Time for Plain Speaking (27 Viewers)

[Jack Griffin]

Everyone makes good logical points. Nothing will happen until the JR in June.

Sisu win and they have a chance or ccc win and sisu but unfortunately ccfc are screwed. (only chance is if sisu take a short rental if they lose JR)

Despite this I want the ccc to win as I believe in morals and ethics.

Still disgusted with it all and Sisu lost 7m in the last accounts but what will next year show. Guess at around and 10m? No business can last this.

Something has to give this summer imo as it has to. JR is scheduled and Sisu cant keep losing 7m last year another 10m this year. Wont happen. Something will give. (remember sisu thought they would get crowds of 7,000 circa and its around 1500-2000 so 5,000 difference. Massive and MONEY ALWAYS TALKS!!!

Agreed mate, NOPM will work in the end..

 

---

[RoboCCFC90]

And there you have the main point. They were going to do anything they had to if it meant breaking the lease. Yet you blame ACL :thinking about:

SISU threatened to liquidate our club. ACL threatened to put our club into admin. SISU put our club into admin instead so they could choose Appleton. And we know why they wanted him. Yet it is all the fault of ACL still?

ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct we were due in court with ACLs admin application the very next day.


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

 

[The Gentleman]

Your debt figures are grossly overstated - and you don't really realize the initial debt to the funds could probably be bought for a fraction of its nominal value.

But never mind that - I am curious to hear your opinion on the club wanting to buy the shares in ACL (and a new extra long lease for ACL) based on two independent valuations.

Do the club want to buy and have they instructed two independent valuations on the Ricoh? If the club had to have the Ricoh (or part of it) for us to be back there playing then although I cannot stand them, I wouldn't mind as long as there were certain caveats in place to protect the club and that revenues did actually filter to the club to help us progress.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Come to think of it - I can't remember any of those constantly quoting a debt figure of £70m even asking why it's now only £45m.

It never was really £70M was it (even though I have that statement in my signature) as the £70M includes all the debt GR has written off, I think he counts as another one who got mislead by SISU, not that I am bothered about him.

Note to self, update the signature.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After Mr Fisher said CCFC were facing if I remember a catastrophic liquidation.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

After Mr Fisher said CCFC were facing if I remember a catastrophic liquidation.

Well we are facing Liquidation now aren't we? CCFC Holdings and Ltd anyhow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

Well we are facing Liquidation now aren't we? CCFC Holdings and Ltd anyhow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you see nothing wrong in Mr Fisher giving that statement:thinking about:Forgot standard business practice

 

[RoboCCFC90]

So you see nothing wrong in Mr Fisher giving that statement:thinking about:Forgot standard business practice

That's not what I am saying at all, but I am just saying it's come round anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Gentleman]

I think that is why Sisu wanted to purchase the Freehold because it skips dealing with ACL to a certain extent. Well the best way to deal with it would be to put mediators in, although this seems to simple.

With respect to the Debt I am not sure it will be quite that figure, Sisu have said they'd covert some of the existing debt into equity and use that to build the new Stadium along with a loan from a lender. Of course this is yet to be seen, but this was what Fisher stated way back at the Forums at the end of last season. Admittedly the appeal of attendances doesn't look great but if they did build their own Stadium it would at least be a business model of which the Club could grow from.

If our current debt stands around 40 million, 5 years at Sixfields with loses around 10 million a year (based on recent accounts plus much bigger than expected hits on attendances) and say the new stadium build is 30 million with half of loans, that seems like a lot of debt to be saddled with. Sisu can (and will) do what they want with the figures to make things look bigger or smaller depending on who they are talking too, but one thing is for sure, we are going to be paying a lot of interest for a very long time which will by far eclipse the original rental deal we had at the Ricoh, let alone the more recent revised ones with access etc. But listen, if you really want to argue that Sisu aren't that bad and we are better off playing and renting at Sixfields rather than the Ricoh then that is your right. Me personally and any other rational business minded person would see that a rental deal at the Ricoh is far better than at Sixfields.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

If our current debt stands around 40 million, 5 years at Sixfields with loses around 10 million a year (based on recent accounts plus much bigger than expected hits on attendances) and say the new stadium build is 30 million with half of loans, that seems like a lot of debt to be saddled with. Sisu can (and will) do what they want with the figures to make things look bigger or smaller depending on who they are talking too, but one thing is for sure, we are going to be paying a lot of interest for a very long time which will by far eclipse the original rental deal we had at the Ricoh, let alone the more recent revised ones with access etc. But listen, if you really want to argue that Sisu aren't that bad and we are better off playing and renting at Sixfields rather than the Ricoh then that is your right. Me personally and any other rational business minded person would see that a rental deal at the Ricoh is far better than at Sixfields.

