Valuations of ACL

[Astute]

Would it be "stupidball" to take out a loan for $14million for something that they think themselves is pretty much valueless just to stick it up the City big boys?

So you are ignoring the fact of the judge saying about the value at the time the loan was taken out and not whilst SISU were doing their best to devalue the arena? So even the judge is wrong now?

 

[Astute]

Anybody could and can, most haven't actually bothered to read them though.

To be fair only just finished Day one, so didn't feel free to comment much before as not read it.

Doesn't stop many others though.

Do you mean the same ones agreeing with what is said whilst looking at it all from one side only? Where will it get us?

If we are to have a proper debate on the matter we need to look at both sides. And it doesn't seem to be happening on this thread. I suppose you can also add crap about me at the same time :facepalm:

 

[Godiva]

From reading what you have put on this thread you would think that all comments in the court were very good for SISU and ACL/CCC are to blame for everything. You haven't posted one single point that went against SISU if not pointed out to you. Anyone could do the same the other way round but why add to the shitfest?

I post my findings - you should post yours.
Then we can have a debate.

 

[Hobo]

I post my findings - you should post yours.
Then we can have a debate.

Why don't you phone the judge?

 

[skybluetony176]

I post my findings - you should post yours.
Then we can have a debate.

At the end of the day your "findings" mean shit, as would mine if I was to post them up here.

In the interest of harmony it would probably be a good idea for everyone to stop posting their "findings" and wait until the judge has decided what's fact and what's fiction, what's relevant and irrelevant. Only then will a balanced debate be able to start and then it should be about one subject only. How we fan's use the judge's rulings to put pressure on all parties to make happen what we and our club deserve, a return to the Ricoh for the start of next season.

If you're discussing anything else you're just pissing in the wind.

 

[Astute]

I post my findings - you should post yours.
Then we can have a debate.

I did post mine. My findings were from reading your posts. You were only trying to find fault with ACL/CCC and ignored anything that could have looked bad for SISU. Everyone could see what you were up to. And everyone could see who those were agreeing with you. Not one of them a surprise at all. It won't help in the JR.

 

[Hobo]

At the end of the day your "findings" mean shit, as would mine if I was to post them up here.

In the interest of harmony it would probably be a good idea for everyone to stop posting their "findings" and wait until the judge has decided what's fact and what's fiction, what's relevant and irrelevant. Only then will a balanced debate be able to start and then it should be about one subject only. How we fan's use the judge's rulings to put pressure on all parties to make happen what we and our club deserve, a return to the Ricoh for the start of next season.

If you're discussing anything else you're just pissing in the wind.

Absolutely, too many people inflating there own egos! A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Godiva won't get us back to the Ricoh or into a new stadium.

 

[skybluetony176]

Absolutely, too many people inflating there own egos! A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Godiva won't get us back to the Ricoh or into a new stadium.

Until the judges report is out you don't even know what's fact. You may as well be debating who done more for the poor Robin Hood or Mother Theresa under the guise that they're both real historical figures. It's a pointless exercise.

 

[Hobo]

Until the judges report is out you don't even know what's fact. You may as well be debating who done more for the poor Robin Hood or Mother Theresa under the guise that they're both real historical figures. It's a pointless exercise.

People are banding the term illegal state aid about, with no in depth knowledge. Someone posted the other day quoting half a legal definition.....ignoring a whole chunk of legislation!

That's before you take into consideration it is a test case!

 

[Moff]

In the interest of harmony it would probably be a good idea for everyone to stop posting their "findings" and wait until the judge has decided what's fact and what's fiction, what's relevant and irrelevant. Only then will a balanced debate be able to start and then it should be about one subject only. How we fan's use the judge's rulings to put pressure on all parties to make happen what we and our club deserve, a return to the Ricoh for the start of next season. If you're discussing anything else you're just pissing in the wind.

Hilarious as if that would ever happen, there are so many experts on this site who know it all.

It amazes me though that Godiva has bothered to read the report and post his interpretation, yet others haven't and decry what he has done. Wouldn't it be better if those people tried making the effort themselves and post their take on the issue, rather than pissing on Godiva's fire as he hasn't toed the party line.

