Did sisu save ACL? (22 Viewers)

[Sky Blue Pete]

Also Godiva the Judge ruled that there was no willingness on either side after the exclusivity period to agree a deal

 

---

[Godiva]

Also Godiva the Judge ruled that there was no willingness on either side after the exclusivity period to agree a deal

He used the word 'appetite' and I understand why he came to that conclusion. Remember that by 'either side' he meant for sisu and Higgs to reach the proposed deal within the ITS.
Sisu were not allowed to speak to Higgs advisors - PwC - and so unable to directly address their concerns. They were also still negotiating with CCC on the parts in the ITS that the Higgs deal depended on.
So the judge could not find that Higgs were interested in concluding the deal - otherwise they would have allowed sisu to speak to PwC.
And he could not find that sisu were interested in concluding the deal - as contact between sisu and Higgs were sparse while sisu negotiated with CCC.

 

[Godiva]

Just out of curiosity, do you think that anything will come to light in the JR that will paint Sisu in a bad light?

Hm - hard to answer. It's a case about illegal state aid.
If anything I would say it doesn't look pretty that sisu were involved in a plan to distress the YB loan.
But then again, when CCC negotiated with YB to buy the loan for themselves they tried the same tactic.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

He used the word 'appetite' and I understand why he came to that conclusion. Remember that by 'either side' he meant for sisu and Higgs to reach the proposed deal within the ITS.
Sisu were not allowed to speak to Higgs advisors - PwC - and so unable to directly address their concerns. They were also still negotiating with CCC on the parts in the ITS that the Higgs deal depended on.
So the judge could not find that Higgs were interested in concluding the deal - otherwise they would have allowed sisu to speak to PwC.
And he could not find that sisu were interested in concluding the deal - as contact between sisu and Higgs were sparse while sisu negotiated with CCC.

Frankly, the whole "won't let us speak to their advisors" is a bullshit excuse.

What questions did they want to ask? Why didn't they ask Higgs to ask their advisors those questions? It would very easy for Higgs to say we didn't have access to SISU advisors, but they don't bother, because it's nonsense.

 

[Godiva]

I read it all, and I believe that Higgs were messed around by SISU. Higgs asked for proof of funds and asked how any future payments would be secured, there were no answers.

Showing proof of funds require you to show a bank or an escrow balance with the money in it.
That's not the way sisu operate - they have an agreement with investors and obtain their accept for the investment on given conditions.
As long as the conditions wasn't met, sisu could not agree terms with Higgs/CCC/YB and so could not have the money released.
I think ACL/Higgs/CCC knew that.

According to the transcripts the future payment of £4m should be secured against assets until paid.

 

[The Gentleman]

Hm - hard to answer. It's a case about illegal state aid.
If anything I would say it doesn't look pretty that sisu were involved in a plan to distress the YB loan.
But then again, when CCC negotiated with YB to buy the loan for themselves they tried the same tactic.

So you think they are both as bad as each other? Also, not having read all these transcripts and emails from the recent case (due to having a busy life and spare time spent on a golf course), do you think that the emails indicate that it was illegal state aid?

 

[Godiva]

Frankly, the whole "won't let us speak to their advisors" is a bullshit excuse.

What questions did they want to ask? Why didn't they ask Higgs to ask their advisors those questions? It would very easy for Higgs to say we didn't have access to SISU advisors, but they don't bother, because it's nonsense.

Is it? Then why didn't Higgs simply set up a meeting with sisu and PwC?
Just saying 'it's nonsense' is not really an argument.

There's a lot of 'he said, she said', but I read from court transcripts and all evidence - spoken and written - were given under oath.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Showing proof of funds require you to show a bank or an escrow balance with the money in it.
That's not the way sisu operate - they have an agreement with investors and obtain their accept for the investment on given conditions.
As long as the conditions wasn't met, sisu could not agree terms with Higgs/CCC/YB and so could not have the money released.
I think ACL/Higgs/CCC knew that.

According to the transcripts the future payment of £4m should be secured against assets until paid.

Speculation mixed with nonsense.

You don't need to have money in an account to show proof of funds.

Are you seriously telling us you know the 'way SISU operate'?

