ACL on CWR after 9am this morning (14 Viewers)

[dongonzalos]

So in short: He is either stupid or a criminel? And a stooge on top of that.

I am sorry, but it's when you are that disrespectful your judgement gets clouded.
Ask yourself this: What would you feel if there was an investigation and nothing major was found and in the proces the club had missed out on a few good players in the transfer window and even started at -15 pts. All for nothing?

I know what you are saying Godiva
However it that happens SISU can ram it down the throat of anyone who questions them.

Without it however this will just keep rumbling on and on.

It will not go away especially if we do go to Northampton

However I think ACL will accept the CVA

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Second - if assets really have been moved around and fraud committed, then I think the club will be sent directly into the abyss. How will the FA/FL respond

Wouldn't the primary focus be on the directors and auditors involved? Direct and shadow?

 

[Godiva]

You're spot on with this comment. However SISU want to dress things up there seems to be a case to answer as to how CCFC Ltd lost it's trading status and assets without there being word from the Company.

BDO are silent because this is potentially huge for them as their ability to properly audit is supposed to protect creditors etc. from any wrongdoing. It's a very public case and however big they are there is a danger that this could seriously affect their business.

If the auditors were going to sign the outstanding accounts they would have done so. I suspect the reason accounts are not being filed is because auditor's have refused to sign them off. How the Football League can approve the transfer to owners that can't file their accounts is beyond belief.

You are building a scenario to fit your own conspiracy theory.

Here's mine:
I think the last set of accounts were not signed by sisu as the budget didn't balance and didn't provide a strategy for a future upside. They wouldn't sign unless the rent were reduced to a realistic level. On that basis the accounts cannot be filed until we are out of administration without the burden of the lease.

BDO are silent as they are obliged not to reveal any sensitive information about any of their clients unless asked in a court of law.

 

[Godiva]

OK, let me ask you something.. do you think the movement of assets needs investigating given the concerns that have been raised and if not why do you think the situation is satisfactory?

It really would be NICE to know ... and my suggestion would have been to ask the club to have one member (with professionel background in accounting/auditing) of the Trust to go through the books with Steve Brookfield.
But that would as a minimum require the Trust to come back to their own constitution and start working with the club.

 

[Jack Griffin]

It really would be NICE to know ... and my suggestion would have been to ask the club to have one member (with professionel background in accounting/auditing) of the Trust to go through the books with Steve Brookfield.
But that would as a minimum require the Trust to come back to their own constitution and start working with the club.

Is that a joke? The only way the true could possibly come out is through the courts & you know it.

 

[Godiva]

Is that a joke? The only way the true could possibly come out is through the courts & you know it.

You don't trust the Trust?
What if the person going through the books with Brookfield was OSB? Do you think he is unable to spot illegalities or sense if something was hidden from him?

 

[fernandopartridge]

You don't trust the Trust?
What if the person going through the books with Brookfield was OSB? Do you think he is unable to spot illegalities or sense if something was hidden from him?

Indeed - considering the court would only make a judgement based on clear evidence - why would any analysis have to be through the courts?

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

You are building a scenario to fit your own conspiracy theory.

Here's mine:
I think the last set of accounts were not signed by sisu as the budget didn't balance and didn't provide a strategy for a future upside. They wouldn't sign unless the rent were reduced to a realistic level. On that basis the accounts cannot be filed until we are out of administration without the burden of the lease.

BDO are silent as they are obliged not to reveal any sensitive information about any of their clients unless asked in a court of law.

Godiva,
Just a couple of points...surely coming out of administration does not break the lease so that burden continues until either an agreement is reached with ACL or CCFC Ltd is liquidated?
Secondly...Sisu are continuing to fund the football team and all of the related costs and have obviously indicated that they intend to continue to do so for at least the next three, possibly five years. Isn't that an indication of long term future planning and so indicative that they feel the organisation has a positive future? If so no reason to delay the accounts.
Finally BDO would not be breaking any commercial confidence in saying whether or not they have completed a satisfactory audit, that would get rid of some of the questions hanging around.

 

[Godiva]

Godiva,
Just a couple of points...surely coming out of administration does not break the lease so that burden continues until either an agreement is reached with ACL or CCFC Ltd is liquidated?