 

[skybluetony176]

People are banding the term illegal state aid about, with no in depth knowledge. Someone posted the other day quoting half a legal definition.....ignoring a whole chunk of legislation!

That's before you take into consideration it is a test case!

Funny ain't it. I recon we should start a debate on how to build a rocket to the moon that runs on fresh air. If we put our "findings" together I reckon we'll be there by breakfast. You up for it?

 

[Grendel]

I post my findings - you should post yours.
Then we can have a debate.

He needs a post from OSB to tell him what's going on.

 

[Hobo]

Hilarious as if that would ever happen, there are so many experts on this site who know it all.

It amazes me though that Godiva has bothered to read the report and post his interpretation, yet others haven't and decry what he has done. Wouldn't it be better if those people tried making the effort themselves and post their take on the issue, rather than pissing on Godiva's fire as he hasn't toed the party line.

I have read it, plus a load of other legislation and resources. It is no good pretending it is simple legislation.

But let's face it, you stand a one in two chance of backing the right horse if you want to trap off.

But my legal experience says keep your money in your pocket if you genuinely want to guess the outcome.

 

[skybluetony176]

Hilarious as if that would ever happen, there are so many experts on this site who know it all.

It amazes me though that Godiva has bothered to read the report and post his interpretation, yet others haven't and decry what he has done. Wouldn't it be better if those people tried making the effort themselves and post their take on the issue, rather than pissing on Godiva's fire as he hasn't toed the party line.

To what end? The only purpose it would serve is to wind themselves up or supply ammunition to wind others up. Even then their "findings" could be so way of the mark they just end up looking stupid.

 

[Moff]

I have read it, plus a load of other legislation and resources. It is no good pretending it is simple legislation.

But let's face it, you stand a one in two chance of backing the right horse if you want to trap off.

But my legal experience says keep your money in your pocket if you genuinely want to guess the outcome.

Thats fair enough Hobo, and I certainly agree with what you have written.

 

[Hobo]

He needs a post from OSB to tell him what's going on.

We all know we are waiting on the Judges findings.

 

[Astute]

He needs a post from OSB to tell him what's going on.

So you know more than OSB? You can work this mess out better than OSB?

Or are you jealous so you just want to rip into OSB because he is much wiser and intelligent than yourself?

 

[Moff]

To what end? The only purpose it would serve is to wind themselves up or supply ammunition to wind others up. Even then their "findings" could be so way of the mark they just end up looking stupid.

Tony, you wouldn't say that if OSB or PKH had posted, and yet as Godiva has given a contrary opinion so you tell him to stop. From someone who has given his opinion on many posts, as have I, I find the ironyometer went off the scale at your post.

 

[skybluesam1987]

Whatever the judge decides there will still be people on here who will feel he has got it wrong.

Sent from my TegraNote-P1640 using Tapatalk

 

[lordsummerisle]

To what end? The only purpose it would serve is to wind themselves up or supply ammunition to wind others up. Even then their "findings" could be so way of the mark they just end up looking stupid.

I take it that if i look back on the 51, yes 51(and i'm set at 30 posts a page), pages across three threads concerning the JR last week that neither you, Hobo, nor Astute would have made any comment at all on it?

Expect you were all waiting for the judges verdict first?

 

[lordsummerisle]

So you know more than OSB? You can work this mess out better than OSB?

Or are you jealous so you just want to rip into OSB because he is much wiser and intelligent than yourself?

Some real sycophants on here.

 

[skybluetony176]

Tony, you wouldn't say that if OSB or PKH had posted, and yet as Godiva has given a contrary opinion so you tell him to stop. From someone who has given his opinion on many posts, as have I, I find the ironyometer went off the scale at your post.

Sorry Moff, I didn't realise that you're telepathic and know my every thought. Oh wait you don't. Godiva has given an opinion, no more and no less. Unfortunately his opinion is based on what he has decided is relevant and fact before it's been ruled to be either relevant or fact.

The judges ruling is probably the first time in years we have had the chance to make an informed opinion on fact yet some seem to want to bask in the glory of uncertainty and here say. Well more fool them.

