ACL Statement (22 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

We do.

Question is, who pays for the winners... whoever they are?

Because isn't there a fair chance the costs of losing would send either of ACL or CCFC into oblivion?

And then who's about to pick up the tab for the winners?

 

---

[lordsummerisle]

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=23866 if you are using chrome I found the article didn't appear for me untill I used internet explorer. seems to be there for me now with chrome though.[/QUOTE

Thanks for that, use Firefox and didn't show!

Very interesting about the proposed closure of the Academy to save a bit of money, something that JE and GH went along with( the only worry that JE had was the PR aspects to manage).

Makes the "Selling Thomas to Liverpool" reason for resigning that Hoffman gave a little redundant 2 years later as Thomas would more than likely not been here at all if the plans he'd agreed to gone ahead, nor would Bigi have been of course, the selling of whom caused so much angst.

 

[grego_gee]

The minutes from 2008 only tell us the understanding that SISU were given by the outgoing regime JE & GH.
It could be possible that confusion already existed and the understanding that JE & GH had was already flawed.

Holdings is the older company established since 24/07/1907 and had a very similar name until 16/02/1996 "COVENTRY CITY FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED(THE)"

Ltd is the newer company established in 16/05/1995

Has anybody ever seen confirmation that the league ever switched over from using the older company details since the new company was formed?

imp:

 

[shmmeee]

The minutes from 2008 only tell us the understanding that SISU were given by the outgoing regime JE & GH.
It could be possible that confusion already existed and the understanding that JE & GH had was already flawed.

Holdings is the older company established since 24/07/1907 and had a very similar name until 16/02/1996 "COVENTRY CITY FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED(THE)"

Ltd is the newer company established in 16/05/1995

Has anybody ever seen confirmation that the league ever switched over from using the older company details since the new company was formed?

imp:

The only people who've ever claimed "confusion" were Sisu. The FL, Companies House, the directors, all paperwork, the employees, etc, etc, were all clear that Ltd was the club. This document makes it clear that Sisu were also clear about this.

 

[shmmeee]

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=23866 if you are using chrome I found the article didn't appear for me untill I used internet explorer. seems to be there for me now with chrome though.

Thanks for that, use Firefox and didn't show!

Very interesting about the proposed closure of the Academy to save a bit of money, something that JE and GH went along with( the only worry that JE had was the PR aspects to manage).

Makes the "Selling Thomas to Liverpool" reason for resigning that Hoffman gave a little redundant 2 years later as Thomas would more than likely not been here at all if the plans he'd agreed to gone ahead, nor would Bigi have been of course, the selling of whom caused so much angst.

Doesn't make Elliot look too great either.

Also, is it just me or does it read like: "there's vandalism issues at the Higgs" "OK, let's shut down the academy!"

 

[grego_gee]

I think you will find that FL have always been dealing with Company No. 00094305

imp:

 

[shmmeee]

I think you will find that FL have always been dealing with Company No. 00094305

imp:

Sorry, I've not geeked out enough to know my club by Company No. which one is that?

The FL's own admission is the GS was in Ltd, by their own laws any players registered elsewhere are not eligible to play. Who they ended up registered with is irrelevant. The organisation with the right to field a team is and always was Ltd and Sisu were fully aware of this.

PS that smiley is stupid.

 

[The Penguin]

With no evidence to the contrary, other than that we have been told by someone who frequently misrepresents the truth, I can only assume that the roles and responsibilities in the minutes were agreed by all parties.

These roles and responsibilities were subsequently adhered to for the next three to four years, according to the published accounts of both Holdings and Limited.

I don't buy the line that there was confusion. It seems pretty clear to me. Limited are responsible for football business. Holdings are responsible for pretty much everything else. I also think that if every single person since 2008 has been confused, and not a single one of them thought to clarify the situation, then their competence should be called into serious question.

