Was it or wasn't it? (12 Viewers)

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

I think you will find that this is what Mr Labovich and his boss think

 

---

[Samo]

What we do seem to know was that the offer was made to someone. This should have been Sisu's perfect opportunity to to show that they care about the football club and its fans. Sisu should have called ACL/CCC bluff when they (or Otium or whatever else they want to be called this week) and said for the sake of the football club let us have that deal at 150k per annum with access to revenue streams. So what if there was a ten year tie in clause, as I have said before Joy used Shrewsbury as an example and that took at least 8 years so ten years wouldn't have been to much of a bind. Think of the potential money they could have been making for themselves and the club with our current form if we would have been at the Ricoh with those terms. If ACL/CCC turned round and said no then it would have been open season on them. If they are the sharp business minded people they should have at least asked if the offer was open to them. The fact that they didn't just shows their hand even more.

Surely by now we know thier hand, what would have exposed it further would have been a direct offer to Otium. Instead they only offered it to the admin and handed SISU yet another excuse not to deal.

 

[Samo]

I think you will find that this is what Mr Labovich and his boss think

So ACL could not have made the exact same offer the following day, away from that environment, directly to Otium? Care to answer?

 

[CJ_covblaze]

I don't see why the offer needed to be offered twice. ML was aware, that's all that's needed isn't it?

If I was responsible for acquiring property for Tesco and was offered site 'A' on Monday but then changed my job and took up the same role with Sainsburys on the Tuesday I know what my first phone call would be for my new employer.

 

[dongonzalos]

That still doesn't clarify whether the offer was on the table and offered to Otium post CVA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Or if Otium have ever asked ACL for the rent deal. Once they were made aware by their partner about the offer put on the table that he states could not say yes or no to (or actually even hear fir that matter if fact) Or did they stick to their leader's stance. Ownership only.

 

[chiefdave]

what would have exposed it further would have been a direct offer to Otium. Instead they only offered it to the admin

An offer was made. It was made prior to, and repeated during the CVA meeting. It was made to Otium. Labovitch, a director of Otium said that he was not there for Otium he was there for Holdings. Therefore he heard no offer.

 

[dongonzalos]

What we do seem to know was that the offer was made to someone. This should have been Sisu's perfect opportunity to to show that they care about the football club and its fans. Sisu should have called ACL/CCC bluff when they (or Otium or whatever else they want to be called this week) and said for the sake of the football club let us have that deal at 150k per annum with access to revenue streams. So what if there was a ten year tie in clause, as I have said before Joy used Shrewsbury as an example and that took at least 8 years so ten years wouldn't have been to much of a bind. Think of the potential money they could have been making for themselves and the club with our current form if we would have been at the Ricoh with those terms. If ACL/CCC turned round and said no then it would have been open season on them. If they are the sharp business minded people they should have at least asked if the offer was open to them. The fact that they didn't just shows their hand even more.

Approximately 200k a month more than they are at the moment.

 

[chiefdave]

I don't see why the offer needed to be offered twice. ML was aware, that's all that's needed isn't it?

Exactly, people are making this out to be way more complicated than it actually is. An offer was on the table, unless ACL have specifically revoked the offer as the other party involved, or any other party interested, you would assume the same offer to be available until told otherwise. I can't believe anyone can seriously think that Otium would quite happily come back under the £150K deal but are all sat around totally unaware the offer was ever made.

 

[The Gentleman]

Surely by now we know thier hand, what would have exposed it further would have been a direct offer to Otium. Instead they only offered it to the admin and handed SISU yet another excuse not to deal.

I understand what you are saying but I just feel that the shit that Sisu have pulled, it is them that should be doing the running. I wonder what the gates at Sixfields would be had they tried to negotiate a deal on the basis of the offer but ACL/CCC didn't accept. I still wouldn't have gone but I bet a few more would have made the trip if they thought that Sisu at least tried to get us back.

 

[Samo]

I don't see why the offer needed to be offered twice. ML was aware, that's all that's needed isn't it?

If I was responsible for acquiring property for Tesco and was offered site 'A' on Monday but then changed my job and took up the same role with Sainsburys on the Tuesday I know what my first phone call would be for my new employer.

It was an offer SISU did not want. The fact that it was offered only to he admin played into thier hands.

 

[stupot07]

I don't see why the offer needed to be offered twice. ML was aware, that's all that's needed isn't it?

If I was responsible for acquiring property for Tesco and was offered site 'A' on Monday but then changed my job and took up the same role with Sainsburys on the Tuesday I know what my first phone call would be for my new employer.

But that doesn't explain why it couldn't have been offered twice, as ML had made it clear he was there for Holdings only.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

 

[dongonzalos]

Exactly, people are making this out to be way more complicated than it actually is. An offer was on the table, unless ACL have specifically revoked the offer as the other party involved, or any other party interested, you would assume the same offer to be available until told otherwise. I can't believe anyone can seriously think that Otium would quite happily come back under the £150K deal but are all sat around totally unaware the offer was ever made.