 

[limoncello]

Sorry Moff, I didn't realise that you're telepathic and know my every thought. Oh wait you don't. Godiva has given an opinion, no more and no less. Unfortunately his opinion is based on what he has decided is relevant and fact before it's been ruled to be either relevant or fact.

The judges ruling is probably the first time in years we have had the chance to make an informed opinion on fact yet some seem to want to bask in the glory of uncertainty and here say. Well more fool them.

So you're saying if the judge rules in favour of Sisu you're going to admit that you're a bit of a simpleton and was wrong about everything? Very Damoscene of you. Respect.

 

[Hobo]

I take it that if i look back on the 51, yes 51(and i'm set at 30 posts a page), pages across three threads concerning the JR last week that neither you, Hobo, nor Astute would have made any comment at all on it?

Expect you were all waiting for the judges verdict first?

I think you will find I advocated caution. I even suggested some people would be disappointed because they didn't understand the JR's remit.....in other words there would be no smoking gun. I think I was first to post the judges decision would take several weeks before the JR even started.

But go ahead and prove me wrong if you wish.

 

[skybluetony176]

I take it that if i look back on the 51, yes 51(and i'm set at 30 posts a page), pages across three threads concerning the JR last week that neither you, Hobo, nor Astute would have made any comment at all on it?

Expect you were all waiting for the judges verdict first?

You look if you like and post them on here too. At the end of the day I've realised that there is no point drawing any conclusions until the judge has spoken. I'm also willing to have my opinion changed on what's happened. The only opinion I will stay steadfast in is that there is no good reason for us to have played last season at suxfields and even less reasons for us to start next season there. That was a decision sisu made for themselves, not for the goodness of me or the club I support and as a result of which I will never step foot in the place or help sisu fund it in any way shape or form.

 

[skybluetony176]

So you're saying if the judge rules in favour of Sisu you're going to admit that you're a bit of a simpleton and was wrong about everything? Very Damoscene of you. Respect.

You won't need to admit you're a simpleton if the judge rules in favour of the council. You do it with every post you make.

 

[limoncello]

You won't need to admit you're a simpleton if the judge rules in favour of the council. You do it with every post you make.

So you're saying that you won't admit you're wrong? That's a bit off.

 

[Grendel]

So you know more than OSB? You can work this mess out better than OSB?

Or are you jealous so you just want to rip into OSB because he is much wiser and intelligent than yourself?

If OSB had posted in detail like Godiva has but from his own angle you'd be drooling and swooning like you always do. However as its not OSB you dismiss the analysis even though it is equally as detailed and analytical.

 

[Godiva]

To what end? The only purpose it would serve is to wind themselves up or supply ammunition to wind others up. Even then their "findings" could be so way of the mark they just end up looking stupid.

You know I don't mind end up looking stupid. I do it all the time.
What I have extracted so far - and I am still not through day three - is more about the narratives both sides have presented and less about all the technical stuff like references to previous cases.

So far I believe the council when they argue the rent strike put ACL in distress. I believe the council when they say up till August all parties agreed and acted within the common plan - the roadmap. I believe the council when they argue the bank would never agree to sisu buying the loan at £2m-£5m.

Similary I believe sisu when they say they never went behind the councils back in an attempt to buy the loan. That makes no commercial sense as it would start a bidding war. I also believe sisu when they say they were completely unaware of the councils decision to leave the roadmap. Finally I find the councils argumentation for buying the loan to be flawed and based on false premises. Even the council QC made a flawed argument that the value of ACL at the point of deciding to buy the loan was not £6.4m as claimed by sisu but at least £10m. That argument is flawed as the loan then exceeded the perceived value of the company and thereby left the loan with not enough security.

It's funny you acuse me of purposely supply ammunition to wind others up. Isn't that what has happened in general from ACL (Weber Shandwick) since January 2013? The difference is that I at least try to back my arguments with the facts presented to the court in the hearing.

But I have to agree with posts in this thread saying that nothing said or argued here will have any bearings on the outcome of the JR. I never pretended it would.

