Acl back on cwr again (13 Viewers)

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

The lease plays a significant role and hold a value as long as the CVA is undecided. So to say ACL wanted a negotiation 'no strings attached' is false. The 'attached string' is the lease. Sisu want the current lease broken as that will remove its value from talks about a potential future at the RA - and ACL want the lease 'alive' as a bargaining chip in such talks.
If ACL really - I mean really(!) - want to negotiate 'no strings attached', then the talks can begin when they have decided on the CVA. Signed or refused.

That has to be one of the most convoluted pieces of logic I've ever seen.

Talks without pre-conditions simply means that - no pre-conditions i.e. no one has to do anything in advance of the talks.

ACL are happy to agree to this. SISU are not. We can only draw our own conclusions as to why.

 

---

[Jack Griffin]

CVA rejected means Appleton will have the golden share and control of the club through it. Club is still in administration and the offer to play at the Ricoh for free would stand and Appleton would probably accept this until agreement could be reached.

TF has said Appleton doesn't have any players to field a team.. so it will be interesting to see how that pans out when push comes to shove.

Though seems to me that the situation is the same as it was just before the last 3 games of last season & a team was fielded then.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Compass own part of the operating company IEC so I cant see them taking action against ACL. Its a joint venture now not a service provider

Ricoh - I think the deal end 2015, what happens after that I dont know. But the Ricoh does attract a lot of business events that Ricoh have direct contact with so I doubt they would sue ACl at this stage.

 

[stupot07]

CVA rejected means Appleton will have the golden share and control of the club through it. Club is still in administration and the offer to play at the Ricoh for free would stand and Appleton would probably accept this until agreement could be reached.

1) Ltd has no players.
2) Appleton has already said that he will liquidate ltd if CVA is not agreed. Otium have already purchased assets from ltd included the right to the golden share.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Compass own part of the operating company IEC so I cant see them taking action against ACL. Its a joint venture now not a service provider

Ricoh - I think the deal end 2015, what happens after that I dont know. But the Ricoh does attract a lot of business events that Ricoh have direct contact with so I doubt they would sue ACl at this stage.

Don't think there is any chance of Ricoh suing.. I'm pretty sure they'll do nothing till the renewal come up and nothing will change for 2 years & then they'll take an objective look at the situation prevailing then.

 

[Godiva]

That has to be one of the most convoluted pieces of logic I've ever seen.

Talks without pre-conditions simply means that - no pre-conditions i.e. no one has to do anything in advance of the talks.

ACL are happy to agree to this. SISU are not. We can only draw our own conclusions as to why.

Yes I agree, that's what it means. ACL want to negotiate on the platform of what is today ... before the lease is broken.
Sisu say's no, we can wait till the CVA is signed - or not. They want to negotiate on 'tomorrows' platform.

It's in ACL's interest to negotiate today - in sisu's interest to negotiate after the creditors meeting.
Put yourself in sisu's shooes - what is the better platform to negotiate on?

ACL's meeting with FL and subsequently twice asking for CWR airtime was to make sure everybody know they want to negotiate. He just didn't (avoided) mention the lease.

 

[fernandopartridge]

That has to be one of the most convoluted pieces of logic I've ever seen.

Talks without pre-conditions simply means that - no pre-conditions i.e. no one has to do anything in advance of the talks.

ACL are happy to agree to this. SISU are not. We can only draw our own conclusions as to why.

Both sides have pre conditions, ACL want talks without a CVA signed, SISU don't. It's two sides of the same coin.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

1) Ltd has no players.
2) Appleton has already said that he will liquidate ltd if CVA is not agreed. Otium have already purchased assets from ltd included the right to the golden share.

That being the case I really don't understand why there's all this faffing around. It's so bloody confusing.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Yes I agree, that's what it means. ACL want to negotiate on the platform of what is today ... before the lease is broken.
Sisu say's no, we can wait till the CVA is signed - or not. They want to negotiate on 'tomorrows' platform.

It's in ACL's interest to negotiate today - in sisu's interest to negotiate after the creditors meeting.
Put yourself in sisu's shooes - what is the better platform to negotiate on?