You think ACL/Higgs/CCC knew that SISU wouldn't be able to meet the terms, a bit weird that SISU thought they could meet them, I guess you know best though.

'Secured against assets until paid' well that's alright then, what could possibly go wrong. I don't know why they didn't just ask SISU for a pinky promise.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Is it? Then why didn't Higgs simply set up a meeting with sisu and PwC?
Just saying 'it's nonsense' is not really an argument.

There's a lot of 'he said, she said', but I read from court transcripts and all evidence - spoken and written - were given under oath.

They didn't want SISU to meet their advisors, seems fair enough to me. If SISU have questions, pass the questions on.

Just saying that what someone else says isn't really an argument, isn't really an argument.

I've read all of it, I found PWKH very believable, I found that Deering was on maternity a lot of the time, or it was up to Fisher, or it was up to Joy.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Night Godiva.

All I want is to watch my home town club in my home town.

Thanks for your insight

 

[Godiva]

So you think they are both as bad as each other? Also, not having read all these transcripts and emails from the recent case (due to having a busy life and spare time spent on a golf course), do you think that the emails indicate that it was illegal state aid?

I do believe they embarked on a joint venture, but I won't get into how bad in percentages I think they all are. I can say however that their combined effort led to us playing in Northampton.

The illegal state aid case is a whole different animal that the case over potential liability for a £29k cost.

Consider this:
Less state aid more efficiently applied: The objective is to target state aid towards activities to which the financial markets are reluctant to loan money or which contribute to growth, competitiveness or the creation of sustainable jobs. However, achieving this objective depends partly on a more refined economic approach.

It's like a rubber band. You can stretch it to a certain point before it breaks.

In this case you cannot argue that the financial markets are reluctant to loan money - clearly sisu has expressed interest to issue the loan.
You cannot argue that the loan contributed to growth - the club moved out and it must have hurt the local economy.
You cannot argue that the loan has created sustainable jobs - if the local economy has shrunk then jobs must have been lost, not gained.


The legislation is complex. Both party will find articles that will suit their case.

One thing I would like to know ... was state aid even considered to be a factor when Chris West, John Mutton etc decided the CCC should fund the loan?

 

[Godiva]

Speculation mixed with nonsense.

You don't need to have money in an account to show proof of funds.

Are you seriously telling us you know the 'way SISU operate'?

You think ACL/Higgs/CCC knew that SISU wouldn't be able to meet the terms, a bit weird that SISU thought they could meet them, I guess you know best though.

'Secured against assets until paid' well that's alright then, what could possibly go wrong. I don't know why they didn't just ask SISU for a pinky promise.

They didn't want SISU to meet their advisors, seems fair enough to me. If SISU have questions, pass the questions on.

Just saying that what someone else says isn't really an argument, isn't really an argument.

I've read all of it, I found PWKH very believable, I found that Deering was on maternity a lot of the time, or it was up to Fisher, or it was up to Joy.

Ok - you are not really arguing anything. Just attacking.
So I will hit the sack.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Ok - you are not really arguing anything. Just attacking.
So I will hit the sack.

I'm pointing out various flaws that I believe to be in the things that you state, it's not an attack, it's arguing a different point of view.

Goodnight darling.

 

[Astute]

Originally Posted by letsallsingtogether
But did she say it was worth nothing yes or no?



She? Joy Seppala?
No JS didn't say that. Her assistant said that.
And it was based on the due diligence they were able to carry out.
Mind you, they were not allowed to speak to PwC who had done their own due diligence (and told Higgs the offer were way above their valuation).

A valuation done on behalf of SISU. A value done with no rent payable for the reason of it being built. Joy had her say through Deering. She didn't answer the harder questions.

Originally Posted by letsallsingtogether
and why buy something that is worth nothing?



Two reasons -
1) It was sisu's plan to bring in AEG and restructure the Areana business. That would raise the value.
(ACL followed that advice and made a joint venture with Compass to the same effect).
2) The club would benefit from a peppercorn rent and access to all year Arena revenue. That would increase the value of the club.
(So both could be sold in the future and pay back the investments made by Sisu's investors).