Fair enough that's your opinion and it could be as well valid as mine.

Yet the one part that let's down your whole post is this insinuation that I am defending the indefensible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

That's not what I am saying at all, but I am just saying it's come round anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In other words it was going to happen anyway it was engineered ie issue the statement knowing full well that ACL had to react then when they do put the blame on them put yourself into administration and appoint the administrator.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

In other words it was going to happen anyway it was engineered ie issue the statement knowing full well that ACL had to react then when they do put the blame on them put yourself into administration and appoint the administrator.

Exactly I get the feeling whether ACL had engineered it or Sisu it would of happened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grendel]

In other words it was going to happen anyway it was engineered ie issue the statement knowing full well that ACL had to react then when they do put the blame on them put yourself into administration and appoint the administrator.

Well you can't by the same token say they had to do that in light of fishers lowuidation threat as they ultimately liquidated the club anyway.

 

[Astute]

ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was nothing more than a threat in the end. It was done to stop the threat of liquidation that came from SISU. But some still twist it around to blame ACL although SISU were threatening worse.

 

[Astute]

Well you can't by the same token say they had to do that in light of fishers lowuidation threat as they ultimately liquidated the club anyway.

Are you saying that ACL knew that SISU would liquidate at a later date......after moving everything of value out of LTD?

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

Well you can't by the same token say they had to do that in light of fishers lowuidation threat as they ultimately liquidated the club anyway.

Of course I can just because that was the result didn't mean it had to be. This is why court appointed administrators should be the norm stops people thinking that there may colusion in any administration much fairer for all parties.

 

[stupot07]

It was nothing more than a threat in the end. It was done to stop the threat of liquidation that came from SISU. But some still twist it around to blame ACL although SISU were threatening worse.

Are you suggesting that ACL wouldn't have put us into administration? That it was just an elaborate charade?


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

 

[Godiva]

Are you saying that ACL knew that SISU would liquidate at a later date......after moving everything of value out of LTD?

Not many believed they would liquidate - yet it happened.
Not many believed (ACL made their whole strategy on it) they had transferred all the players to Holdings - yet they had.

And that is just two things not many believed when they said.

Now, do you want to bet your house that sisu are not going back to the Ricoh as tenants?
Or that they will not build a new stadium if they cannot buy the shares in ACL?

 

[Astute]

Are you suggesting that ACL wouldn't have put us into administration? That it was just an elaborate charade?

No.

Are you saying that SISU wouldn't have liquidated like they had said they would or even put us into admin like they did if ACL hadn't done so? And are you still blaming ACL for SISU putting us into admin although it was done to get out of the rental contract?

 

[The Gentleman]

Fair enough that's your opinion and it could be as well valid as mine.

Yet the one part that let's down your whole post is this insinuation that I am defending the indefensible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is you that is defending the fact that Sisu say they will not go back to a rental deal and you say you agree with them. I don't need to insinuate anything, it's what you are saying. All I am saying is that we would be better of with the latest rental deal at the Ricoh rather than at Sixfields, or do you think that the club is better off on the rental deal at Sixfields?

 

[Hobo]

Actually its the sad bastards who actually feel proud of a council that clearly see the club as nothing more than an entity to fleece money off that I feel sorry for.

Inflammatory garbage, to use one of your own quotes, "where is your proof, or is it just opinion rather than fact?"

 

[stupot07]

No.

Are you saying that SISU wouldn't have liquidated like they had said they would or even put us into admin like they did if ACL hadn't done so? And are you still blaming ACL for SISU putting us into admin although it was done to get out of the rental contract?

No i don't think sisu would have liquidated, and I'm not personally convinced they'd have out us into admin if ACL hadn't already applied. There was still room for negotiation, they managed to get from £400k don't to £150k.