As I understand it Otium have only bought the assets and left the lease in Limited. Limited will be liquidated. The CVA most likely (I haven't seen the proposal) have a clause that ACL accept the lease is not transferred and stay in Limited, which will be liquidated.
'Coming out of administration' is seen by the eyes of FL - that happens once the CVA is signed ... or even if not signed ... and the GS is transferred to Otium.

Secondly...Sisu are continuing to fund the football team and all of the related costs and have obviously indicated that they intend to continue to do so for at least the next three, possibly five years. Isn't that an indication of long term future planning and so indicative that they feel the organisation has a positive future? If so no reason to delay the accounts.

The current long term strategy is the work of the current board. On the back of the fiasco's of first Ranson/Hoffman/Elliott and subsequently Dulieu/Igwe, I take it sisu have been very clear in demanding a sustainable future if they were to keep funding the club. So on that basis Fisher/Seppala went to the council with the proposal to buy the ACL mortgage and discharge it as well as buying the Higgs shares. It was probably paramount to the plan that Yorkshire Bank felt ACL were in distress and the mortgage in danger ... thus the rent strike and no accounts from ccfc.

I think it is very clear that they set up the rent strike on purpose with the intend to get the mortgage for as little as possible before they took over Higgs shares. No dout that is morally questionable, but I am not sure it is punishable by law.

Finally BDO would not be breaking any commercial confidence in saying whether or not they have completed a satisfactory audit, that would get rid of some of the questions hanging around.

BDO have already stated that ... on the accounts they have signed!

 

[shropshirecov]

Rubbish, man. They simply wanted a tenant that paid their contracted rent FFS!

The club can't afford it, man.
The people who signed up for were idiots, as were the people who took over.
ACL takes revenues that the football club creates. It's nothing short of a disgrace.
Keep shouting about the contract all you want, bottom line is that contract was killing the club

 

[Grendel]

The club can't afford it, man.
The people who signed up for were idiots, as were the people who took over.
ACL takes revenues that the football club creates. It's nothing short of a disgrace.
Keep shouting about the contract all you want, bottom line is that contract was killing the club

A sensible post which if posted on any other forum up and down the land would receive universal concurrence. On here.....well.

 

[skybluesam66]

A sensible post which if posted on any other forum up and down the land would receive universal concurrence. On here.....well.

with owners who did not do everything within their powers to alienate the fans, then maybe

 

[blueflint]

Last set of accounts dates before the present board.


no they don't fisher signed the last set of accounts very late i admit

 

[blueflint]

The club can't afford it, man.
The people who signed up for were idiots, as were the people who took over.
ACL takes revenues that the football club creates. It's nothing short of a disgrace.
Keep shouting about the contract all you want, bottom line is that contract was killing the club

shite m8 SISU were after the ricoh on the cheap they failed. the club sold the rights to income streams they could buy them back. they illegally withheld rent they are the only ones at blame here the council ACL could of helped a bit more earlier but a massive drop in rent was offered and refused end of.

 

[SkyBlueCharlie]

As I understand it Otium have only bought the assets and left the lease in Limited. Limited will be liquidated. The CVA most likely (I haven't seen the proposal) have a clause that ACL accept the lease is not transferred and stay in Limited, which will be liquidated.
'Coming out of administration' is seen by the eyes of FL - that happens once the CVA is signed ... or even if not signed ... and the GS is transferred to Otium.

I'm not sure that I agree with your premise about 'coming out of administration' being just the remit of the FL but generally I agree with you that's the way it will probably go.

The current long term strategy is the work of the current board. On the back of the fiasco's of first Ranson/Hoffman/Elliott and subsequently Dulieu/Igwe, I take it sisu have been very clear in demanding a sustainable future if they were to keep funding the club. So on that basis Fisher/Seppala went to the council with the proposal to buy the ACL mortgage and discharge it as well as buying the Higgs shares. It was probably paramount to the plan that Yorkshire Bank felt ACL were in distress and the mortgage in danger ... thus the rent strike and no accounts from ccfc.