Correct. But you can also word it that it is to the benefit of SISU and not our club.

Originally Posted by letsallsingtogether
And would they have paid or taken the charity to court yet again on some technicality, just to pay nothing and then sell it on for a larger amount and the new owner then adding he purchase price to the debt we already own?



Who took who to court????
I believe it was Higgs who took sisu to court!
And ACL took the club to court ... and then ACL forced the club into administration.

Joy threatened liquidation of our club if she didn't get her own way. Then again she threatened liquidation before ACL went for administration. So Joy then went for administration so she could put Appleton in place

Originally Posted by letsallsingtogether
Come on we all know how it works!!!



No, apparently you don't

​We all have an idea how it works. Having an idea don't mean anyone is right though. To know if you are right or not you would need to know Joy's future plans. You would also need to know what we yet don't know. Which is why I now say we need to wait for the JR to occur.

 

[Astute]

Showing proof of funds require you to show a bank or an escrow balance with the money in it.
That's not the way sisu operate - they have an agreement with investors and obtain their accept for the investment on given conditions.
As long as the conditions wasn't met, sisu could not agree terms with Higgs/CCC/YB and so could not have the money released.
I think ACL/Higgs/CCC knew that.

According to the transcripts the future payment of £4m should be secured against assets until paid.

Who would trust SISU to pay a debt in the future? I would expect litigation before repayment. Maybe Higgs did too.

And what assets would the 4m have been secured on? They were trying to say that the contract was valueless so if they were right there how can they say by taking it over it would be equity with a value :thinking about: CCFC have no assets. Or what they do have would go to SISU's investors first.

 

[italiahorse]

Who would trust SISU to pay a debt in the future? I would expect litigation before repayment. Maybe Higgs did too.

And what assets would the 4m have been secured on? They were trying to say that the contract was valueless so if they were right there how can they say by taking it over it would be equity with a value :thinking about: CCFC have no assets. Or what they do have would go to SISU's investors first.

I think the point would certainly be valid if all the stadium did was host football.
With no team a stadium bowl would be worthless.
This is why a stadium company would want a long lease and this is why CCC only agreed to build the stadium after CCFC sold Highfield Road and spent the money.
There is certainly no doubt that without CCC that CCFC would have been homeless.

Sisu broke the lease but the stadium kept it's head above water by having more in its portfolio than just football.
There is no doubt that the rearranged loan helped the situation and scuppered the Sisu plan, hence their need to pursue the JR.

Just go Sisu and do the right thing for the fans. There is nothing for you here.

 

[lewys33]

I regularly consider myself to be saving my landlord ....... Actually FUCK HIM. Im gonna move to Bell Green.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I regularly consider myself to be saving my landlord ....... Actually FUCK HIM. Im gonna move to Bell Green.

Maybe try somewhere between Bell Green and Wood End.

 

[lewys33]

Maybe try somewhere between Bell Green and Wood End.

Is there a place called Green Wood??

 

[lordsummerisle]

There is no doubt that the rearranged loan helped the situation and scuppered the Sisu plan, hence their need to pursue the JR.

A particularly good plan that would, after too many years, have reunited club with stadium.

Scuppered deliberately, and in a rather underhand way by CCC, which is why we're in Northampton and The Ricoh has Spider Pig or whatever.

If you swapped round the Sisu and ACL/CCC words in the emails and documents released last week the outrage on here would be incredible.

Would all be "Fucking sisu stitch-up, don't blame the council for moving out after being treated like that"

 

[lordsummerisle]

Is there a place called Green Wood??

Was thinking of Bell Wood myself.

 

[italiahorse]

I regularly consider myself to be saving my landlord ....... Actually FUCK HIM. Im gonna move to Bell Green.

Why don't you put a bid in for the house instead.
I bet if you told him you were going to stop the rent for a year and then move out of town he might be interested.
I know when he took you in you were homeless but sod him, offer him 50% of what it's worth.
You can always take him to court, they are bound to agree that he threw you out.

 

[Godiva]

Is there a place called Green Wood??

Was thinking of Bell Wood myself.

Bell End?

 

[lewys33]

A particularly good plan that would, after too many years, have reunited club with stadium.

