Indemnity Amount (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Never been quoted to my knowledge, and given the number of NDAs in place, i would be GOBSMACKED if anyone had mentioned it. It's just guesswork/made up!
hill83
Well-Known Member
When I was selling my last house the buyers lawyer wanted indemnity insurance for £200, for no record of a boiler being fitted. Ended up finding the record myself online for a fiver. The bloke was gutted.
So based on that I’ve got no idea how much it would be but I’m pretty sure it’s never been said how much it would be either.
So based on that I’ve got no idea how much it would be but I’m pretty sure it’s never been said how much it would be either.
Nick
Administrator
What you are saying is that you can bring us back to the Ricoh?
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Really good question that as id assumed it was an unlimited figure
hill83
Well-Known Member
I can neither confirm or deny.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It’s eleventy billion. FACT!
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
In the same way that you can buy indemnity insurance for that, i'm sure you could buy cover for legal charges too, but i may be wrong. You can't insure your business against fines imposed by courts for (e.g.) H&S breaches or negligence claims.
(And that, kids, is why good H&S might cost a bit, but saves a hell of a lot more!!)
Nick
Administrator
Cheers, you actually raise a good point to be on honest and taken on board
I take this as a backhand and will be piped down!
No, it hasn't been stated and nor could it be. Until the European Commission rule on the case nobody has any real idea of what the financial implications could be for any of the parties. Hence the reason Wasps want CCFC to indemnify them against any costs or impact to their business that comes their way. The man is a fool, I wouldn't waste waste time on him.
tisza
Well-Known Member
I'd be surprised if there is an exact figure as it was supposed to include costs, interest etc. So that's a figure that is constantly going to be moved upwards.
Some of the quotes out there was that they wanted an indemnity to cover all Wasps & Council's costs so again a figure that could change drastically eg Commission finds there's a case to answer then legal fees will shoot up.
Whatever it is it certainly would be well in excess of the security paid to the EFL.
Some of the quotes out there was that they wanted an indemnity to cover all Wasps & Council's costs so again a figure that could change drastically eg Commission finds there's a case to answer then legal fees will shoot up.
Whatever it is it certainly would be well in excess of the security paid to the EFL.
hill83
Well-Known Member
Cheers, you actually raise a good point to be on honest and taken on board
I take this as a backhand and will be piped down!
stupot07
Well-Known Member
He's made a number of errors there. The amount needed to be covered by the indemnity if any won't be known until after the EU investigation.
However looking at valuations Wasps paid £6.5m for ACL including the extension for the 250 lease. And the council specifically £2.7m for 50% of ACL and £1m for the extension.
They then have valued ACL/Ricoh of c£45m+.
So assuming they would also need to pay Higgs too, if found it was illegal state aid, it could be anywhere from no payment up to c£40m.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
However looking at valuations Wasps paid £6.5m for ACL including the extension for the 250 lease. And the council specifically £2.7m for 50% of ACL and £1m for the extension.
They then have valued ACL/Ricoh of c£45m+.
So assuming they would also need to pay Higgs too, if found it was illegal state aid, it could be anywhere from no payment up to c£40m.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
There is a figure being bandied about but I think it's absolute bullshit.
As Ricketts said, until the complaint is dealt with how can anyone know?
Although the person who told me also told me we would be at St.Andrews this season long before it was announced.
As Ricketts said, until the complaint is dealt with how can anyone know?
Although the person who told me also told me we would be at St.Andrews this season long before it was announced.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
What’s the figure?
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I heard 5 mil.
I don't believe that for one minute. I'll be amazed if it's not bullshit.
I'd imagine if the EC complaint is upheld the liability will be higher than that.
Nick
Administrator
Fuck it, give them Sam McCallum.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Needs a question though as if it’s £5m it’s a lot but not too bad
Originally:
It covered WASPS , any connected parties ( CCC ? ), associates and any business partners who suffered a loss or had to pay any costs / compensation etc
They also wanted cash bond held in escrow
Not sure if that has changed
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
For the indemnity? Wow ccc too?? Are ccc and wasps linked businesses?
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Which is probably why that's the figure being bandied about, suits the agenda.
Though definitely worth trying to get someone to confirm either way.
tisza
Well-Known Member
opens a can of worms. If there was money to be paid out that by Wasps could effect the value of the bond and that's a big enough sum to worry people on top of any money the Council might have to reclaim from Wasps.
GaryJones
Well-Known Member
38-24-38 Pear shaped
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Would be gobsmacked if wasps opened with a capped indemnity. I also don’t think it’s something sisu would negotiate as they would quite rightly be against any indemnity at all.
Bizzarre. Unless Wasps shit themselves and started offering a cap which wouldn’t be a good move really as severely weakens position
So basically I’ve got about as much a clue as Hill83 after boiler gate
Bizzarre. Unless Wasps shit themselves and started offering a cap which wouldn’t be a good move really as severely weakens position
So basically I’ve got about as much a clue as Hill83 after boiler gate
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
No, he's an idiot. The indemnity has indefinite in the way they phrased it
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
And the security will be repaid on a return to Coventry IIRC.
AStonesThrow
Well-Known Member
Hold on a minute, wait, this isn’t right. You can’t just take it, you have to threaten to rape his owl or something lolCheers, you actually raise a good point to be on honest and taken on board
I take this as a backhand and will be piped down!
In all seriousness, fair play for taking it on board Nick
tisza
Well-Known Member
If the Commission agree the actual value of the Ricoh was 50m (as SISU claim) against the 20 odd million the Council "sold" it for then there's your starting point.
In the Real Madrid case that is what they did (Madrid were ordered to pay the difference in value plus interest) although it was overturned by the appeal court who disagreed the valuation process. The side issue of an advantage over other businesses could be more complicated as Wasps do compete against other EU clubs (not just English ones) in cup competitions.
Happy_Martian
Well-Known Member
Cheers, you actually raise a good point to be on honest and taken on board
I take this as a backhand and will be piped down!
Nick, considering our club has so many parody accounts floating around on Twitter, why not create your own parody of your main account and call it "Sky Blues Fireside Chat" ? You can still post as the voice of SBT or you can challenge other individuals using your own voice under SBFC. Just an idea
Spurs 'City Away Kit' Kit
Well-Known Member
Any judgment is likely to be based on the difference between an independent assessment of what a fair, arms length, commercial arrangement would have been at the time Wasps purchased the shares of ACL from the council, and what was paid. Probably plus costs and potentially ‘interest’.
I don’t know what the interest calculation would be but the Financial Conduct Authority in the UK uses 8% in settlement but I imagine it would less than that and costs may well be added.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there is a process that triggered action against the council if this happened as they would have been the party that broke the law on state aid.
I don’t know what the interest calculation would be but the Financial Conduct Authority in the UK uses 8% in settlement but I imagine it would less than that and costs may well be added.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there is a process that triggered action against the council if this happened as they would have been the party that broke the law on state aid.
Ricketts
Well-Known Member
A bit less around the arse would be better.
Also, that's not pear shaped. More a 'nice pair' shape.