I'm not blaming ACL, I'm pointing out that it isn't black and white, had sisu not put us in admin, ACL would have 24 hours later.


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

 

[Godiva]

It is you that is defending the fact that Sisu say they will not go back to a rental deal and you say you agree with them. I don't need to insinuate anything, it's what you are saying. All I am saying is that we would be better of with the latest rental deal at the Ricoh rather than at Sixfields, or do you think that the club is better off on the rental deal at Sixfields?

But neither a rental deal at sixfields or a rental deal at the Ricoh is the goal. Both are simply interim solutions. A short term rental deal at the Ricoh was NOT offered on acceptable terms before they signed the ground share deal.
In any case - the goal is for the club to own its own stadium. We should all back that goal!

 

[spider_ricoh]

In any case - the goal is for the club to own its own stadium. We should all back that goal!

In principle yes, but the way SISU have gone about it is a disgrace - tearing up the lease and forfeiting the fans by dragging the club out of the city that bears its name.

 

[Grendel]

In principle yes, but the way SISU have gone about it is a disgrace - tearing up the lease and forfeiting the fans by dragging the club out of the city that bears its name.

The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.

 

[Astute]

No i don't think sisu would have liquidated, and I'm not personally convinced they'd have out us into admin if ACL hadn't already applied. There was still room for negotiation, they managed to get from £400k don't to £150k.

I'm not blaming ACL, I'm pointing out that it isn't black and white, had sisu not put us in admin, ACL would have 24 hours later.


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

So you agree that they put us into admin to get out of the lease but say they only did it because ACL did it first?

 

[The Gentleman]

But neither a rental deal at sixfields or a rental deal at the Ricoh is the goal. Both are simply interim solutions. A short term rental deal at the Ricoh was NOT offered on acceptable terms before they signed the ground share deal.
In any case - the goal is for the club to own its own stadium. We should all back that goal!

Would agree that the ultimate goal is for us to own our club. However, in the short term would it not benefit CCFC to now take up the the latest rental offer. Did we not have the option to opt out of Sixfields at the end of each season there. It makes financial sense to come HOME, it is common sense to come HOME and it makes no sense to stay at Sixfields while this debacle plays out.

 

[Astute]

The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.

Oh yes we should all applaud them for breaking the lease and taking us to Northampton.

 

[The Gentleman]

The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.

Grendel, is your spell check fucked? the last few days you spelling has been terrible (although slightly amusing).

 

[Grendel]

So you agree that they put us into admin to get out of the lease but say they only did it because ACL did it first?

No he's not. ACL raised an administration order as they claimed sisu had threatened liquidation and had to protect their interests.

Then when given the opportunity to get the club out if administration they voted to liquidate the club.

 

[Grendel]

Grendel, is your spell check fucked? the last few days you spelling has been terrible (although slightly amusing).

On my phone with contact lenses which makes it hard to read to be honest.

 

[spider_ricoh]

The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.

A perfectly valid lease, which they had no right to break. I will never forgive them for that - that was when they went too far. IMO a 30 point deduction wouldn't have been enough punishment for that; if the FL had a spine they'd have kicked us out of the league. It was truly disgusting to walk away from it.

 

[spider_ricoh]

No he's not. ACL raised an administration order as they claimed sisu had threatened liquidation and had to protect their interests.

Then when given the opportunity to get the club out if administration they voted to liquidate the club.

As you well know the CVA offered them a pittance, it would have been giving respectability to a truly illegitimate process if ACL had voted for the CVA. Before Timmy moans about "we want our ten points back", ACL should respond with "let's have our 43-years of rent back"

 

[RoboCCFC90]

It is you that is defending the fact that Sisu say they will not go back to a rental deal and you say you agree with them. I don't need to insinuate anything, it's what you are saying. All I am saying is that we would be better of with the latest rental deal at the Ricoh rather than at Sixfields, or do you think that the club is better off on the rental deal at Sixfields?

I only have stated what Sisu have stated, yet their actions have also supported their statements. I don't believe they will run back to the Ricoh with there tail between their legs looking for a Rent deal.

I have also said previously that we would be better off at the Ricoh but the chances of this happening are nil for many reasons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk