Any chance of words in the form of answers? Please confirm what you meant by "it's happened". Has SISU dropped the JR and affirmed willingness to negotiate a way out of this impasse? Yes or no.
Labovitch calls for independent ACL valuation (21 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
Any chance of words in the form of answers? Please confirm what you meant by "it's happened". Has SISU dropped the JR and affirmed willingness to negotiate a way out of this impasse? Yes or no.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
Read the Higgs v Sisu legal docs. There's been enough background on CT site and even here if you go back through Summer 2012 to Autumn 3013 too.
Sisu want to break ACL to get a lease, ACL want to break Sisu to get a more preferable owner. Fans suffer.
End the blame game, start the solution game.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Rob, Joy will not build a new stadium not unless she wants to lose more of her investors money.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Completely agree with that point.
Unfortunately, it's difficult to see that happening until the JR is out of the way.
Perhaps afterwards?????????
Sorry to bother you. You said "it's happened" and I should be with you. Please clarify.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Not banter. Just fair questions. If I was to make such claims I would give a reply as to why I think so. You accused Higgs/ACL/CCC of something that we don't see. But don't reply why you think so. As I said earlier you make some good points but ruin it with accusations that you don't back up. This isn't me having a go. Just saying it as I see it.
And yes I see a lease for SISU as being a way forward. But that would leave our club open to a high rent. My favored way would be for SISU to purchase the Higgs half of ACL and as part of this do a deal with CCC to extend the lease. All profits to go to our club other than paying back the outstanding loan. CCC having a say in what goes on so there would be less chance of our club being charged an extortionate rent in the future. Or even a rent structure set out, like for instance the rent payable at whatever the loan repayments are.
We need this to move forward, but to do this the litigation needs to come to an end. How can they deal with each other with all this crap going on? Joy won't build a stadium. It would cost more than our club and the stadium would be worth....and that is without adding more debt of financing a new ground. It would put our debt at close to 100m. How many division 3 clubs would sell for 25m even if they play in the place where they come from? And how much would this stadium cost?
Astute
Well-Known Member
So a SISU accusation is your idea of proof? :facepalm:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
The last statement made by Ann Lucas, the 'we're moving on' one, included "I continue to be available on behalf of the Council to discuss with the owners of football club a reuniting of the Sky Blues with the Ricoh Arena". She has also stated repeatedly that any serious offer from anyone, including SISU, would be considered so to answer your question I would say yes.
Again we are in a situation where SISU can easily call her bluff. All they need to do is publically state there is no new ground and they want the Ricoh lease, put a bid on the table and wait for a response from the council. If the council reject it then they would need to state why. If they refuse to state why or don't give a 'valid' reason then pressure would swing towards the council.
At the moment we have the council saying they will listen to any offer yet no offer has been submitted and SISU are saying they aren't interested in the Ricoh and are building a new ground!
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Yes it doesn't work
Ownership of a company depends on owning the shares not the loans. Take your pick but Otium owe at least £13m to Arvo plus accumulated interest and SBS&L owe 28.5m plus accumulated interest. Someone comes in as new owners then unless those loans (Plus interest) are written off then the loans still stand. So how does that make it debt free? Can you see SISU or ARVO writing it all off? Even if they do that just takes the net Balance sheet back to £nil with the likelihood of future losses to be funded.
Negotiate a 125 year lease - well to do that you would either have to pay the costs of dismantling ACL or expect CCC/Charity to write off their investment after settling the compensation for breaking leases and contracts. There is of course a cost of acquiring 125 year lease that would be payable to CCC so Charity is not going to be exactly happy. Can the CCC wind up ACL without a Charity veto? Would or do either stakeholder want or envisage winding ACL up at extra cost to themselves?