I do not believe they would have come back for free if they felt it may reduce the chances of buying the freehold at a lower value than what it will be sold at in conjunction with the football club.

 

[stupot07]

Or if Otium have ever asked ACL for the rent deal. Once they were made aware by their partner about the offer put on the table that he states could not say yes or no to (or actually even hear fir that matter if fact) Or did they stick to their leader's stance. Ownership only.

But it's still not clear whether the offer was valid post CVA.

Otium could have asked and ACL could've offered. Clearly both at fault, if the offer was still valid outside the CVA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

 

[Astute]

But it's still not clear whether the offer was valid post CVA.

Otium could have asked and ACL could've offered. Clearly both at fault, if the offer was still valid outside the CVA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

:facepalm:

You certainly try your best to share some of the blame with CCC when you know it is the fault of SISU

 

[CJ_covblaze]

Exactly, people are making this out to be way more complicated than it actually is. An offer was on the table, unless ACL have specifically revoked the offer as the other party involved, or any other party interested, you would assume the same offer to be available until told otherwise. I can't believe anyone can seriously think that Otium would quite happily come back under the £150K deal but are all sat around totally unaware the offer was ever made.

Or to put it simply
You: CJ do you want to rent my house?

Me: Saw it advertised Dave, fully aware of the price.

You: Deal CJ?

Me: Nah thanks Dave. Come and find me again tomorrow because I want you to tell me again and I'll forget everything by then.

Your reply?

 

[Samo]

:facepalm:

You certainly try your best to share some of the blame with CCC when you know it is the fault of SISU

SISU and only SISU huh? Wow!

 

[dongonzalos]

But it's still not clear whether the offer was valid post CVA.

Otium could have asked and ACL could've offered. Clearly both at fault, if the offer was still valid outside the CVA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Come on Stu

Would you like to come back to the Ricoh this is the deal?

Sorry today I have my holdings/ltd cap on.

Oh right that's that then.

Off ML goes and completely forgets about the offer.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Exactly, people are making this out to be way more complicated than it actually is. An offer was on the table, unless ACL have specifically revoked the offer as the other party involved, or any other party interested, you would assume the same offer to be available until told otherwise. I can't believe anyone can seriously think that Otium would quite happily come back under the £150K deal but are all sat around totally unaware the offer was ever made.

If ML was there when the offer was made to 1 party that he is representing...common sense would dictate that with his other hat on, at some point in the near future, he'd ask if the offer was open to that party as an option too.
If he didn't it suggests that his/their intent was to deliberately play silly-buggers.

 

[Samo]

Or to put it simply
You: CJ do you want to rent my house?

Me: Saw it advertised Dave, fully aware of the price.

You: Deal CJ?

Me: Nah thanks Dave. Come and find me again tomorrow because I want you to tell me again and I'll forget everything by then.

Your reply?

Oh behave! The offer was made and declined in a very specific and particular legal environment, that being the case, could it not have been offered directly to Otium, away from that environment at a later time? Please tell me why it was not?

 

[stupot07]

:facepalm:

You certainly try your best to share some of the blame with CCC when you know it is the fault of SISU

I wasn't blaming ccc I was blaming ACL along with sisu.

 

[SkyBlueScottie]

This is the problem we fans have, we are forming arguement's on simple clearly structured situations, when the reality was obviously nothing like that. All through out the process we have the club arranging meetings to discuss stuff only to be told the people present could not make a decision and vice versa. Potentially Labovitch could have given short shrift to " the offer" either on advice of Appleton or because he and ACL both clearly knew that if any offer is to be made it needs to go straight to Seppalla. On the flip side to that I do not see why Labovitch could not have made contract in the following days to discuss such an offer.

 

[stupot07]

Or to put it simply
You: CJ do you want to rent my house?

Me: Saw it advertised Dave, fully aware of the price.

You: Deal CJ?

Me: Nah thanks Dave. Come and find me again tomorrow because I want you to tell me again and I'll forget everything by then.

Your reply?

Funny, estate agents, letting agents, car salesman, etc, tend to follow up offers.

Car salesman: so would you like to buy this car, it's a good offer.

Me: it's a good price.

Car salesman: deal?

Me: sorry it's for the wife, so cant do a deal today.

Next day phone rings....

Hi, it's Peter from the garage. Wondered if you have spoken to the wife, and whether she'd like to come down for a test drive

 

[Grendel]

An offer was made. It was made prior to, and repeated during the CVA meeting. It was made to Otium. Labovitch, a director of Otium said that he was not there for Otium he was there for Holdings. Therefore he heard no offer. It then becomes a philosophical question doesn't it? The man, Labovitch, was there. Labovitch was there for Holdings. As the offer was not to Holdings but to Otium he could not hear it. As a man he could hear it, but as a director of Otium he could not hear it, so it was not made....

Even you only got 4 "likes" for that one.

 

[rondog1973]

Funny, estate agents, letting agents, car salesman, etc, tend to follow up offers.

