appleton fires back (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter covcity4life
- Start date
Voice_of_Reason
Well-Known Member
Even worse !!!
T
true sky blue
Guest
your so hilarious. :facepalm: nontwatleague
You're rather comical yourself, Perry Mason.
There isn't an unknown value, you are correct with your guess of a years rent.
I personally don't think that is enough at all especially when they are only getting 26% of that. It makes a complete mockery of Appleton saying he took the offer that provided the best deal for the unsecured creditors. The other buyers would have continued in the Ricoh so even an offer of 1p in the pound would have been massively more advantageous to the unsecured creditors (ie ACL), one of a number of very dubious decisions from Appleton but this is the one that really kills the football club.
Ok, then I assume we now know the extent of the offer and the important content of the CVA.
You say: 1p in the pound would have been massively more advantageous to the unsecured creditors
What is Mr. Appeltons priority here? To achieve the best deal for the secured or the unsecured creditors?
skybluehugh
New Member
I was going to write the same thing but couldn't be bothered to responded to the twat
magic82ball
New Member
Hadn't thought of that argument but your spot on!
skybluehugh
New Member
But what assets? ltd doesn't have any of I recall correctly
I don't think the offer is completely in the public domain but the telegraph had seen the offer and wrote an article about it, I think it was 25.9p in the pound and the ammount the administrator said ACL were owed + 1 years rent for compensation x .259.
Regarding your second point sure, we all expected Appleton to chose a SISU related company to do best by the secured connected creditors however he told us his reasons for chosing Otium was that it provided the best deal for the unsecured unconnected creditors and that simply isn't true.
"It was the bid which gave the greatest return to the unsecured, non-connected creditors of CCFC Limited by a considerable margin," To you sir I say BOLLOCKS! I'm positive it was the biggest percentage in the pound but he knows full well that is a million miles away from the full story.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
The right to claim the golden share and probably the right to claim the tax rebate.
From the op article: -
We have sold the right, title and interest of the various assets within Limited having made extensive enquiries into those assets. This has been carried out within a time-frame which will allow the football club to meet its obligations under the rules of the Football League and Football Association.
And from 27 June
"Otium has purchased the right and title to certain assets possessed in CCFC Limited, including the shares in the Football League and the Football Association," added Appleton.
"Obviously, one of the key points now is to determine where the club plays its football next season, but that is a matter for the purchasers and the Football League.q
We don't know the other offers, but if Otiums offer really was the one that paid the biggest percentage, then it surely offered the greatest return.
But it's semantics and I know what you mean ... it may not have been the best overall deal for ACL.
Then lets go a step further. Let's say another offer was at the amount of £5m - which I think would be really OTT for an outside bidder not being sure he would get the Golden Share and even if he did then had to buy the players contracts out of Holdings. That offer would not be the best offer for the secured connected creditors, so even such a bid would not have won.
grego_gee
New Member
I believe the admin process is essentially an auction that goes to the highest bidder. Otium in this case. If they have included one years compo in their bid thats what ACL will get. There is no discussion about what the compo should have been. Had a higher bidder included 3yrs compo that would have been the higher bid and would have succeeded.
Now the highest bid has been selected the other bids are dead the is no chance of reverting to one of those or increasing one of those.
ACL have a straight choice of accepting what the chosen preffered bid includes or rejecting it.
If they reject it, they get nothing, CCFCLtd is liquidated (NOT the club) but the club gets a 15 pt deduction.
imp:
Astute
Well-Known Member
Recently we were said to be debt free by Timmy. Suddenly we were heavily in debt. Then Timmy says all unsecured debts would be paid 100%. Was that also untrue?
These sudden debts found by SISU were just a paper chase. They will not be paying a penny of cash to themselves, but it looks a good headline to people not in the know. They know someone would have needed to bid 30m.......maybe much more to even be on a par to a bid of about £600,000 cash. It is all a big con. Even more legal threats from SISU to try to keep everyone quiet. The FL must be shitting themselves more than anyone else. They don't want to risk being sued by SISU. SISU can't take legal action whilst in charge of the club easily, but if the FL refused them the Golden share they would be able to. But if our club were to go under the FL would have a lot to answer to. They said we could play so far away from home as we don't have anywhere to play. They either see that the SISU offer was not a proper one and tell them where to go or risk a massive backlash. Would they dare take on the house of commons? Would they dare take on fans from all clubs?
