Have sisu paid the rent yet (4 Viewers)

[derbyskyblue]

from last month. I only ask as this months rent must be coming up soon. Assuming that doesn't get paid either, its going to get very interesting then.
I feel sure things are going to come to a head very soon.

 

---

[Sisu_Cockroaches]

To be fair i am leaning towards supporting the council on this. At the end of the day this football club is the property of the city of coventry. The council will not do a deal with these locusts who are here to earn a quick buck. It doesn't seem the council respect or like this sisu outfit and they are not budging an inch. In the long term the rent needs sorting out but the council are only going to negotiate with people they think have the clubs best interests in mind.

 

[We'll_live_and_die]

I think the council straight up need to say CCFC under it's current stewardship need to pay the agreed amount, but under new Stewardship we would be happy to review this.

If the council are happy with the new owners they could offer a 50% (or whatever is reasonable) reduction.

 

[Otis]

Or at least give them Clubcard points.

 

[Sisu_Cockroaches]

I think the council straight up need to say CCFC under it's current stewardship need to pay the agreed amount, but under new Stewardship we would be happy to review this.

If the council are happy with the new owners they could offer a 50% (or whatever is reasonable) reduction.

I agree with you, the council though wont do this as it would give any potential new owners a head start on any negotiations. I have a sneaky feeling the council have club clubs best interests at heart and will play the long game with this. The football club is fundamental to the interests of the city, we have along history and the city should be proud of that. For me its not just about football its about the city as a whole we have had a lot of setbacks recently. I feel the football club wont get going until the city does, there are no jobs here for people the city is in decline just like the football club and its no coincidence.

 

[Danceswithhorses]

from last month. I only ask as this months rent must be coming up soon. Assuming that doesn't get paid either, its going to get very interesting then.
I feel sure things are going to come to a head very soon.

I have a feeling that they will not pay this month's rent either, take the easiest route to shed the rest of CCFC debts (whether admin or liquidation), then blame the council

 

[egastap]

Been here in Canada too long to remember the British law on this, but if the rent is not paid for three consecutive months can the City Council go the courts to put CCFC into administration as they are now an unpaid creditor?

Anyone know?

 

[Sisu_Cockroaches]

Been here in Canada too long to remember the British law on this, but if the rent is not paid for three consecutive months can the City Council go the courts to put CCFC into administration as they are now an unpaid creditor?

Anyone know?

They wouldn't do that.

 

[egastap]

They wouldn't do that.

Why not? If they (the Council) don't want to do business with them on the ownership of the ground, why would they not use this tool (if it is available to them as my question was originally) as a way of ridding all of us with SISU? Sure, they would lose 300 grand, but i think it is a great way to rid the City of this scourge of a hedge fund company.

 

[Paxman II]

I think the council straight up need to say CCFC under it's current stewardship need to pay the agreed amount, but under new Stewardship we would be happy to review this.

If the council are happy with the new owners they could offer a 50% (or whatever is reasonable) reduction.

Don't be silly. Rules for one and rules for another? Favourtism? What are you thinking?
The present tenants are obliged to pay the rent. The present tenants are obligated to ask for a review. The Council are obligated to have a review. During any such period rent can be with held.
The council I believe should match the agreement to the tenants ability to pay and clearly the tenants abilities have been curtailed (due to relegation) and if the council play hard ball then they can always seek another tenant? Arh that would be a problem though...they could always ask the Villa?
Whether it's SISU or whoever really has no bearing what so ever. A sitting tenant has already passed muster so the council need to behave in a more reasonable manner. They are beginning to sound like they don't want a football club?! It would be a disaster for this City not to have one and very costly to the City. I'm not a fan of concils and the numpties running them....probably lucky if we can find a few A levels among them.

 

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

The question of rent is nothing to do with the Council. They can have a view, just as everyone else can have a view. The rent is agreed between ACL and CCFC. It is up to them to come to agreement or blows or whatever.

 

[Paxman II]

Wrenstreetcarpark. Yes I agree. Though the council are the freeholders and will have an input. ACL don't own the stadium. They operate the stadium for the Council.

 

[coundonskyblue]

Wrenstreetcarpark. Yes I agree. Though the council are the freeholders and will have an input. ACL don't own the stadium. They operate the stadium for the Council.

ACL own the lease, effectively they do own the stadium.

If you go and buy a Flat your not the Freeholder, but you still own the Flat.

 

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

Sorry: they don't operate the stadium FOR the Council. ACL is an independent company.

 

[egastap]

Wrenstreetcarpark. Yes I agree. Though the council are the freeholders and will have an input. ACL don't own the stadium. They operate the stadium for the Council.

OK.....doesn't matter who owns the lease/freehold....ACL or Council. Either one of them which holds the ownership rights could take CCFC to court and get them into administration as an unpaid creditor. That was my question! Does anyone know the Brit Law on this?

 

[Tank Top]

It looks like we're heading for a Mexican stand off'
If the rent is defaulted on again, it looks as if Sisu are determined to push the council into a corner, which will force them to pursue the arrears through the financial courts, this may be the opportunity SiSu are looking for, to declare Bankruptcy, and go into liquidation, or Administration, blaming, "the Council" for the demise of the Football club.
I hope the Council, stand their ground, the council tax payers of Coventry, should not be blackmailed by these Locusts of the financial world.

 

[Stoppercurtis]

The Council has budgets like everyone else. If the City don't pay their bill then like anyone else the Council will put them into administration. We have a simular situation in the Town I live in and I'm afraid the Council have moved for Admin after countless promisses of payment. Who can blame them?