Car salesman: so would you like to buy this car, it's a good offer.

Me: it's a good price.

Car salesman: deal?

Me: sorry it's for the wife, so cant do a deal today.

Next day phone rings....

Hi, it's Peter from the garage. Wondered if you have spoken to the wife, and whether she'd like to come down for a test drive

Isn't it refreshing that, for once, our Politicians don't behave like Estate agents, letting agents and Car salesmen?

 

[Astute]

Oh behave! The offer was made and declined in a very specific and particular legal environment, that being the case, could it not have been offered directly to Otium, away from that environment at a later time? Please tell me why it was not?

And as you know if they wanted us playing in Coventry for a low rent we could be back in a couple of weeks. They would also start making a profit as our wage bill is vastly reduced. But she wants the ground for well below value.

I am now starting to think that the best way forward is to rent the Ricoh and build this stadium they keep going on about. If they can't distress ACL like they hoped and it can't be sold to them for what Joy is prepared to go to it would be the best way forward for ACL, SISU and most importantly us fans.

 

[dongonzalos]

Funny, estate agents, letting agents, car salesman, etc, tend to follow up offers.

Car salesman: so would you like to buy this car, it's a good offer.

Me: it's a good price.

Car salesman: deal?

Me: sorry it's for the wife, so cant do a deal today.

Next day phone rings....

Hi, it's Peter from the garage. Wondered if you have spoken to the wife, and whether she'd like to come down for a test drive

Yep and it's bargain
You go home speak to the wife come back to finalised the deal or try and tweak it.

Unless of course there is a chance you can threaten the salesman with taking all their customers away and picking up the car a lot cheaper later on.

Then you may not bother picking up the phone.....

 

[lewys33]

Even you only got 4 "likes" for that one.

You ask him a question, he answers, and that is your reply? BRAVO!

So now there is clarity that the offer was made to Otium. IIRC the CVA meeting was adjourned for a couple of days after the offer was made? Then they met again and said no. Therefore the CVA was not signed. Everyone can try and pick faults all they want but (shock horror) both sides did things wrong yet again.

I still cannot fathom why on earth this is still being talked about though. We are waaaaaaay past this now. But I guess while people are so obsessive over this, would we not have been better off at the Ricoh this year even paying the original £400,000 rent offered?

 

[lewys33]

Another point I will make while we are all being so obsessive about the past - IIRC Tim Fisher said one of the reasons they could not accept the deal was because it would be "too difficult" to get out of the deal they had made with Northampton. I guess there must have been something in the contract to state "if in 6 months we have distressed ACL enough to get the Ricoh on the cheap this contract is void and we will sue you for making us move to your ground from Coventry."

 

[_brian_]

Even you only got 4 "likes" for that one.

To be honest, it was probably because, like me, most on here didn't quite understand what he was on about!!! LOL! All that philosophy mumbo-jumbo! Double LOL!!!

 

[oldskyblue58]

Whilst I welcome anything that clarifies what went on haven't events overtaken this offer. In mid September (over a month after the CVA rejection and the £150k offer ) ACL confirmed to the Trust and issued a statement to the CT saying that it would welcome Otiums best offer to return on a rental basis. That offer could have been the same as at the CVA meeting, more likely it would have been less, extremely unlikely to be more, but ACL were open to discussing it.

That statement and the Trusts press release 19/09/13 could perhaps be seen as a catalyst to the JS statement that followed, basically freehold not rent. I think that PWKH would be able to confirm that there has been no approach from any SISU entity to rent the Ricoh since the CVA meeting.

So should we be hung up on whether the £150k was offered in or out of the CVA process when rental bids on the basis of SISU/CCFC own terms have been invited and not received since?

 

[blueflint]

So ACL could not have made the exact same offer the following day, away from that environment, directly to Otium? Care to answer?

why should they the offer was refused by labobitch its then up to otium to negotiate they didn't what bit of that don't you understand

 

[blueflint]

It was an offer SISU did not want. The fact that it was offered only to he admin played into thier hands.

can't you read PKWH said the offer was made to otium prior which means before the admin and again during the meeting it was refused both times

 

[lewys33]

can't you read PKWH said the offer was made to otium prior which means before the admin and again during the meeting it was refused both times

Bluefint surely you know what answer you are going to get ........

"ML was legally there for holdings not otium so could not accept the offer" .......... yes but ML was there. He also has ears. If they were interested they would have chased it up. I really dont see why people think ACL should do the running around?!

 

[italiahorse]

Sisu are taking us to hell in a hand cart.

Get back to the Ricoh on the best deal you can get. Worry about the stadium purchase later.

 

[blueflint]

Bluefint surely you know what answer you are going to get ........

"ML was legally there for holdings not otium so could not accept the offer" .......... yes but ML was there. He also has ears. If they were interested they would have chased it up. I really dont see why people think ACL should do the running around?!

i know but i get annoyed when the same question is asked by the same person who can't seem to read when the answer is there for all to see