongoings of Coventry City he was s**t on from a great height.

Didn't RR walk with all his initial investment repaid by SISU !!!

RR sold them a pup and got out and has left us with SISU

 

[stupot07]

Didn't RR walk with all his initial investment repaid by SISU !!!

RR sold them a pup and got out and has left us with SISU

And yet some still hail him as a hero....

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Astute]

Didn't RR walk with all his initial investment repaid by SISU !!!

RR sold them a pup and got out and has left us with SISU

He sold them a dream. Untold riches if we got back to the Prem. They got cold feet when they realised how much it would cost with no guarantee. So he left.

The rest is down to guesswork. Did he bullshit them on how much it would cost or make out it would be easy?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Didn't RR walk with all his initial investment repaid by SISU !!!

RR sold them a pup and got out and has left us with SISU

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/ray-ranson-quit-coventry-city-3048174

 

[shy_tall_knight]

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/ray-ranson-quit-coventry-city-3048174

Cheers so he lost £1m+,

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Cheers so he lost £1m+,

Oh no my friend... There's more
http://www.coventrycity-mad.co.uk/n...d_city_from_administration_682922/index.shtml

 

[Godiva]

The Trust haven't taken over, so I'm not really interested in hyperthetical possible future scenarios.So that's fine Godiva, perhaps you can list the names for us of every person involved in the current ownership of our football club.

I cannot. And if the Trust managed the club owned by the fans I couldn't either. That's my point. The 'fit & proper ownership' regulation sounds very good on paper, but will never work. It's nothing to do with our owners (present or future) - clubs all over the country have fans who believe their owners are unfit, but looking to the FL for help is futile and waste of time and energy.

 

[Rodders1]

there a £60 million hole in their accounts that keeps getting washed around and i think that whilst they still have CCFC its not written off but as soon as they sell then they have to do something about it, Not a Finance guy so only summizing OSB would know

This is the point. They haven't taken the hit on CCFC yet. The group companies have taken anything of the £60m debt. As it was converted into equity. Still on the balance sheet. They say they sell then the hit is realised.

Having said that, their investors must get regular reports into their investments meaning this should be no surprise to them that they'll take a massive hit.

 

[6 Generations]

Sisu are not nameless, faceless or anonymous. They represent the shareholders and act on their behalf.
(We can agree that in retrospect they are not fit for purpose from the fans perspective, but that is beside the point).

What if the Trust took over the club and financed it by issuing shares for the fans to buy? How would you propose a fit & proper test of all the shareholders then?

I cannot. And if the Trust managed the club owned by the fans I couldn't either. That's my point. The 'fit & proper ownership' regulation sounds very good on paper, but will never work. It's nothing to do with our owners (present or future) - clubs all over the country have fans who believe their owners are unfit, but looking to the FL for help is futile and waste of time and energy.

But without knowledge or awareness of an individual, a 'Fit and Proper Persons' test cannot apply to a person or indeed have been passed as a test when that person is anonymous.

My argument is that the owners of our football club could not have passed it, so therefore, how can the Football League or FA deem them fit?

I genuinely feel for supporters of clubs that are under the ownership of incompetent people, but without exception, those clubs have names and faces of their owners.

Ours is a unique case and I along with many of our supporters, would like an answer as to who owns my football club.

 

[skybluetony176]

Probably worked a bit too well, being as it let Wasps in.

It wasn't the devaluing that let Wasps in. It was the lack of acting upon it that let them in. I.e. SISU not placing a bid leaving Wasps the only option.

 

[Hobo]

So, as far as we know, regardless of the various token figure heads that have been presented before us and have proceeded badly run our football club,
Nobody knows who actually owns us.

The test is known as 'The Fit and Proper Persons Test'.

Is there not a legal argument that our largely anonymous custodians, by their very anonymity, could not ever have passed 'The Fit and Proper Persons Test'?

This alone renders them unfit for purpose, doesn't it?

Or am I missing something?

That has been my argument. The FL refused to answer it or ignored it in response to my letter.

 

[6 Generations]

That has been my argument. The FL refused to answer it or ignored it in response to my letter.

So, presumably there is a legal contention to the awarding of the Golden Share to people who the football authorities have absolutely no clue as to their identity.

Surely this is an avenue worth pursuing.

 

[mrtrench]

of course it is to do with offsetting tax on investments, we are a important part of Sisu we have saved them millions. That money(tax saving) goes abroad to there tax free coffers. IMO

I have some investments you can buy off me that will save you millions in exactly the same way*. Let me know if you're interested.


* It works like this: You give me money; I never pay it back. You go ahead and realise all the benefits from the agreement exactly how you imagine SISU do.

 

[6 Generations]

Who owns Coventry City football club and if we don't know, who has the Golden Share?

Appleton lost it once.

 

[chiefdave]

Isn't there an exemption when you fall below a certain %

For example with fan owned clubs they don't check every shareholder do they?

 

[SkyBlueZack]

It wasn't the devaluing that let Wasps in. It was the lack of acting upon it that let them in. I.e. SISU not placing a bid leaving Wasps the only option.

I personally don't think a bid would have been accepted but they should still have bid anyway. Partly to see if it increased the sale price to wasps.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

Who owns Coventry City football club and if we don't know, who has the Golden Share?

Appleton lost it once.

Is it not SISU capital or ARVO as owners? Joy Seppalla is the head of those funds? As she has control of those funds, she is considered owner? Therefore the test would be conducted on her?

 

[skybluebeduff]

This is the point. They haven't taken the hit on CCFC yet. The group companies have taken anything of the £60m debt. As it was converted into equity. Still on the balance sheet. They say they sell then the hit is realised.

Having said that, their investors must get regular reports into their investments meaning this should be no surprise to them that they'll take a massive hit.

Also these investors could of pulled out at any given time, which they haven't, because they know something we don't IMO.