ACL's meeting with FL and subsequently twice asking for CWR airtime was to make sure everybody know they want to negotiate. He just didn't (avoided) mention the lease.

Let's assume we're dealing with rational people here (I accept that this may be a bit of a stretch).

ACL would benefit by having CCFC as a tenant, even if for a short period (i.e. up to 5 years) while SISU build their new ground. That would give them ample time to prepare for a post CCFC world.

SISU would benefit from playing at the Ricoh rather than at Northampton. "Even" paying the much discussed £400k rent, their net of rent revenue will, without any doubt, be significantly higher at the Ricoh.

So both sides benefit.

The lease/CVA issue will be whatever it will be. Irrespective of "wins" that particular battle, both sides will then be better off by "working together" until the new ground is built.

Hence I do not understand your logic, unless your argument is that if ACL reject the CVA, SISU will "cut off their nose to spite their face".

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Both sides have pre conditions, ACL want talks without a CVA signed, SISU don't. It's two sides of the same coin.

I'm afraid that that is nonsense.

 

[treenie01]

I think the point is that if ACL sign the CVA they are agreeing to break the lease and therefore proving that CCFC have no where to play (unless I've completely lost the plot)

 

[chiefdave]

1) Ltd has no players.
2) Appleton has already said that he will liquidate ltd if CVA is not agreed. Otium have already purchased assets from ltd included the right to the golden share.

This assumes that the football league have allowed player registrations to be transferred, either knowingly or by mistake to a company that doesn't hold the golden share. Surely that raises the question of players fielded last year being under third party ownership?

Also I wouldn't have thought you can just transfer round the golden share as you feel like. Does the share not revert back to the League upon entering admin who then allow the company they have taken it from to continue in the league until such a time as the share is either returned to that company or issued to another?

How did Appleton manage to field a team at the end of last season if Ltd didn't have any claim to the GS or the players and why did SISU not contest the points deduction if no part of the football club is in Ltd?

 

[duffer]

Both sides have pre conditions, ACL want talks without a CVA signed, SISU don't. It's two sides of the same coin.

It's not two sides of the same coin though, is it. ACL want talks without strings, right now. SISU are refusing those talks.

 

[duffer]

Yes I agree, that's what it means. ACL want to negotiate on the platform of what is today ... before the lease is broken.
Sisu say's no, we can wait till the CVA is signed - or not. They want to negotiate on 'tomorrows' platform.

It's in ACL's interest to negotiate today - in sisu's interest to negotiate after the creditors meeting.
Put yourself in sisu's shooes - what is the better platform to negotiate on?

ACL's meeting with FL and subsequently twice asking for CWR airtime was to make sure everybody know they want to negotiate. He just didn't (avoided) mention the lease.

In essence that's complicating something that's actually very simple. ACL are saying let's talk, SISU are refusing. It's impossible to spin this as anything else.

 

[Godiva]

It's not two sides of the same coin though, is it. ACL want talks without strings, right now. SISU are refusing those talks.

No matter how many times anyone quote PWKH's spin from this morning 'no strings attached' - it's still remain false. You say it yourself: Right Now!
Not when the lease is dead. That's the string.
PWKH didn't say on the radio ... maybe he is not fully open and transparant as many believes.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Oh ... where did I ever said they want nothing back???
They want to make a fortune out of their investment! They will have it all back ... and yet some!

The group debt to sisu is already frightening, but as the club add a stadium to the books and actually start making a profit from the overall operation, then debts can be exchanged to equity as the loans will 'only' keep their value while the shares will raise in value.
And when that time comes ... 5 or 6 years from now, then there will be no need for a debt-wall to fend off a potential hostile takeover. The debts will have served its purpose.

Keep this up and they'll be giving you a pay rise! Today has seen some of the most partisan posting in this board's history in favour of the transparently crooked SISU. You really should come clean.

 

[Godiva]

In essence that's complicating something that's actually very simple. ACL are saying let's talk, SISU are refusing. It's impossible to spin this as anything else.

Then ACL should have said: Ok, then let's schedule talks to begin after the creditors meeting.
It's not complicated.