Stopper

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

People seem to think CCC is made of money-it isn't. It runs at a loss and is accountable to 300,000 people who rely on it to provide services. If SISU play hardball with rent, they are cheating the whole city.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Can we please be clear on a few things

1)The lease is with ACL not the council - the council do not and did not set the rent for CCFC nor do they receive any of the rent that CCFC might pay. It is ACL that would have to take any action for recovery of unpaid rent

2)ACL has a long lease from the Council which they paid for. The council recieve rates from ACL

3)The council have 1 seat on the Board of directors of 7 (may have changed so if anyone can confirm I would be grateful) the council do not control day to day decisions at the Ricoh. Taking on tenants and rentals is the normal business of ACL

4)The shareholders can not withdraw any income from ACL for two reasons (a) there is an undertaking to repay the mortgage that ACL owe (13 years + to go) before any distribution to shareholders (b) any distributions would currently be illegal due to the accumulated losses at ACL incurred in the early years.

5) buying, acquiring, receiving as gift some of the shares will not gain CCFC any income whatsoever (see (4) above)

6) CCFC have no money .......... that is the point ....... that is why we are in a financial mess......... there is no prospect of any great increase in money available, we cant even buy players ...... how the hell do we purchase for millions the stadium or some of the shares???!!!!

7) ACL, The council, the Charity ......... do not want to see CCFC fail or disappear ..... it is in no ones interest for that to happen. They are not seeking to work against CCFC and its supporters. But they all have responsibilities that extend to far more than a near bankrupt, poorly managed, some what arrogant and deluded football club. The Ricoh is now much more than the home ground of CCFC and there is a responsibility to protect the interests of more than just CCFC

8) Until CCFC can prove they are really getting to grips with their own issues not only now but for years to come then this whole process can not move forward. The rent is a matter for discussion but it is not the reason CCFC are in a mess and even if they had the stadium for nothing (and i am not saying they should - would be unfair on ACL and its other tenants) the football club would still be in a big mess financially.


and finally, following previous financial problems at CCFC there was established a rental deposit against which ACL could draw for any unpaid rent. Rental deposits are not unusual. Assuming that the rent is currently in default and unpaid, what happened to this rental deposit. Not sure how much it was but 2010 CCFC Holdings shows £500k as restricted funds so perhaps this is it. If ACL cannot draw the current rent down from this account does that imply it has already been used up and this is not the first rental default at CCFC?

 

[PWKH]

The Council and the Charity each have two nominated directors on the Board of ACL. The Chairman and Finance Director are independent as is the Chief Exec who is also a Board member.

 

[Bill Glazier]

Hi all, I've not been taking careful note of the club's predicament for a few years but my interest goes back a long way as my great grandfather was 'Cocky' Heath, the first captain of Singers FC back in the 1880's and I've been following City since 1966, so I do care!

So I'm coming into this with a fresh mind as it were.

Why Sisu got involved I've no idea - presumably Ray Ranson sweet-talked Joy Seppala into something she didn't fully understand back in '07. I'm loathe to defend a hedge fund but if it wasn't Sisu we'd have to find someone else to fund losses of £500,000 a month. It used to be Jeff Robinson and I don't remember him getting much thanks either. He eventually swallowed terrible losses when Sisu took over. Any takers out there?

At the moment there seems to be no trust between Sisu and the other stakeholders so Sisu can't get what they really want - a share in the ground. No surprise there really, as hedge funds aren't noted for their charity, and the previous regime's scandalous lifting of a covenant that gifted Highfield Road to the club in perpetuity, on the specific understanding that it should never be sold, is still fresh in everyone's mind. (There's a juicy story there to be uncovered there by any investigative journalist who could be bothered I'm sure)

But we are where we are, and any solution clearly must involve re-uinification of the club with its ground. It seems to me that, if a handy billionaire isn't going to turn up, a grand coalition must be formed from all stakeholders and local business leaders to take over the club. It would probably include Sisu, who could dilute their ownership, accept some losses without having to crystallise all of them, and still retain some sort of hope of a profit in the future. Sisu seem to be looking for some sort of solution like this according to today's CT.

The really radical bit is that the council itself might hold a stake. For all I know that may not even be legal and there would be much complaining by uninterested council tax payers in these hard times, but they're on record as saying how important CCFC is to local business and the community so a case could be made. Some European clubs are owned this way, so the precedent exists.

Coventry City could rise again - I'm old enough to remember the Jimmy Hill miracle - but if it remains with Sisu alone I can only see administration and maybe liquidation.

 

[Stoppercurtis]

Soory I didn't know there was a thrid party involved. Do ACLhave to pay CCC what ever happens? If not then you could still end up with City going into Admin except the name on the writ will be ACL as apposed to CCC.

Stopper

 

[smouch1975]

I read here earlier that CCFC pay rent all year, as a household would. As opposed to the seasons duration only

If this is the case, is CCFC collecting the revenue from summer concerts or not?

 

[SkyBlueUkeman]

If SISU hired this guy for PR then I would be fully behind them.

 

[sky blue john]

I don't think they will go for liquidation, why would they ?
reasons assets they could sell via liquidation would be Ryton and players, Ryton is mortgaged and they wouldn't get much for the players.
The two most valuable assets they have are-
1) Going concern league one team with 10k season ticket holders.
2) Higgs share of the stadium agreement.
These would be both worthless down the liquidation route because CCFC would cease to exist and the Higgs agreement would die with the club.
I may be wrong but that is how i see it.