To acquire the lease will cost money that the club has not got so that if deal even possible would mean borrowing more from ARVO/SISU. Or CCC grant ACL 150 year lease (at a cost) and then grant CCFC 125 year lease..... of course that leaves ACL in place (not what SISU want)and CCFC paying a potential lease premium to ACL which means more borrowing
CCC only get the £14m back if the loan is settled by ACL and ACL only clear of ccc loan if they get paid or a loan to clear it. If they could presently clear the loan of £14m from cashflow then the current value of ACL is substantial and the loan would not exist in the first place. If say SISU paid out £14m to CCC then ACL would owe SISU - cant see that happening can you.
You need to explain how ACL is removed from the picture at minimal/no cost to CCC or Charity before you can even start to talk about 125 year leases for CCFC
As for a new owner offering £35m for the new set up......... that still leaves multi million losses on investment for ARVO and SISU investors.
Also how much worth do you think an under performing under financed L1 team brings to the party? An investor would be better off buying the Arena, then the club for £1 (majority if not all loans written off)and raising working capital for the club by a share issue to fans
It isn't about giving SISU a way out- that's the way business goes you lose some and sometimes badly - it is about bringing the club back at the least cost and most sustainable way.
Nice idea but I do not see how it works
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
How many offers have been made to SISU?
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/sisu-boss-joy-seppala-rejects-6363684
Top of the article shows how SISU don't want to bring our club home. The bottom shows that the door is still open, although a rent free offer had just been turned down.
Astute
Well-Known Member
I should have gone to school more. Would have been better at putting sentences together like yourself OSB
ACL don't like or trust SISU. According to the court documents CCC wanted to "persuade" SISU to sell up and if that didn't work, to continue negotiating with them. They went behind SISU's back, as did SISU go behind Higgs' back previously. Naughty, but not unlawful.
The solution game is easy: the person/ company that started the JR, and now looks like getting nowhere with it, should stop the JR. The person who said she doesn't negotiate should say that she has changed her mind and affirm willingness to negotiate a way out of this impasse.
The only thing from a financial point of view that should matter is "commercial advantage" - the blame game is obsolete - and the way forward involves making sure that both parties gain some advantage in comparison to the mess that they are in now.
Pick the phone up Joy...
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
if an offer was rejected and ccc wasn't forthcoming with a reason why, would an FOI request for this reasoning mean that the council couldn't dodge the question?
surely making an offer would call everyone's bluff if that is the case?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Not sure if they could use commercial confidentiality as a get out for a FOI request but if SISU call their bluff and they refuse to give a valid response that by itself would be enough to see some people attitude start to change leading to pressure on the council. Going after the council is fair game once there is something to go after them for. At the moment it seems to be go after the council to get them to talk to SISU when there is nothing to suggest that they wouldn't consider any offer made by SISU.
duffer
Well-Known Member
ACL may indeed have fancied a new owner once the Administration process started - but once again it's obvious that there's no mechanism for that to happen if SISU pay the bills, or indeed negotiate in good faith. There were plenty of chances to sort this way before it got into Appleton's hands, and indeed even after that. Regardless, we are where we are.
So Rob, let me ask the question again. What specifically are ACL doing now to distress SISU?
Offering them a rent free/low rent deal?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I think there are a few assumptions that are made
- that everyone wants the club back in Coventry - no one would or could argue against that surely
- that the Ricoh arena is for sale - no one who owns it (lease or freehold) has said it is.
- that the Ricoh Arena is the clubs right to buy - no one has seen anything that confirms this, it might be desirable but there is no right
- that the Charity wants out - it hasn't said so, only that it is prepared to talk with anyone who comes with a sensible offer until then they sit tight
- that negotiations are on an equal footing - are they? are both sides need to do a deal equal?
- that neither can survive without the other - ask whose shoes would you rather be in from a hard cold business angle? We don't actually know this to be true
not to mention a few other assumptions. This is business I am afraid and we the fans are stuck in the middle with next to no say in it. We can come up with all sorts of plans, ideas that to us seem reasonable but in the end it has to work for all sides on a business level. What are both sides bringing to the table????