 

[stupot07]

That being the case I really don't understand why there's all this faffing around. It's so bloody confusing.

You're not wrong!

 

[Grendel]

I'm afraid that that is nonsense.

If you were a company that was looking at renegotiating a lease would you seriously do that with a threat of a CVA hanging over them.

Given the money already paid out of Erscow I would assume the proposed amount is the remaining balance.

The club would be minus 15 points and still in an embargo. Yet ACL are supposed to be showing support by offering the ground no doubt at the £400,000 figure? So the club pays and ACL reject the CVA?

Come on, no business would agree to that. The offer is aost sisu-esque as was the shameless performance by PWKH this morning

ACL must thing the supporters are gullible idiots. Well..........

 

[Grendel]

Keep this up and they'll be giving you a pay rise! Today has seen some of the most partisan posting in this board's history in favour of the transparently crooked SISU. You really should come clean.

James you seemed ever so keen to highlight defemation laws yesterday - what do you think about this? To my knowledge sisu have never been convicted of a criminal offence and defemation of Godiva's character? What do you think James?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Grendel: your refusal to see the real villain in all of this - despite the overwhelming evidence before your very eyes - is frankly astonishing.

I have no idea as to what your agenda is. It can't be the health of the football club you purport to support. It's on it's knees, and going from bad to worse, yet your every stance is to support by proxy the party most culpable

 

[Snozz_is_god]

The lease is ACL only bargaining chip, even if they signed it away SISU won't necessarily talk or agree anything. ACL have to reject the CVA

 

[Godiva]

I think the point is that if ACL sign the CVA they are agreeing to break the lease and therefore proving that CCFC have no where to play (unless I've completely lost the plot)

I didn't get your point at first, but I think you are half right.
If they sign the CVA they accept the lease is broken and the club without a place to play.
On the other hand, refusing the CVA will (probably) not stop the lease from become void as the transfer of other assets to Otium will still happen.
The main point is that ACL by refusing the CVA will not participate in making the lease void and the club without a place to play.

Good point treenie!

 

[duffer]

Then ACL should have said: Ok, then let's schedule talks to begin after the creditors meeting.
It's not complicated.

It isn't complicated, you're right. ACL have offered to talk, right now. SISU have refused. It really is that simple.

How anyone can support SISU's stance on this is utterly beyond me, but there you go.

 

[stupot07]

This assumes that the football league have allowed player registrations to be transferred, either knowingly or by mistake to a company that doesn't hold the golden share. Surely that raises the question of players fielded last year being under third party ownership?

Also I wouldn't have thought you can just transfer round the golden share as you feel like. Does the share not revert back to the League upon entering admin who then allow the company they have taken it from to continue in the league until such a time as the share is either returned to that company or issued to another?

How did Appleton manage to field a team at the end of last season if Ltd didn't have any claim to the GS or the players and why did SISU not contest the points deduction if no part of the football club is in Ltd?

I have no idea, but a guess.

1) the football league did knowingly allow registrations and contracts to be in holdings. As ltd is a subsidiary of holdings it is probably not seen as third party ownership. Also the football league allowing it means they were complicit, or are at fault for letting it happen.

2) the golden share is with the FL, I'm only going by what Appleton said in the telegraph and that was that Otium bought the rights to claim the golden share. At the end of the day the football league will give it to the company that holds the players.

3) Appleton hadn't started investigating at that point so wouldn't have been fully aware of where everything was. His report was the 16th may after the season had finished.

4) sisu didn't appeal was they knew the golden share was in ltd.

The problem is Appleton has all the facts is only managing ltd, they have no players, and he can't make holdings field a side.

 

[Senior Vick from Alicante]

If you were a company that was looking at renegotiating a lease would you seriously do that with a threat of a CVA hanging over them.

Given the money already paid out of Erscow I would assume the proposed amount is the remaining balance.

The club would be minus 15 points and still in an embargo. Yet ACL are supposed to be showing support by offering the ground no doubt at the £400,000 figure? So the club pays and ACL reject the CVA?

Come on, no business would agree to that. The offer is aost sisu-esque as was the shameless performance by PWKH this morning

ACL must thing the supporters are gullible idiots. Well..........