I do also seem to remember someone on here posting the confirmation of which you speak, grego_gee, but given we've seen and discussed so many things in this sordid affair, I may be misremembering.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think you will find that FL have always been dealing with Company No. 00094305

imp:

suggest you take a look at the 2008 Football League annual return at Company House then..... it says differently

 

[Noggin]

The minutes from 2008 only tell us the understanding that SISU were given by the outgoing regime JE & GH.

No they don't the march meeting was clearly discussing proposals for how the companies should be and the april meeting was confirming that.

It could be possible that confusion already existed and the understanding that JE & GH had was already flawed.

Holdings is the older company established since 24/07/1907 and had a very similar name until 16/02/1996 "COVENTRY CITY FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED(THE)"

Ltd is the newer company established in 16/05/1995

Rubbish, there is no confusion here at all, have you even looked at the document? above the section detailing responsibilities for Coventry City Football Club Limited (CCF) is the section detailing the responsibilities for Coventry City Football Club (Holdings) Limited (CCH) what on earth makes you think they are confused?

Has anybody ever seen confirmation that the league ever switched over from using the older company details since the new company was formed?

imp:

 

[grego_gee]

Thank you ob, can you not upload it for us all?
when did it change?


imp:

 

[blueflint]

...“We have also seen during the last 24 hours the emergence, via an independent website of documents.."

Hunt is on for the website..

where have you been they are quite damaging to SISU

 

[oldskyblue58]

The hive down from "The Coventry City Football Club Limited" to CCFC Ltd and CCFC H Ltd had to be approved by the Football League otherwise it could not have happened. There was therefore no confusion in 1995 and there were no changes in operation between 1995 and 2008

Yes JE and GH were on the Board in 2008 but so was Onye Igwe a direct appointment from the owners (a SISU employee) and attending was Laura Deering who is Joy Seppala's personal assistant who approved all finance transactions I believe (happy to be corrected if wrong). It is clear that the current owners were fully informed in 2008 in my opinion

 

[CarpyCov84]

Question is - did the football league no ???

 

[italiahorse]

The hive down from "The Coventry City Football Club Limited" to CCFC Ltd and CCFC H Ltd had to be approved by the Football League otherwise it could not have happened. There was therefore no confusion in 1995 and there were no changes in operation between 1995 and 2008

Yes JE and GH were on the Board in 2008 but so was Onye Igwe a direct appointment from the owners (a SISU employee) and Laura Deering who is Joy Seppala's personal assistant who approved all finance transactions I believe (happy to be corrected if wrong). It is clear that the current owners were fully informed in 2008 in my opinion

The document is pretty clear to me how the club was broke down. Seems very logical and there is no reason why you would change it .......... unless .......... (Not for me to say) .......... anyway Paul Appleton would be on top of this otherwise the part of the club he put up for sale was missing a few important items. :thinking about:

 

[Bluegloucester]

I think you will find that FL have always been dealing with Company No. 00094305

imp:

This is incorrect, the FL only recognised it as the parent company of the football club.

 

[Florence1898]

joe and gary why have they kept so silent? are they involved witth Northampton

Doesn't make Elliot look too great either.

Also, is it just me or does it read like: "there's vandalism issues at the Higgs" "OK, let's shut down the academy!"

 

[The Prefect]

If if if if SISU moved the players from CCFCLtd to CCFCHolding, deliberately to put CCFCLtd into administration, to get rid of debts & the Ricoh lease, then it's asset stripping and fraud

You need to be careful as to what people are being accused of...

I have worked with administrators a lot over the last 12 months. Things are never as clear cut as they may appear.

Before I'm accused as being on SISU's side - I'm not however...

Moving assets from one company to another isn't in itself a problem. It becomes an issue when it is done prior to a company going into administration and when assets move between members of the same 'group' or related companies. What needs to be investigated is the price of the assets when they moved and whether the transfer was done at a fair market value. The other thing that needs to be considered is whether the transfer of assets was detrimental to the creditors of the company.

An administrator / liquidator will have to produce a report and this should be included.