Something not right (4 Viewers)

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

The two things are not mutually exclusive.

Sorry, you've lost me.

There is a contract in place.

It can be varied by agreement between the parties.

Offers have been made by one side or the other - none of these have been accepted by the other party.

Therefore the original contract remains in place and all offers/final offers etc have no legal status.

 

---

[PIPSQUEEK]

If they are wiping off 32 million what is happening with the other 28 - 38 million of dept ( 70 million ) shitsu claim.

On another note Who are Coventry City , Are they in admin or Holdings can some one tell me cause you cant have 2 companys running COVENTRY CITY F.C and the football league should be looking at third party ownership . :facepalm:

 

[skybluesam66]

This is actually very interesting

what it does show- based on the % in the £, is that SISus offer through Otium was around £20m

That means, they have put a price on their value of the club

if PH4 had bid higher than £20m he would have bought Limited

There is negotiation to be done

ie half the stadium for £10m CCFc for £15m

packaged club for £25m

 

[Deleted member 5849]

packaged club for £25m

Frankly, would you buy half a stadium company and a slightly shitty football team for that much? (and SISU are renowned for not compromising when they get into this mode, so £30mil may indeed be a more likely figure).

I can't see any sane reason to do so, or any opportunity that comes from that, can you?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Frankly, would you buy half a stadium company and a slightly shitty football team for that much? (and SISU are renowned for not compromising when they get into this mode, so £30mil may indeed be a more likely figure).

I can't see any sane reason to do so, or any opportunity that comes from that, can you?

Ha, good one.

 

[ArchieLittle]

Didnt appleton say the creditors would be paid in full which is why he accepted the SISU bid?
How is it the best deal for the creditors when Haskell said he'd made a generous offer for SISUs debt and SISU will just wipe the debt clean? As a creditor SISU get nothing? Surely even if Haskell was offering just 1p per pound its a better deal for the debt?

It was Fisher who said it ACL would be paid in full
"We have put forward proposals to the administrator which would see all creditors at the date of the administration paid in full, including ACL."

 

[Jack Griffin]

£30M, same number TF quotes to build a stadium.. is that the price?

Trouble is no one is going to pay that much.

 

[oldskyblue58]

OSB-how do SISU justify to their investors the need to put in tens of millions of pounds to build a football stadium on top of all that has gone in?

I have no idea BSB ........... SISU appear to be the only ones that think the figures in doing so stack up

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

OSB-how do SISU justify to their investors the need to put in tens of millions of pounds to build a football stadium on top of all that has gone in?

Always assuming there really is a plan to build a stadium, rather than just a PR campaign to put pressure on ACL!

 

[stupot07]

I have no idea BSB ........... SISU appear to be the only ones that think the figures in doing so stack up

OSB, what happens if ACL refuse CVA? Can the court force them?

 

[Snozz_is_god]

SISU aren't going to build a stadium, it's all spin.

There are after one thing and that is the RICOH and they want it on the cheap.

It's a game of chess they are playing, in the hope ACL go under.

 

[oldskyblue58]

OSB, what happens if ACL refuse CVA? Can the court force them?

I would have thought a court has the power to impose a solution but it would involve further time in court arguing it.

ACL in a difficult place - if they reject it then they will be portrayed as as anti CCFC and putting the club at risk of liquidation. If they accept it then they take a large financial loss and the club moves away from the city (until such time as ACL is weakened enough for SISU to try muscle way back or the supposed new stadium built).

Will that financial pressure be enough to put ACL at risk though? CCFC is probably now less than 10% of its income can any of that 10% be made up in any way ? Are their alternatives to CCFC that put a hole in the reduced footfall ? - need to find say 225,000 more visitors to compensate for the loss of CCFC footfall. So if ACL believe they can do that then they could accept the CVA, stop paying out legals etc and move on, that might make things difficult for SISU instead

Also ACL will be keen to have the directors actions investigated which happens after CVA agreed. That might lead to to ACL claims against directors and shadow directors. Plus I would guess they are also taking action against the guarantors of the escrow account. As always the decisions are never clear or easy

ACL options
accept the CVA, take the £600k, move on
accept CVA take the £600k and do some deal with SISU for club to be there (actually think this wont happen)
reject the CVA and administrator puts club in to liquidation - ACL get the blame
reject the CVA but deal is imposed by court and club gets further penalty - ACL get the blame

personally i would go with the first option - go with an immediate future without CCFC but always leave the door open to a possible return in a season or two (due to having to get usage from the stadium bowl the club might have to share its use of the stadium with other events in an interim return period until they can commit to a new long term lease)

 

[BrisbaneBronco]

I would have thought a court has the power to impose a solution but it would involve further time in court arguing it.