Grendel, was it not Tim Fisher who said lets get independent mediation and both parties abide by the decision of that mediator? If SISU entered negotiations now they would have the League with a vested interest in the club as the arbitrator. I may be missing something here but if the league are mediating surely they have more of an interest in the club than ACL so it would be to SISU's advantage it would be hard for the league to be impartial, or just perhaps, knowing what has been said in the past, SISU have something to hide as they have always been open and never gone back on what they have said.

 

[PWKH]

It's a difficult one OSB, PWKH has already been on radio this week saying they will very likely reject the CVA as they want ccfc and sisu investigating, ccfc staying at the Ricoh doesn't guarantee they will sign the CVA, and likewise signing the cva doesnt guarantee that ccfc will return. If I was sisu I think I would be asking for the CVA to be signed first. ACL might counter that will requesting the judicial review be withdrawn....but technically that is not against ACL.

I was very careful in what I said: I was asked about what happens if the CVA is agreed or rejected and gave my understanding of each outcome. I did not, nor could or would suggest, hint or intimate what ACL will or will not do. The directors are under a duty to fulfil their responsibilities as directors and the legal advice is pretty clear on those duties. I can assure you that the directors will fulfil those duties.

 

[Snozz_is_god]

Godiva, it's the only string they have got, if they give that away before any talks then they are naive. SISU aren't going to agree to anything unless they make money out of it. I'm with PWKH & ACL all the way on this one, the hold the only chance we have of getting rid of SISU and even that is a long shot.

 

[shy_tall_knight]

Grendel don't refer to Sisu as a normal business, no normal business would alienate 90% of its fan base by relocating to Northampton or incur the huge losses that SISU have apparently and still want to continue operating.

Sisu bought CCFC aware of the long term lease, complain about lack of revenue funds which the club had sold the rights to previously. Why is there a CVA, why is there a judicial review all Sisu lead actions.

 

[Grendel]

Grendel: your refusal to see the real villain in all of this - despite the overwhelming evidence before your very eyes - is frankly astonishing.


I have no idea as to what your agenda is. It can't be the health of the football club you purport to support. It's on it's knees, and going from bad to worse, yet your every stance is to support by proxy the party most culpable

I support the football club. Of course sisu are culpable and as I have already posted on here the lack of interest in the consumer is bewildering and alarming.

Lets not kid ourselves though. This latest escapade was a cheap publicity stunt by ACL. They new the answer and are using the club as a political and point scoring football. If they do reject the CVA at least we know that the myth they really care about the club is exposed. I know some of my posts are shall we say of a provocative nature but today's posturing by PWKH was taking a leaf out of fishers performances. It was for dramatic effect and ill considered and has left me genuinely annoyed.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I support the football club. Of course sisu are culpable and as I have already posted on here the lack of interest in the consumer is bewildering and alarming.

Lets not kid ourselves though. This latest escapade was a cheap publicity stunt by ACL. They new the answer and are using the club as a political and point scoring football. If they do reject the CVA at least we know that the myth they really care about the club is exposed. I know some of my posts are shall we say of a provocative nature but today's posturing by PWKH was taking a leaf out of fishers performances. It was for dramatic effect and ill considered and has left me genuinely annoyed.

Have a look three posts above yours. There's your reason. What do you expect the directors to do?

What are you saying now, huh?

 

[CCFC_GT]

It costs nothing to talk and all things rightly would have been up for discussion and negotiation at the meeting.

I guess I am just a gullible idiot.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

today's posturing by PWKH was taking a leaf out of fishers performances

And that bit is alarmingly myopic. Fisher has twisted, turned, deceived and spun at every occasion.

'We are debt free'!

Feck me, how can you draw and parallels with this man FFS

 

[oldskyblue58]

Someone just told me that Vince Cable (Secretary for Business) in commons,answering question from Jim Cunningham has agreed to investigate current situation at CCFC

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

1) Ltd has no players.
2) Appleton has already said that he will liquidate ltd if CVA is not agreed. Otium have already purchased assets from ltd included the right to the golden share.

Wow, totally missed that one...how much did they pay? I didn't know that it was even "for sale"