This is really about the past not about the current outstanding accounts. They have failed, so far at least, in their attempt to distress ACL but have carried on funding the company(s) so they obviously believe there is a future for the organisation. from there it would have been quite simple to say "we will fund the operation for a further 12 months" as they did before, that would have allowed the accounts to be signed off and so no transfer embargo. It would not have prevented them continuing with the rent strike etc. or the later administration process. I cannot see the link between trying to persuade the Yorkshire Bank that ACL was distressed and not signing off the CCFC accounts....Ltd or Holdings.

I think it is very clear that they set up the rent strike on purpose with the intend to get the mortgage for as little as possible before they took over Higgs shares. No dout that is morally questionable, but I am not sure it is punishable by law.

It is an 'offence' in civil law...it's called breach of contract.


BDO have already stated that ... on the accounts they have signed!

Again you are talking about the past accounts, I'm referring to the current outstanding accounts...it would be acceptable for BDO to state whether or not they have completed the audit particularly as I assume (hope) that this information has been passed to the Administrator.

 

[ccfcway]

The club can't afford it, man.
The people who signed up for were idiots, as were the people who took over.
ACL takes revenues that the football club creates. It's nothing short of a disgrace.
Keep shouting about the contract all you want, bottom line is that contract was killing the club

how can they afford the ntfc rent then ?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

The club can't afford it, man.
The people who signed up for were idiots, as were the people who took over.
ACL takes revenues that the football club creates. It's nothing short of a disgrace.
Keep shouting about the contract all you want, bottom line is that contract was killing the club

Yet they can afford to pay the rent at Northampton.

Yet they can afford to cut gates from last year's circa 10.5k to between 3k and 5k (I think that was TF's estimate).

Yet, apparently they can afford to subsidise ticket prices and transport (or at least, so it is presumed), to achieve these attendances.

Something here doesn't add up.

 

[oldskyblue58]

The accounts

Firstly if you listen to what TF has said a while back in respect of the audit it is clear that the auditors have yet to do the audit. TF said that once out of admin it would take 10 days to do the audit ...... so I doubt that BDO are holding on to any opinion right now because I doubt they have done the work

In order to form an opinion they would need to see that the club (a) has a lease to play some where (b) financial plans that are properly funded (c) the end of administration process

I think thats as far as the conspiracy theory needs to go

TF has said the financials are a mess ..... but does he mean the way transactions were done in the records or does he mean the accounts were wrong? As usual it is not clear. Couple that with a Finance Director who cant possibly say if the accounts are wrong or right and you have to think it was all about deflecting attention whilst they used the time to settle things elsewhere (eg FL)

Think when looking at anything SISU related it is wise to step a pace back and look at things. If your focus is on one area you can bet something important is happening elsewhere.

 

[dongonzalos]

Yet they can afford to pay the rent at Northampton.

Yet they can afford to cut gates from last year's circa 10.5k to between 3k and 5k (I think that was TF's estimate).

Yet, apparently they can afford to subsidise ticket prices and transport (or at least, so it is presumed), to achieve these attendances.

Something here doesn't add up.

The plan doesn't add up it is completely economically unviable

 

[dongonzalos]

OSB
Have you spent anytime looking at what you would consider to be the economics of
Renting from Northampton for 5 years at 3k attendances.
Whilst buying land and paying for loans to build a new stadium.
In order to get access to F and B revenues.
Then as they have always admitted sell the club for a profit over the debt you have already incurred plus the added debt when the club is at the height of the business cycle.

 

[James Smith]

As I've said before the original rent at the Ricoh was far too high and I think everyone on here accepts that don't they? A break even of 22000 attendance isn't workable when our gates were far lower than that consistently. Now in a normal situation the tenant would approach the landlord or managing agent and try and negotiate a cheaper rent. The landlord would consider this and reach a decision, if this was acceptable to the tenant they would accept and if it wasn't they'd negotiate an early exit from the agreement.

What doesn't normally happen is that the tenant refuses to pay without negotiation and doesn't get kicked out , the landlord doesn't normally let them stay for a year rent free (the kick them out period at my flat is two months unpaid rent)*. The landlord doesn't then normally make offers to the delinquent tenant and half owners of the headlease offer to sell to them, despite the tenant having walked away from negotiations before.

Very little about this is normal

*there was of course the escrow

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

OSB
Have you spent anytime looking at what you would consider to be the economics of
Renting from Northampton for 5 years at 3k attendances.
Whilst buying land and paying for loans to build a new stadium.
In order to get access to F and B revenues.
Then as they have always admitted sell the club for a profit over the debt you have already incurred plus the added debt when the club is at the height of the business cycle.