ACL in a difficult place - if they reject it then they will be portrayed as as anti CCFC and putting the club at risk of liquidation. If they accept it then they take a large financial loss and the club moves away from the city (until such time as ACL is weakened enough for SISU to try muscle way back or the supposed new stadium built).

Will that financial pressure be enough to put ACL at risk though? CCFC is probably now less than 10% of its income can any of that 10% be made up in any way ? Are their alternatives to CCFC that put a hole in the reduced footfall ? - need to find say 225,000 more visitors to compensate for the loss of CCFC footfall. So if ACL believe they can do that then they could accept the CVA, stop paying out legals etc and move on, that might make things difficult for SISU instead

Also ACL will be keen to have the directors actions investigated which happens after CVA agreed. That might lead to to ACL claims against directors and shadow directors. Plus I would guess they are also taking action against the guarantors of the escrow account. As always the decisions are never clear or easy

ACL options
accept the CVA, take the £600k, move on
accept CVA take the £600k and do some deal with SISU for club to be there (actually think this wont happen)
reject the CVA and administrator puts club in to liquidation - ACL get the blame
reject the CVA but deal is imposed by court and club gets further penalty - ACL get the blame

personally i would go with the first option - go with an immediate future without CCFC but always leave the door open to a possible return in a season or two (due to having to get usage from the stadium bowl the club might have to share its use of the stadium with other events in an interim return period until they can commit to a new long term lease)

Is the 3rd option of putting the club in liquidation the whole club as in no more CCFC or just Limited?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Always assuming there really is a plan to build a stadium, rather than just a PR campaign to put pressure on ACL!

Am I giving them too much credit (or not enough)?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sisu-agrees-write-32m-debt-4872430

Offer of 1.5m accepted!!!

I understand that other parties offered more than 1.5m for Ccfc ltd. how has otium won the bid??

Uh ..............

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Guilfoyle said that Otium bid the most, so how serious we're the other bidders? Not very perhaps.

Given that Otium as a SISU company have the ability to just wipe off Ltd's debt rather than actually pay any of it, the other bidders never had a chance. SISU have been planning for this for over a year now.

 

[StevieM]

ACL have said all along that they can survive without CCFC.
I would think that if the 23 home games plus associated cup games per season which potentially tie up Saturdays could have far more lucrative events staged (conferencing and exhibitions) if you can exclude the rent-which they weren't getting paid anyway?
One of my neighbours works for ACL and she claims that they don't make much cash from home games per se, around £20,000.
She did tell us of a story where by Fisher was berating an ACL staff member and became quite threatening towards this person at which point a senior member of the ACL staff had him around the throat telling him to "try picking on someone his own size".
Fishers response once released was that the ACL were going to be out of business and that they (the staff) would all be out of work.
So my neighbours opinion of him is that he is nothing more than an obnoxiuos bully.
Perhaps thats why he has his big hard dog with him at all times and also could go towards explaining why he can't negotiate with ACL?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

I'm aware of that, as are most people.

But surely, the other bidders bid more than 1.5m, but it wouldn't appear so because Otium bid the most (according to Guilfoyle) so...

You have to cast your mind back to what was on offer.

A "non-trading subsidiary with only property assets" - the property asset being the lease that SISU were trying to extract themselves from.

The only other potential asset was the GS which CCFC Holdings were claiming beneficial ownership of.

This was a carefully constructed administration designed to produce a single end result, by effectively locking out all other interested parties.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm aware of that, as are most people.

But surely, the other bidders bid more than 1.5m, but it wouldn't appear so because Otium bid the most (according to Guilfoyle) so...

I'm sure you have plenty of evidence to back up this sweeping statement, well?

Evidence to back up what?

 

[ccfcway]

wouldnt worry, sisu will have it all sorted before the season starts....

:facepalm:

 

[Noggin]

I'm aware of that, as are most people.

But surely, the other bidders bid more than 1.5m, but it wouldn't appear so because Otium bid the most (according to Guilfoyle) so...

I'm sure you have plenty of evidence to back up this sweeping statement, well?

You are making it sound like sisu submited an envolope with 1.5mill written in it and so that means none of the other bidders envolopes contained a number over 1.5mill. Thats not what is going to have happened at all.

If you buy limited you would have debts of £70million, so offering £1 would cost you £70mill and £1. So really the bids would have been saying what the bidders would give to the creditors.

