Let me quantify my first question. From scouring the internet I'm pretty certain that Isle of Capri had to pay a 'fine' to leave the Ricoh Arena complex as they would have broken their lease agreement. I can't 'prove' it so I wanted to ask.
If it is true, then a multitude of questions stem from that fact, and questions that are important in this dispute.
How much was paid? (From reading Twitter it would seem it could be as much as £7m)
If taken as a lump sum - why was it not in their published accounts from that time period?
If ACL are spreading it out in their accounts (which is a perfectly legal and common practice in business) then what is the distribution? (Again from reading Twitter it may be done at £1m pa - having an impact on the perceived viability of ACL as a business)
If ACL is a self sufficient business that does not need a football club in the Ricoh complex - then why was the business in financial distress? (bearing in mind this 'distressed' period was before CCFC stopped paying rent)
If ACL had this money from Isle of Capri and were not distributing it in their yearly accounts, then why did they need to negotiate with SISU to sell part of their business? And when that turned sour why did CCC need to intervene and buy out their mortgage?
Likewise, lets say it is not true. That brings itself questions that are important too.
How does a partner in the Ricoh complex just walk away from a lease without penalty? Why would some leaseholders be afforded this and not all?
ACL negotiated a pretty brutal lease agreement when CCFC first went to Ricoh, do you not think they would have had similar in place for other partners?
How did someone that was part of ACL not realise that when they went hell for leather to put CCFC in admin, that in doing so it would immediately negate the lease agreement they had worked so hard to protect, and likewise jeopardise their opportunity to not only get back their money, but protect future revenue.
Did the deal that ACL set up with Compass have a break clause? How the hell are they going to pay a catering/event contract when no fans ever use the stadium?
Every single question here goes some way into understanding the motives of ACL.
What do they want?
Why didn't they sign the CVA if the financial outcome would be the same for them?
Why was it that within their own organisation they couldn't even agree on their approach to the CVA?
There is also the question more generally of information. I don't have access to have any secret information. Aside from the reports in the CET and some rooting about on Google, I have only read 3 specific documents relating to CCFC and this dispute.
They are the Arena Cabinet Report on the Ricoh build, the Statement of Facts that was produced for the JR application and the published transcript from last weeks court case. Every single one of these is freely available for all fans to read. Yet it seems to me that plenty of people don't even know about their existence, never mind seening these documents.
Why is this the case? Why hasn't the CET published more information from these? Why is there not a single fans group that has shared these documents with their members? If I was running the SBT I'd have damn well made sure all of my members could have access to all this. Why is only selected information being drip fed into the general domain for the bulk of fans?