23 x 3000 x £25 (allowed for Timmy Pi factor) = £69,000 x 25 (I'm getting there) = £1,725,000. On top of that £676.50 from the Paint Brush trophy and £3,462 from a tiny cup run. Sponsorship brings in another £5m (paper only transaction, which we owe back with interest) from SEPPALA APPLES (eat healthy campaigners). Outgoings £23,000 to Northampton ball boys, £46,000 to Northampton Pizza hut staff (doubling up as stewards) and £11,000 a week on players wages (one third of which is made up of pocket money, due to age of players). sorry, what was the question again????? (I know it's serious stuff really, but we all know it doesn't make sense - i'm edging ever c;loser to the theory that we're being used as one of their failing businesses against which to offset taxes owed on profitable ventures):blue:

 

[dongonzalos]

Tbh I don't know how that offsetting loses works

 

[hutch1972]

23 x 3000 x £25 (allowed for Timmy Pi factor) = £69,000 x 25 (I'm getting there) = £1,725,000. On top of that £676.50 from the Paint Brush trophy and £3,462 from a tiny cup run. Sponsorship brings in another £5m (paper only transaction, which we owe back with interest) from SEPPALA APPLES (eat healthy campaigners). Outgoings £23,000 to Northampton ball boys, £46,000 to Northampton Pizza hut staff (doubling up as stewards) and £11,000 a week on players wages (one third of which is made up of pocket money, due to age of players). sorry, what was the question again????? (I know it's serious stuff really, but we all know it doesn't make sense - i'm edging ever c;loser to the theory that we're being used as one of their failing businesses against which to offset taxes owed on profitable ventures):blue:

Theory, you can bet your arse on it !!

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Theory, you can bet your arse on it !!

Never bet on the arse, play some lovely stuff, but never put it in the net (except for against us in the Cup)!

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Tbh I don't know how that offsetting loses works

Hi mate - SISUopolos (Firm A) make £50M . Cov City lose £50m (on paper through TFs dodgy accounting). 2 firms (part of the same overall SISU empire) have broken even between them. So, they've made no profit and owe nowt to Taxman. Smoke and mirrors, begorrah. (Oh,and lots of that £50M loss has gone on management fees to guess who?) :blue:

 

[dongonzalos]

Hi mate - SISUopolos (Firm A) make £50M . Cov City lose £50m (on paper through TFs dodgy accounting). 2 firms (part of the same overall SISU empire) have broken even between them. So, they've made no profit and owe nowt to Taxman. Smoke and mirrors, begorrah. (Oh,and lots of that £50M loss has gone on management fees to guess who?) :blue:

Cheers
I get it now.

 

[RPHunt]

Hi mate - SISUopolos (Firm A) make £50M . Cov City lose £50m (on paper through TFs dodgy accounting). 2 firms (part of the same overall SISU empire) have broken even between them. So, they've made no profit and owe nowt to Taxman. Smoke and mirrors, begorrah. (Oh,and lots of that £50M loss has gone on management fees to guess who?) :blue:

It's a good theory Harry, but the problem is that there isn't a company in the SISU "empire" that actually makes any money.

Smoke and mirrors I agree with, but only to hide the fact that they are skint.

 

[Delboycov]

Last term we lost at least 10 points in the start of the season and was further deducted 10 points towards the end. We still was some way above the relegation zone And we still have the backbone of the squad: Murphy, Baker, Moussa, Clarke. We won't get relegated!

A bit of deja vu going on here Godiva! Do you remember what happened the last time you said the words "We won't get relegated!"....With your track record for predictions mate I make it a racing certainty we will now!

 

[Godiva]

A bit of deja vu going on here Godiva! Do you remember what happened the last time you said the words "We won't get relegated!"....With your track record for predictions mate I make it a racing certainty we will now!

I remember, and we did indeed get relegated. I jinxed it - it was all my fault.
And here I go again, well statistically I should get this one right.
Just to test my luck I tossed a coin 100 times predicting Heads every time. Result was Tail in 92 times, 8 times the coin was lost under the sofa and the dog wouldn't let me have it. I am certain it was heads all those times.