- that everyone wants the club back in Coventry - no one would or could argue against that surely
- that the Ricoh arena is for sale - no one who owns it (lease or freehold) has said it is.
- that the Ricoh Arena is the clubs right to buy - no one has seen anything that confirms this, it might be desirable but there is no right
- that the Charity wants out - it hasn't said so, only that it is prepared to talk with anyone who comes with a sensible offer until then they sit tight
- that negotiations are on an equal footing - are they? are both sides need to do a deal equal?
- that neither can survive without the other - ask whose shoes would you rather be in from a hard cold business angle? We don't actually know this to be true
not to mention a few other assumptions. This is business I am afraid and we the fans are stuck in the middle with next to no say in it. We can come up with all sorts of plans, ideas that to us seem reasonable but in the end it has to work for all sides on a business level. What are both sides bringing to the table????
Last edited:
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
I like Rob s and appreciate his efforts but I think he is confused on this one.
OSB has quite rightly pointed out the ways in which the solution outlined won't work and Rob a you claimed you're surprised it isn't in the media this week? Well what? This isn't a children's playground this is our football club and the future of it.
As far as well can all see we will know nothing and nothing will happen until June 12th when the judge rules a decision but even then are we any nearer a solution?
I don't see how ACL are distressing sisu especially will 90% reduction in rent offers and free rent offers whatever fact is offers were made and turned down. ACL may have wanted different owners sure but then again sisu withheld rent and started to get arse about face about it all so yes if it was me running ACL I would want new owners also.
I still don't see with what's wrong with a low rental agreement and either build your new stadium (never in a million years) or negotiate with ACL to claim your 50% stake back that is in the contract in the buy back clause.
The problem is and always has been sisu want something for nothing and then would like to sell on as club and stadium together and do one.
Who is more interested in the fans that's us btw. A caymen islands hedgefund who are greedy selfish business people who "batter people in court" or ccc who run the city most of us live in and actually care about the community and such alike?
OSB has quite rightly pointed out the ways in which the solution outlined won't work and Rob a you claimed you're surprised it isn't in the media this week? Well what? This isn't a children's playground this is our football club and the future of it.
As far as well can all see we will know nothing and nothing will happen until June 12th when the judge rules a decision but even then are we any nearer a solution?
I don't see how ACL are distressing sisu especially will 90% reduction in rent offers and free rent offers whatever fact is offers were made and turned down. ACL may have wanted different owners sure but then again sisu withheld rent and started to get arse about face about it all so yes if it was me running ACL I would want new owners also.
I still don't see with what's wrong with a low rental agreement and either build your new stadium (never in a million years) or negotiate with ACL to claim your 50% stake back that is in the contract in the buy back clause.
The problem is and always has been sisu want something for nothing and then would like to sell on as club and stadium together and do one.
Who is more interested in the fans that's us btw. A caymen islands hedgefund who are greedy selfish business people who "batter people in court" or ccc who run the city most of us live in and actually care about the community and such alike?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
So basically if the council are found to have acted properly in the JR then that's likely to be the bloke tapping the last of the 6ft of dirt on top of the coffin (the last nail of which I think went in sometime ago) that contains the chance of us playing at the Ricoh under Sisu?)
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Important to remember that the Sisu counterclaim was thrown out in its entirity by the judge.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
depends on whether SISU can swallow their pride really doesn't it. The only kind of deal they are going to be offered is a low rental deal on a 10 year rolling contract to meet FL rules and to be allowed to buy in to the match day income rights (and costs). Don't think ACL will bend further than that, the council doesn't get to make the decision.
Problem that they will have is that there are events booked in for next year at least and I assume more to follow that will interfere with the usage by CCFC. Got a feeling that CCFC will be just another tenant not even the anchor tenant if it goes on much longer.