It is common knowledge amongst football fans that we don't have anywhere to play other than Northampton. I was talking to a Leeds fan yesterday. He had been hearing about a player called Cyrus that his club could be interested in. I told him my version of what is going on. He just laughed. Saw him again today. He had been on the net last night looking for info. He said he couldn't believe what he had read. We are going to have fans from all clubs behind us now the truth is coming out. One comment made me smile though. 'How come you have fans looking for excuses for them w@nkers killing your club? If it was happening to Leeds everyone would be behind getting them out of our club'
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
grego the club will get a 15point deduction either way acl go. Because ccfc ltd will still be liquidated to dump the lease !!!!
sure, while I was always going to have a problem with Otium being considered the prefered bidder I can certainly see a strong argument for him having to chose them. My problem here is with his honesty, he's been deliberately misleading and now I can't trust him. I can no longer rely on anything he says at face value and while I'm sure he is acting within the letter of the law it's alot harder to trust he is acting in the spirit of it than it would have been before.
I believe the admin process is essentially an auction that goes to the highest bidder. Otium in this case. If they have included one years compo in their bid thats what ACL will get. There is no discussion about what the compo should have been. Had a higher bidder included 3yrs compo that would have been the higher bid and would have succeeded.
Now the highest bid has been selected the other bids are dead the is no chance of reverting to one of those or increasing one of those.
ACL have a straight choice of accepting what the chosen preffered bid includes or rejecting it.
If they reject it, they get nothing, CCFCLtd is liquidated (NOT the club) but the club gets a 15 pt deduction.
all of the other bids would have played at the Ricoh that puts them more than an order of magnitude higher than 1 year rent compensation.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Wrong they will only liquidate when the transfer to holdings, which the F A have sanctioned, takes place. Minus 15 does not occur unless the CVA not agreed.
The club will ONLY get a points penalty if ACL rejects the CVA.
If ACL signs the CVA they agree to tear up the lease.
jesus-wept
New Member
Grendel, Godiva, Grego_Gee Do you think the CVA should be signed ?
I hope it will be signed. I don't want to start the season on -15 points and with no new players.
But it's luckily not my decision ... the directors of ACL have to decide what will best promote success for ACL. That's their duty. They have the information to make that decision - none of us mortals have that.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Sorry I'm still confused from your other posts some days ago, I hope you can clear it up here.
You never answered my question
James Smith said:
jesus-wept
New Member
What about ACL exercising their 28 "cooling off" period pushing this beyond the Bristol game ? As for having no players, apart from the central defender aspect it is much the same squad we finished with last season when we didn't have a fit Leon Clarke
I am not sure they can push it - I think they have to make their decision known on the creditors meeting. I think the cooling off period start after that.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I believe the admin process is essentially an auction that goes to the highest bidder. Otium in this case. If they have included one years compo in their bid thats what ACL will get. There is no discussion about what the compo should have been. Had a higher bidder included 3yrs compo that would have been the higher bid and would have succeeded.
Now the highest bid has been selected the other bids are dead the is no chance of reverting to one of those or increasing one of those.
ACL have a straight choice of accepting what the chosen preffered bid includes or rejecting it.
If they reject it, they get nothing, CCFCLtd is liquidated (NOT the club) but the club gets a 15 pt deduction.
In that case surely Otium would be the lowest value bid as everyone apart from SISU would continue playing at the Rioch so over the course of the lease ACL would receive millions more than they will get from Otium.
I said - I don't want to start the season with no NEW players. We need replacements for the CB's as well as McSheff, Bell and Jennings.
Other than that I think we should be able to do well.
jesus-wept
New Member
Can't see that, why have a cooling off period then ? You are massively in the minority, you may think you are not because there are others on here like minded to you and it may seem there is a split but there ain't I would say 90% of fans support the MPs and the ones leading the fight, which I think will intensify after Monday
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Given that we were told the only reason the original winding up order was raised by ACL was to protect shareholder interests if they did not sign if that motive would then become debatable.
There's a definition on Cooling Off Period on wiki - not entirely related I think, but gives a general idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooling-off_period
I have absolutely no idea if I am in line with the majority or not.
I am not a follower and never have been. My parants brought me up to be independent. 'The majority is not always right. The history books are full of mass hysteria cases where the majority certainly wasn't right' they told me over and over.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Is this why you always fight for the underdog? Which just happens to be SISU this time :facepalm:
I was taught right from wrong. It is right to know SISU are wrong for us.
SkyBlueBlood
Member
Has to be pretty high in the top 5 faces you would love to punch, not quite Fisher but very close
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf he's always been on SISU's side as long as I can remember, even when that was the majority position.
What's wrong in fighting for the underdog?
But, no I don't always fight for the underdog - and I certainly don't fight for sisu, they can do that themself I am sure.
Hmm - right from wrong.
What's right for one person is wrong for the next. Usually it's the winner who decide what's officially right and what's officially wrong. The winner write the laws and the history books.
I prefer the way Abraham Lincoln put it:
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time"
SISU are still fooling some people.