 

[duffer]

So what are you REALLY saying?
You want to avoid the fate of the club being killed off by restricted FFP budget.
You believe that will happen if we move to sixfields (btw you cannot know it will be 'at least' five years).
So to avoid all of this you want an investigation to see if any proof of fraud can be found.
You therefor ask ACL to not sign the CVA and ensure we start the new season on -15 points.

First - won't that push us in the direction you want to avoid?
Second - if assets really have been moved around and fraud committed, then I think the club will be sent directly into the abyss. How will the FA/FL respond?
Third - You can't know for sure if our FFP budget will be hurt severely by moving to sixfields for a number of years. The club will need funding in the interim, but with the threat of hostile takeover gone there's no need to keep building on the debt wall. Funding can come as equity injection - and that counts as turnover in the FFP calculation. If more is needed they can convert some of the debts to equity.
Sisu haven't said they will use that instrument, but that is not the same as they won't do it.

Actually, I think it's a lot simpler than that.

If wrongdoing is found, then SISU's claim to be fit & proper owners is shot down in flames. Presumably CCFC Ltd is shown to be the club, and the other parties interested in purchasing the club get their chance at a straightforward deal.

We're finally clear of owners that have done little except load the club with £60m debts, and propose to take us out of the city.

Yes there's a risk of further penalties, most obviously the fifteen points. But beyond that it's not clear to me what else the FL could or would do. It is clear what SISU's plan is though, and it's an absolute disaster - and they haven't been running the club badly because of the threat of a 'hostile' takeover. They've simply been running the club badly.

So again, to my mind there's a risk worth taking here. Vote down the CVA, and let's find out what's really going on.

The fact that SISU won't even talk to ACL without the CVA being signed suggests to me that they're getting a bit worried about things now.

 

[Godiva]

Actually, I think it's a lot simpler than that.

If wrongdoing is found, then SISU's claim to be fit & proper owners is shot down in flames. Presumably CCFC Ltd is shown to be the club, and the other parties interested in purchasing the club get their chance at a straightforward deal.

We're finally clear of owners that have done little except load the club with £60m debts, and propose to take us out of the city.

Yes there's a risk of further penalties, most obviously the fifteen points. But beyond that it's not clear to me what else the FL could or would do. It is clear what SISU's plan is though, and it's an absolute disaster - and they haven't been running the club badly because of the threat of a 'hostile' takeover. They've simply been running the club badly.

So again, to my mind there's a risk worth taking here. Vote down the CVA, and let's find out what's really going on.

The fact that SISU won't even talk to ACL without the CVA being signed suggests to me that they're getting a bit worried about things now.

If the owners are still the funds - I mean owning the shares in the club - then the owners are not up for a F&P test.
That leaves the directors ... i.e. Fisher and he can be replaced.
I don't think the F&P can lead to new owners, only more delays.

 

[duffer]

If the owners are still the funds - I mean owning the shares in the club - then the owners are not up for a F&P test.
That leaves the directors ... i.e. Fisher and he can be replaced.
I don't think the F&P can lead to new owners, only more delays.

The problem is that there's little clarity on who the ultimate owners of the funds are are, but it's clear that JS has been working as a shadow director and that SISU have been the controlling company in all of this. I can't see JS stepping down from SISU.

All things are possible, but I find it hard to believe that the FL or FA would let SISU continue on those lines. And there's still the fact that it might clear the path for a new owner to pick us up out of admin with some or all of the mystery debts gone, and some real clarity over what's in CCFC Ltd.

 

[Dhinsa's_Millions]

JS : Throw me the Idol, I throw you the whip!!!

 

[Godiva]

The problem is that there's little clarity on who the ultimate owners of the funds are are, but it's clear that JS has been working as a shadow director and that SISU have been the controlling company in all of this. I can't see JS stepping down from SISU.

All things are possible, but I find it hard to believe that the FL or FA would let SISU continue on those lines. And there's still the fact that it might clear the path for a new owner to pick us up out of admin with some or all of the mystery debts gone, and some real clarity over what's in CCFC Ltd.

I don't think there's anything in the FA/FL's rules and regulations that can be used to fail the F&P certifications. If there were, I think the pressure from the council, MP and even MEP, ACL and the fans would have achieved that by now.