Just my opinion nothing more
Danceswithhorses
Well-Known Member
Exactly, so utterly poor 'proof'
Danceswithhorses
Well-Known Member
So if sisu couldn't move ccfc back to the Ricoh due to legitimate bookings made by paying tenants, they might have to subsidize ccfc in Northampton for another year at least....ouch that will cost them - not much profit there.
Maybe it wasn't such a great idea of Joy's/Tim's for sisu to go on a rent strike, and move the club 35 miles away to distress their landlord ?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Yeah I agree with that - thing is I think my lottery numbers have more chance than Sisu swallowing their pride. It's also just my opinion and I could be wrong.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Your right. CCFC was creaming in millions during its tenancy at the Ricoh.
Danceswithhorses
Well-Known Member
That really isn't relevant at all.
At no point did i say ccfc were 'creaming in millions'.
But instead of this ridiculous situation, sisu could have negotiated a lower rent, or bought the charity's share of ACL.
SISU chose not to.
Do you think the rent strike and removal of ccfc to Northampton was a blinding decision then ?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
If SISU are still saying they'll build a new stadium there is nothing to talk about?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Joy gets bored, gives up on a £60m black hole of debt and just gives it away? Really??? In what acid-fried reality does that happen?
It is called cutting your losses. I think she is playing the game of trying to run CCFC in Northampton at break even till the politicians crack & beg her to bring the club home. That is why a boycott is of Sixfields is needed, because only the FL can stop that situation & it is debatable that they have the balls to force the issue.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The problem is they do and they have the golden share. You can be as fearful as you like as to what horrors may befall us when we're back at the Ricoh but I'd rather be in that position than the one we're in now.
And if nothing else, they are business people who want to make a profit (or avoid too big a loss). A relatively successful club with a secure home is a far more valuable and sellable asset. It doesn't make any business sense to go back to the rent only situation.
Sure, get Sisu to sell the club without a stadium. First you've got to find a buyer who will see that as an attractive prospect. Good luck with that.
Joy gets bored, gives up on a £60m black hole of debt and just gives it away? Really??? In what acid-fried reality does that happen?
The sky blue John world isn't a rational one
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
I should have gone to school more. Would have been better at putting sentences together like yourself OSB
Don't do yourself down, you are very good at putting your point across.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
What
What about Chris West's PR campaign? The one he mentioned in his email. It's indirect financial distress through reputational damage + enforcing a ridiculous rent deal.
What about Chris West's PR campaign? The one he mentioned in his email. It's indirect financial distress through reputational damage + enforcing a ridiculous rent deal.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
Always happy to reply to a polite request
AFAIK, an approach was made or proposed and knocked back by the council. I'm back on the train again so I'll check up on further details and get back to you tomorrow if that's ok?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Was that the email where he said if the Yorkshire bank refuse to accept the offer to buy out the mortgage they could expect a full media campaign?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Are you trying to say that SISU have a reputation to damage :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
More rational than the sisu world. But you keep attacking other fans who hate our owners for doing what they are doing to our club, that will get things sorted.
Tell me. If the JR goes the same way as yesterday's warm up game are you going to actively start criticising sisu for what they have done and most likely carry on doing to our club (possibly regardless of the JR result) or are you just going to carry on attacking your fellow fans who are prepared to make a stand not just for themselves but for other fans, lost future fans and the preservation of the club that we all love?
Always happy to reply to a polite request
AFAIK, an approach was made or proposed and knocked back by the council. I'm back on the train again so I'll check up on further details and get back to you tomorrow if that's ok?
Yes, but.... I said it needed SISU to drop the JR and affirm their willingness to negotiate a way out of this impasse. If they did that and the council refused to negotiate, then I would be with you.
Your answer was "it happened" you're with me then. Apparently nothing happened. They ( SISU ) were in court again, with the usual 7 lawyers, which only aggravated the situation. JR still ongoing and no will to negotiate on SISU's side.
So, I am not with you. Let me know when SISU have dropped the JR and want to enter into negotiations. If the council refuse to accept their offer to negotiate in these circumstances, then I am with you.