J
Jack Griffin
Guest
On twitter....
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
How much lower are Sisu going to take us ?
It won't be their fault though !!
It won't be their fault though !!
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Quick translation is the payment will still be paid but it won't be paid by end of may.
Be an interesting read for sure. Wonder if we will get a ML special degrading comment as usual?
Be an interesting read for sure. Wonder if we will get a ML special degrading comment as usual?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
So I see you all traveled to the future to read the article before coming back here to tell us what it says....
Did anyone bring back the blue prints for a hover board?
If I get any older waiting for them to come out I'll need a hover zimmer frame to go with it.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
Why should they pay the £590k when our previous directors guaranteed to pay £500k! So by my reckoning we should pay them the balance of £95k
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Not connected. One's an agreement between Otium and the FL and the other is an agreement between ACL and MM/GR.
Besides MM & GR only paid £150K each, £300K in total not £500K.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Funny, GR & MM negotiated a settlement with ACL, how come SISU can't negotiate anything?
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
So I see you all traveled to the future to read the article before coming back here to tell us what it says....
No your right Ian. The debt has been paid, Labovitch was just playing when he spoke about the mechanics of bank transfers and the possibility of it being late. Furthermore, Sisu/Otium reveal that SP has all the money from the sale of Leon Clarke to spend on players with an extra £500k on top. Finally, a site has been purchased and planning permission put in for the new stadium. Sorry but that future only exists in the land of Disney or are you telling me that you draw optimism from all the goings on in the last 2 years and expect really good news?
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
So it's ok for you to come on here like you have in the past and try to guess about the financial viability of say ACL in the future, but when some try to work out what will be happening about an upcoming news report and try to guess what it will contain you decide to try and take the piss?
Senior Vick from Alicante
Well-Known Member
Labovitch stated in a previous radio interview with Eakin that the money is due to be paid to Acl on the completion of the administration process. Appleton has still not finished it yet so if Sisu can drag it out for another couple of weeks so the Jr is decided, depending on the outcome they could theoretically not have to pay it.
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
Deadline has passed, and we at the Football League definitely made sure the Coventry owners are forced to promise us they're good for the cash and totally sent the cheque in the post. They followed by telling us to 'chill out', which we view as a satisfactory resolution.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Are you a lawyer for sisu? Lol
No as SBT states they are not connected so the 590k is a condition of staying in the football league not actual rent.
The actual rent due was around 1.8m so if your theory holds true isn't it only 1.3 to pay?
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Labovitch says many things, I would suggest it foolish for anyone to believe all that he comes out with. The admin process completion has nothing to do with the FL insistence that payment should be made to ACL by the current holder of the golden share.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Just to clear up for people who still live in the dark ages, money transfers can be made within an hour these days.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Well hopefully it will get paid 23.59 tomorrow night then.
To be fair if it was my money I would rather leave it in my bank gaining interest than pay it early and let someone else gain the interest on it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Astute
Well-Known Member
Money transfers are immediate these days. All you need to do is make the transfer during banking hours and have the money in the account that you are transferring from. I have done them for all amounts up to just over 3k. That one was for my mother last year. She booked a holiday where she paid a deposit. She needed a replacement card for her main account where she receives rent from some of her tenants. So she had paid the deposit from her pension bank account and asked for the rest to come from another account. They got this part wrong. Her bank thought a fraud was going on and contacted her. She worked out what it was and called me. I transferred the money to her account and called her. She then called her bank that was different to mine. It was already in there.
Or a couple of months ago I sold some American shares that I have a holding of. I had to choose a date at least 3 days ahead so the deal could be done. But the money was in my account the same day of the sale. I know this as the share price and exchange rate was quoted to me for the day the money arrived in my account. This was an international transfer where the time difference and exchange rate comes into it. So why can't SISU manage it?
Sbarcher
Well-Known Member
It's a telegraphic transfer. Pretty instant. I used it last week to help out a new friend in Nigeria. Turns out he is coming into millions of pounds, just needed me to send him £10,000 to bribe an official to release the money from the State bank. I'll get £1 million back when it goes through. Talk about easy money, I'll be rich next week.
ArchieLittle
New Member
That's amazing. My new Nigerian friend is just about to come into a lot of money too. I've given him my bank details so he can transfer it here.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Hey Guy's, if I were you lot I wouldn't trust those Nigerians because a man from South America told me it is all a scam. He then told me that if I transfer £10k into his account he will make sure that I don't get contacted about anymore scams.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
Ok plus the £500k that ACL sucked out of the escrow account
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They are entirely connected. The amount determined by the football league was the same as the rent so if the outstanding rent was £290,000 that would be the amount to pay.
To say otherwise is nonsense.
Mr T - Sukka!
Active Member
The clock is ticking SISU.
You will be at the full wrath of the FL!
You know the organisation with no backbone who doesnt follow its own rules.
You will be at the full wrath of the FL!
You know the organisation with no backbone who doesnt follow its own rules.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Simons story has been posted now. Sorry don't know how to do a link on my phone so if someone could do the honours.
