Disheartening Sky Blue's Story On The Way.. (44 Viewers)

[wingy]

I've seen it. In fact I've got a copy as it's in the public domain. You'll have 126 paragraphs to get through spread over 41 pages.

Could you not publish it In a sticky on here?

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

The jr says it's our ball and if you're not gonna play how we want you to we will take it away and play without you!!

 

[oldskyblue58]

The JR documented referred to is the submission put to the court in order to support the case put forward that a JR should take place. For want of a better way of putting it the story according to SISU. It will include those things that SISU believe would persuade a judge to allow a JR. As such, though it is supported by 1500 pages of documents it is one sided and incomplete and should be viewed in that way. The defendants did not at that stage have to provide much in the way of evidence to rebut the claims or tell their story. So if reading it keep an open mind, something many seem to leave behind

 

[wingy]

The JR documented referred to is the submission put to the court in order to support the case put forward that a JR should take place. For want of a better way of putting it the story according to SISU. It will include those things that SISU believe would persuade a judge to allow a JR. As such, though it is supported by 1500 pages of documents it is one sided and incomplete and should be viewed in that way. The defendants did not at that stage have to provide much in the way of evidence to rebut the claims or tell their story. So if reading it keep an open mind, something many seem to leave behin

d.............

 

[Rob S]

So are you saying that shareholders in a business are responsible for the acts of that business? Because if you are then shareholders in News International had better watch out

No, I'm saying that in this case, with a 50% shareholding & members on the board they have some involvement.

 

[Rob S]

Link? (yes I'm that sad)

Make that sort of in the public domain. Drop me a PM.

 

[cloughie]

I don't really know all of the facts and what was agreed. If the charity have done nothing wrong at all then of course it is out of order.

If you don't know all the facts then DON'T COMMENT !!!!

 

[wingy]

Make that sort of in the public domain. Drop me a PM.

Publish and be damned.

 

[Jack Griffin]

All perfectly legal and part of business at its hard nosed money edge but like many, probably nearly all Coventry citizens that are aware of this action it leaves a very nasty taste all the same.

And nasty is putting it mildly..

 

[Nick]

If you don't know all the facts then DON'T COMMENT !!!!

Sorry I won't post stuff, I'll leave it to the people on here who were in every meeting, read every contract.

If you read my posts I was trying to find out the facts?

 

[mrtickle]

Had the CCC not bailed CCFC out and built the Ricoh for them we would have had nowhere to play
our games, In fact it's just like now--we would have been homeless. If our useless owners had an iota of sense
they would go cap in hand to CCC and ask for a return to the RICOH. You I and everybody who cares for CCFC
and it's fans would do the same--Sisu on the other hand do not give a toss,money is their god and they don't care how they get it.

I'm sorry but I can't agree. The council benefits from having a football club and should support it. The club should not be grateful to the council for its current pitiful existence.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

To defend against the Charity claim of £29000 (pocket money surely to our owners) then you do not need to counter sue. All you have to do is prove there was no such agreement to pay the costs. However if you cant do that, need to put pressure on the other side and their associates you put in a huge counter claim, not saying SISU are not entitled to "counter" sue if they so wish but I get the feeling this action is part of a bigger game.

Say the Charity withdrew their claim (i do not think they will for a second) then I doubt SISU would withdraw theirs. If you think about it though it isnt a big leap to think that such an action against the Charity was inevitable and SISU can now hide behind argument of Higgs sued first. The most vulnerable point financially is the Charity, they do not have lots of money to fund long expensive legal battles, embroil them in that and it puts pressure on them and their partners ACL & CCC.

All perfectly legal and part of business at its hard nosed money edge but like many, probably nearly all Coventry citizens that are aware of this action it leaves a very nasty taste all the same.

Litigation and courtrooms are SISU's playground-they can run rings around the Council and the Higgs, be it out of spite or as part of getting that building with lots of seats and grass in it on the cheap. Although Fisher is a man with no influence on the bigger picture, suing a charity which has done a lot for the city doesn't quite bring that sense of community spirit he talked about in his Northampton programme notes once upon a time.

 

[Rob S]

Sorry I won't post stuff, I'll leave it to the people on here who were in every meeting, read every contract.

If you read my posts I was trying to find out the facts?

Nick, I admire your patience with this place and thanks for putting up with it all. On most forums, yelling at the admin? That's a banhammering...