So Otium could have offered around 26% this is a bid of £18million if they actually paid it out, but instead the other companies have just written the debt off so they are only paying 1.5mill.

If someone else had offered the same 26%, the sisu companies and holdings wouldn't have written debt off so it would have cost the buyer the full £18 mill. So even if someone had offered say £5million which appears on the face of it to be far higher than 1.5mill Otium are paying actually the £5mill bid is nearly 4 times to low to win the bid.

This is the reason no one other than a sisu company had any hope of buying limited without bidding £20million and the club isn't worth that even as a whole and this is just limited, someone could have bid £20 million and got limited only for sisu to claim benefital ownership of the share in court and win giveing them the £20mill for the sale and losing nothing.

 

[Noggin]

'That SISU have been planning this for at least a year'.

The Arvo charge, moving assets around, stopping paying the rent a year ago to start to distress ACL to get them on the cheap all suggest very strongly this has been a plan since then.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

'SISU have been planning for this for over a year now.'

Noggin's just written out my answer for me. Why did you say 'We are all aware of that' to that quote if you doubted it?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

That doesn't mean this was a coherent plan, it could be a product of circumstances they found themselves in.

Not sure why you would transfer the trade out of one limited company into another unless it was part of a plan.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Not sure why you would transfer the trade out of one limited company into another unless it was part of a plan.

I didn't say it weren't a plan, just I don't think it was planned as far back as 1 year ago, I think the plan/strategy has change due to changes of the situation.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That doesn't mean this was a coherent plan, it could be a product of circumstances they found themselves in.

Plan A: Buy average Championship club, inject a few million, get promoted, sell on for profit.

Plan B: Withhold funding and force business to become lean, sell on for reduced profit.

Plan C: Withhold more funding, force business to become relegated, reduce operating costs, sell on at a loss.

Plan D: Continue withholding funding, withhold all money from stadium management company to force it to go under to acquire stadium on cheap, sell on at profit.

Plan E: Put own business into administration to actually give stadium management some money, but move business away from stadium to hopefully fulfill Plan D, sell on at profit.

We'll soon be out of letters.

 

[Noggin]

That doesn't mean this was a coherent plan, it could be a product of circumstances they found themselves in.

This obviously isn't plan A but the ARVO charge and the asset moving etc suggest this was a contingency plan. Those were all done well before they found themselves in this situation.

 

[wingy]

No, where you have quoted me was regarding Otium and SISU writing debt off etc. not the master plan.

Why Not??.......:thinking about:

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I didn't say it weren't a plan, just I don't think it was planned as far back as 1 year ago, I think the plan/strategy has change due to changes of the situation.

It happened around the same time that their own incompetence secured relegation to League 1 and they realised that they could use the different FFP rules in that division to use the terms of a lease as an excuse to start a vendetta against ACL. Their back-up option was to use the debenture to trump any attempt by ACL to reclaim the resulting arrears-as TF said at the time, 'It's just one SISU company looking after the interests of another SISU company'.

 

[wingy]

It happened around the same time that their own incompetence secured relegation to League 1 and they realised that they could use the different FFP rules in that division to use the terms of a lease as an excuse to start a vendetta against ACL. Their back-up option was to use the debenture to trump any attempt by ACL to reclaim the resulting arrears-as TF said at the time, 'It's just one SISU company looking after the interests of another SISU company'.

the setting up of Otium along with the swathing reduction In squad ,coupled allegedly TF lurking in the Shadows some months before joining the board suggest this formed right there.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

the setting up of Otium along with the swathing reduction In squad ,coupled allegedly TF lurking in the Shadows some months before joining the board suggest this formed right there.

Make no mistake they aren't idiots in terms of how they conduct these operations, they're just idiots in terms of being guided by their own hubris.

 

[SkyBlueSwiss]

I'm aware of that, as are most people.

But surely, the other bidders bid more than 1.5m, but it wouldn't appear so because Otium bid the most (according to Guilfoyle) so...

I'm sure you have plenty of evidence to back up this sweeping statement, well?

Taylor,
the 1.5 million was cash as I understand it. The rest of the SISU bid was writing of tens of millions of intercompany debt, which when added to the small amount of actual cash involved in the bid, was far more in total than any sensible person would pay for a more-or-less worthless football club with a bunch of mostly useless players and no stadium.
So to say that the other bidders could not have been serious if they did not outbid the 1.5 million is being very naïve indeed.

EDIT: Sorry, see others answered this already