Doesn't look good.
Doesn't look good.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/confusion-over-football-league-deadline-7195827
Looks like there is some confusion but legally sisu have to pay the sum owed.
Looks like there is some confusion but legally sisu have to pay the sum owed.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
As soon as Labovitch opens his mouth confusion starts he seems to be a real problem in this situation.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
So many places where this can be " re interpreted"
The rent that ACL claimed as owed was around 1.4m
The administrator included an amount in his report at 636K after deducting the proceeds of the escrow account £536k and the match day payments approx. £230k
It seems that GR & MM have paid £300k under their guarantee which is either earnings or part payment of the rent liability - not clear
In the CVA proposal there was a figure of £590k proposed. This was made up of a repayment of 24.63p in the £ owed to creditors. 24.63% of the rent liability in the administration report £636 k being £156k. The balance of the £590 proposed was compensation for termination of the lease £434K based on an arbitrary figure of £1.762m x 24.63% decided by Appleton - ie not rent at all. However this was all just a proposal that was rejected and as such the CVA figure never really existed and never became a liability to be paid.
The FL decided Otium who are the "new" owners and not party to any lease at the Ricoh should pay ACL £590k. You would have to ask them why they arrived at that figure but I assume that they did it to match the CVA. To then call it "rent" is wrong if they are basing on the CVA. If they wanted the rent liability paid surely they would have insisted on £636K. The FL did not have to impose any figure at all but could impose any figure they liked as compensation. Cant help but think that the FL didn't fully understand what was going on :thinking about:
Just to confuse things further if we are basing things on the proposed calculated CVA figure and the GR/MM payments then surely the calculation should go like this
Amount owed to ACL per administrator £636k
less the amount from GR/MM £300k
leaves rent outstanding £336k
add to that the administrators compensation calculation for lease termination = £1.762m
leaves a total due to ACL Gross at £2.098m
multiply by the pence in pound they would have received in the CVA proposed 24.63% = £516k
It would seem to me that £516k should be the figure to be paid
But just to be clear if we are basing the payment on the CVA then you have to include all the terms of calculation as well as the amounts paid or claimed. If you do not then the figure has no real basis and is just a figure agreed between Otium and FL. What the £590k imposed by the FL is not it seems to me is a total of £590k in respect of rent
I would also add that in my opinion the statement issued by the club included in Simon's article seems to confuse things further rather than make anything clearer. :thinking about:
The rent that ACL claimed as owed was around 1.4m
The administrator included an amount in his report at 636K after deducting the proceeds of the escrow account £536k and the match day payments approx. £230k
It seems that GR & MM have paid £300k under their guarantee which is either earnings or part payment of the rent liability - not clear
In the CVA proposal there was a figure of £590k proposed. This was made up of a repayment of 24.63p in the £ owed to creditors. 24.63% of the rent liability in the administration report £636 k being £156k. The balance of the £590 proposed was compensation for termination of the lease £434K based on an arbitrary figure of £1.762m x 24.63% decided by Appleton - ie not rent at all. However this was all just a proposal that was rejected and as such the CVA figure never really existed and never became a liability to be paid.
The FL decided Otium who are the "new" owners and not party to any lease at the Ricoh should pay ACL £590k. You would have to ask them why they arrived at that figure but I assume that they did it to match the CVA. To then call it "rent" is wrong if they are basing on the CVA. If they wanted the rent liability paid surely they would have insisted on £636K. The FL did not have to impose any figure at all but could impose any figure they liked as compensation. Cant help but think that the FL didn't fully understand what was going on :thinking about:
Just to confuse things further if we are basing things on the proposed calculated CVA figure and the GR/MM payments then surely the calculation should go like this
Amount owed to ACL per administrator £636k
less the amount from GR/MM £300k
leaves rent outstanding £336k
add to that the administrators compensation calculation for lease termination = £1.762m
leaves a total due to ACL Gross at £2.098m
multiply by the pence in pound they would have received in the CVA proposed 24.63% = £516k
It would seem to me that £516k should be the figure to be paid
But just to be clear if we are basing the payment on the CVA then you have to include all the terms of calculation as well as the amounts paid or claimed. If you do not then the figure has no real basis and is just a figure agreed between Otium and FL. What the £590k imposed by the FL is not it seems to me is a total of £590k in respect of rent
I would also add that in my opinion the statement issued by the club included in Simon's article seems to confuse things further rather than make anything clearer. :thinking about:
Last edited:
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
So I hope covmark, ian, ccfc4life will be happy and still support Sisu after the fl have given ccfc another points deduction !!!!!
My first point its only a calculated figure to be paid there is no excuse for not getting it sorted before deadline !!!
Second point is Sisu don't give a fuck about CCFC if prepared to let CCFC to get further sanctions. Just so they can continue their personal fight with Acl !!!
My first point its only a calculated figure to be paid there is no excuse for not getting it sorted before deadline !!!
Second point is Sisu don't give a fuck about CCFC if prepared to let CCFC to get further sanctions. Just so they can continue their personal fight with Acl !!!