 

[letsallsingtogether]

So they wanted to sell Ryton for houses get the Higgs centre for free through the courts, pretend to build a stadium and then get one free through the courts, they really are scum but some will still say it is good for the club and support the boys.

 

[dongonzalos]

Litigation and courtrooms are SISU's playground-they can run rings around the Council and the Higgs, be it out of spite or as part of getting that building with lots of seats and grass in it on the cheap. Although Fisher is a man with no influence on the bigger picture, suing a charity which has done a lot for the city doesn't quite bring that sense of community spirit he talked about in his Northampton programme notes once upon a time.

And there ladies and gentleman is the moral of the story

30k 100k whatever........
There comes a time when PR is more important than the risk of exposing your true nature

 

[letsallsingtogether]

What benefits have they had except for being dragged through the courts, after all the could have built a bigger conference centre and made even more money.

And where would we have played? No one seems to answer that question...

I'm sorry but I can't agree. The council benefits from having a football club and should support it. The club should not be grateful to the council for its current pitiful existence.

 

[Astute]

whilst sisu own us i dont think they will charge themselves extorionate rent. crazy i know

if they sell us they will need to offer a good stadium deal to any would be buyer.

council have hurt us for over a decade. can sisu do any worse? not a great situation to be in

They charge our club over a million in interest charges and 2.5m in management fees yet you say you don't think they will charge an extortionate rent :thinking about:

Forgot to take my phone to work last night. Answer me one question. They were in talks about buying the Higgs share in 2012 when they walked away. Higgs have been trying to get the agreed money since. Court action started a couple of months ago. Nobody thinks that plan A is going to happen. Plan B can't happen by law. The council have said that they can't do what SISUE want. Suddenly SISUE decide to sue Higgs. Coincidence or has it taken them 18 months to decide to sue Higgs? Or if like some say on here it is just a counter claim why didn't they do it a couple of months ago and not straight after Higgs try to get the money owed to them of which they have to also do by law?

 

[runner]

And there ladies and gentleman is the moral of the story

30k 100k whatever........
There comes a time when PR is more important than the risk of exposing your true nature

PR ... what's that ? Roughly translates as "If in doubt ... sue you way out"

 

[oldskyblue58]

Litigation and courtrooms are SISU's playground-they can run rings around the Council and the Higgs, be it out of spite or as part of getting that building with lots of seats and grass in it on the cheap. Although Fisher is a man with no influence on the bigger picture, suing a charity which has done a lot for the city doesn't quite bring that sense of community spirit he talked about in his Northampton programme notes once upon a time.

You see I am not sure that is really the case. There seems to be a popular myth that SISU are some super court room beings that always win their case. I really do not think that is the case. What they appear to have is lots of money to spend on legal fees for expensive solicitors and barristers. Ordinarily that is good enough to win through because the people defending do not have the means or will to fight. In which case it isn't necessarily about being legally right, it could be simply who has deepest pockets and that is a very different thing.

I think where SISU have led the events then it is easy to perceive that they are running rings round others, because the others will clearly always have to play catch up. Proactive vs reactive if you like. However there have been times in this dispute where they have clearly been caught out by events and statements. This has sent them scampering about playing catch up themselves. The reason this whole affair has been so acrimonious is because neither side have rolled over.

 

[skybluefred]

I'm sorry but I can't agree. The council benefits from having a football club and should support it. The club should not be grateful to the council for its current pitiful existence.

The current pitiful existence the Club is now in is down to sisu totally and absolutely.

 

[Grendel]

The current pitiful existence the Club is now in is down to sisu totally and absolutely.

Yes of course. Ten times the average rent, the most restricted revenues in the football league, near bankruptcy, administration, liquidation - yes of course it is - off the medication today?

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

Yes of course. Ten times the average rent, the most restricted revenues in the football league, near bankruptcy, administration, liquidation - yes of course it is - off the medication today?

None of which their due diligence recognised.......were SISU on medication when they went into this "deal" eyes wide shut I wonder:thinking about:

 

[Grendel]

None of which their due diligence recognised.......were SISU on medication when they went into this "deal" eyes wide shut I wonder:thinking about:

The same can be said for the Higgs charity for firstly investing in a high risk project and secondly for taking legal action over a disputed amount. If they lose or draw they too failed in their due dillegence didn't they?

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

The same can be said for the Higgs charity for firstly investing in a high risk project and secondly for taking legal action over a disputed amount. If they lose or draw they too failed in their due dillegence didn't they?