Scuppered deliberately, and in a rather underhand way by CCC, which is why we're in Northampton and The Ricoh has Spider Pig or whatever.

If you swapped round the Sisu and ACL/CCC words in the emails and documents released last week the outrage on here would be incredible.

Would all be "Fucking sisu stitch-up, don't blame the council for moving out after being treated like that"

Probably right. But anyone who thought CCC had no role in this are moronic. Two wrongs don't make a right though, and ultimately the final decision to play in Northampton was from 1 side only.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Bell End?

That's a bit off!

 

[lewys33]

Why don't you put a bid in for the house instead.
I bet if you told him you were going to stop the rent for a year and then move out of town he might be interested.
I know when he took you in you were homeless but sod him, offer him 50% of what it's worth.
You can always take him to court, they are bound to agree that he threw you out.

To be fair he probably would kick me out within a month, rather than me move out myself after 6.

 

[lewys33]

Bell End?

How DARE you!!!

 

[italiahorse]

A particularly good plan that would, after too many years, have reunited club with stadium.

Scuppered deliberately, and in a rather underhand way by CCC, which is why we're in Northampton and The Ricoh has Spider Pig or whatever.

If you swapped round the Sisu and ACL/CCC words in the emails and documents released last week the outrage on here would be incredible.

Would all be "Fucking sisu stitch-up, don't blame the council for moving out after being treated like that"

The club will never be reunited with the stadium as the only way that can happen is if they own the stadium.
If Sisu own the stadium they will rent it to the club not give it too them.
Surely you can understand that?

 

[Godiva]

The club will never be reunited with the stadium as the only way that can happen is if they own the stadium.
If Sisu own the stadium they will rent it to the club not give it too them.
Surely you can understand that?

If they own both are they not united?
ARVO now owns the club (Otium), but it's under the SBS&L umbrella.
It would make no sense for sisu not to place the stadium under the same umbrella.

 

[lewys33]

If they own both are they not united?
ARVO now owns the club (Otium), but it's under the SBS&L umbrella.
It would make no sense for sisu not to place the stadium under the same umbrella.

If they charge us rent though we are back to square 1?

 

[italiahorse]

Probably right. But anyone who thought CCC had no role in this are moronic. Two wrongs don't make a right though, and ultimately the final decision to play in Northampton was from 1 side only.

Not sure on this.
I feel that CCC should have been more sympathetic to CCFC plight and charged rent accordingly.
Can't remember any requests from CCFC to reduce the rent and CCC refusing. Or in fact any discussions.
But I feel that because they didn't reduce it initially they played into Sisu hands and gave them the excuse to stress the Ricoh.

I am convinced that Sisu always planned to stress the Ricoh from day one.

 

[lewys33]

Not sure on this.
I feel that CCC should have been more sympathetic to CCFC plight and charged rent accordingly.
Can't remember any requests from CCFC to reduce the rent and CCC refusing. Or in fact any discussions.
But I feel that because they didn't reduce it initially they played into Sisu hands and gave them the excuse to stress the Ricoh.

I am convinced that Sisu always planned to stress the Ricoh from day one.

I was aiming it more towards Chris West told Higgs that SISU knew (or would know) that they were talking to YB as well.

Just to query as I haven't seen any - do we have any proof that sisu DIDN'T know??

 

[italiahorse]

If they charge us rent though we are back to square 1?

It may be an interdepartmental transfer of costs but its still rent.
I think I am blinded by Sisu treatment of fans and will never be able to accept them even if their intentions are good.

 

[Hobo]

It may be an interdepartmental transfer of costs but its still rent.
I think I am blinded by Sisu treatment of fans and will never be able to accept them even if their intentions are good.

Or blinded by reality!

 

[Godiva]

If they charge us rent though we are back to square 1?

So far all that was on the table was for sisu to acquire Higgs shares - not CCC's shares.
This mean that ACL would be a joint venture between CCC and sisu.
The idea was that ACL would charge the club a peppercorn rent. The amount would be decided by sisu and CCC.
Any rent paid by the club would have to be funded ultimately by sisu/ARVO, so not in their interest to work for a high rent.