Yes.... so I've answered you're question would you do me the courtesy of doing the same?

 

[Grendel]

Yes.... so I've answered you're question would you do me the courtesy of doing the same?

I'm not sure what answer in supposed to give. Ok let's say they were negligent in not realising the deal on offer was a road to oblivion? So what? Should we then say we should have been liquidated six years ago. That then would definately taken ACL and the Ricoh down with it and the club would have ceased to exist. I fail to see the point to be honest.

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

I'm not sure what answer in supposed to give. Ok let's say they were negligent in not realising the deal on offer was a road to oblivion? So what? Should we then say we should have been liquidated six years ago. That then would definately taken ACL and the Ricoh down with it and the club would have ceased to exist. I fail to see the point to be honest.

I wish I had a pound......

 

[cloughie]

I'm not sure what answer in supposed to give. Ok let's say they were negligent in not realising the deal on offer was a road to oblivion? So what? Should we then say we should have been liquidated six years ago. That then would definately taken ACL and the Ricoh down with it and the club would have ceased to exist. I fail to see the point to be honest.

On your theory there was no one else to bid to to save the club at that time ?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The same can be said for the Higgs charity for firstly investing in a high risk project and secondly for taking legal action over a disputed amount. If they lose or draw they too failed in their due dillegence didn't they?

What high risk project have they invested in?

 

[Grendel]

What high risk project have they invested in?

Well as James smith is very keen to point out no dividends have been paid. So at present their have been no earnings from the venture. Investment which is principally dependant on the success of a football team hitherto unsuccessful I'd say is very high risk.

 

[Grendel]

On your theory there was no one else to bid to to save the club at that time ?

Well there was Geoffrey Robinson I suppose.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Well as James smith is very keen to point out no dividends have been paid. So at present their have been no earnings from the venture. Investment which is principally dependant on the success of a football team hitherto unsuccessful I'd say is very high risk.

The dividend part is irrelevant, many people who invest in shares do not get a dividend, they rely on capital growth. If ACL are growing as a business, or even if it were merely stable, you surely wouldn't class that as a high risk investment.

How are you defining 'principally'? Are you suggesting that as the club hasn't been there this year, they are unlikely to make a profit this year?

 

[Huckerby]

Nick, I admire your patience with this place and thanks for putting up with it all. On most forums, yelling at the admin? That's a banhammering...

get your tongue out mate

 

[James Smith]

The same can be said for the Higgs charity for firstly investing in a high risk project and secondly for taking legal action over a disputed amount. If they lose or draw they too failed in their due dillegence didn't they?

Did the Higgs have much of a choice though? When they bought the share from the club Sisu weren't on the horizon then. The idea as I understand it was that the Club would buy back the share ASAP and be partners in the Arena. There was a formula put in place so that the club could buy back the share at a reasonable price. Yes rhe rent was high but had the club bought the share back they could have had a say in how the arena was run and what the rent and revenues were. The Club then changed hands and Sisu came in but the Higgs still had the share and were still keen to sell it and the logical purchaser was us.

Would we have been happy if they had sold the share to someone else? Yes I know that it's not guaranteed that someone else would have come in for it but it could have happened. Would the Higgs have been as keen to sell to someone else, I don't know. But given they were willing to sell to the club when they were first approached even after the rent boycott had started it says to me that they were still trying to help the club (even if they had no one else wanting to buy).

Did the Higgs have a choice in who the people who bought the club were - no they didn't. Would we all have been up in arms if they hadn't agreed to talk to Sisu - probably. I suspect that our owners would have been shouting that they were being treated unfairly from every rooftop and media outlet they could find.

Was it a risk for the Higgs? Yes most investments are to some degree. Was it a high risk investment? Probably, but I suspect that they weren't planning on holding on to it for that long, and I'd argue that buying the club was a far riskier 'investment'. Now if ACL really have got more sound financials now then when the loan is paid off the charity may actually see some money back.

 

[Astute]

Yes of course. Ten times the average rent, the most restricted revenues in the football league, near bankruptcy, administration, liquidation - yes of course it is - off the medication today?

If you think that 1.2m for the rent was too much what do you say about the 2.5m management fees they charge our club? At least for the rent we got a good ground to play in. As for their management skills.............

 

[mrtickle]

The current pitiful existence the Club is now in is down to sisu totally and absolutely.

I think there a long list of people in the queue before sisu. Our previous owners have helped us get where we are today far more than sisu.