 

[skybluetony176]

So you're saying that you won't admit you're wrong? That's a bit off.

Read my previous post to Lord and stop trying to make yourself look like a simpleton.

 

[Astute]

So you're saying if the judge rules in favour of Sisu you're going to admit that you're a bit of a simpleton and was wrong about everything? Very Damoscene of you. Respect.

And if he doesn't are you going to admit what most of us think?

Nobody knows which way this will go. There was no smoking gun like some were hoping. I was expecting at least something. Yet the way some are going on you would think they are not guilty of anything. It is as though some don't give a shit about what is going on with our club as long as SISU get what they are after.

 

[Astute]

If OSB had posted in detail like Godiva has but from his own angle you'd be drooling and swooning like you always do. However as its not OSB you dismiss the analysis even though it is equally as detailed and analytical.

Because he looks at both sides and not just looking for what could be bad news for one side. He breaks down the numbers so we can all understand them even if a few would like to twist them......or even try to say he is all one sided like you are.

 

[skybluetony176]

You know I don't mind end up looking stupid. I do it all the time.
What I have extracted so far - and I am still not through day three - is more about the narratives both sides have presented and less about all the technical stuff like references to previous cases.

So far I believe the council when they argue the rent strike put ACL in distress. I believe the council when they say up till August all parties agreed and acted within the common plan - the roadmap. I believe the council when they argue the bank would never agree to sisu buying the loan at £2m-£5m.

Similary I believe sisu when they say they never went behind the councils back in an attempt to buy the loan. That makes no commercial sense as it would start a bidding war. I also believe sisu when they say they were completely unaware of the councils decision to leave the roadmap. Finally I find the councils argumentation for buying the loan to be flawed and based on false premises. Even the council QC made a flawed argument that the value of ACL at the point of deciding to buy the loan was not £6.4m as claimed by sisu but at least £10m. That argument is flawed as the loan then exceeded the perceived value of the company and thereby left the loan with not enough security.

It's funny you acuse me of purposely supply ammunition to wind others up. Isn't that what has happened in general from ACL (Weber Shandwick) since January 2013? The difference is that I at least try to back my arguments with the facts presented to the court in the hearing.

But I have to agree with posts in this thread saying that nothing said or argued here will have any bearings on the outcome of the JR. I never pretended it would.

Yeah, I stopped reading that as soon as you said "what I have extracted so far". You were starting to sound too much like Leonardo Decaprio in catch me who can when he's in court for the first time acting like the lawyers he's seen in TV drama's. I'm sure you'll get a like of grendull though.

 

[Astute]

You know I don't mind end up looking stupid. I do it all the time.
What I have extracted so far - and I am still not through day three - is more about the narratives both sides have presented and less about all the technical stuff like references to previous cases.

So far I believe the council when they argue the rent strike put ACL in distress. I believe the council when they say up till August all parties agreed and acted within the common plan - the roadmap. I believe the council when they argue the bank would never agree to sisu buying the loan at £2m-£5m.

Similary I believe sisu when they say they never went behind the councils back in an attempt to buy the loan. That makes no commercial sense as it would start a bidding war. I also believe sisu when they say they were completely unaware of the councils decision to leave the roadmap. Finally I find the councils argumentation for buying the loan to be flawed and based on false premises. Even the council QC made a flawed argument that the value of ACL at the point of deciding to buy the loan was not £6.4m as claimed by sisu but at least £10m. That argument is flawed as the loan then exceeded the perceived value of the company and thereby left the loan with not enough security.

It's funny you acuse me of purposely supply ammunition to wind others up. Isn't that what has happened in general from ACL (Weber Shandwick) since January 2013? The difference is that I at least try to back my arguments with the facts presented to the court in the hearing.

But I have to agree with posts in this thread saying that nothing said or argued here will have any bearings on the outcome of the JR. I never pretended it would.

The judge pulled them up when they tried to say tyhat they could have bought the debt for much less than the loan was for. Was this supposed to have been done without trying? And the part on the road map has already been said to be false in the court of law. That is why SISU didn't have to pay Higgs the 29k as neither side wanted to complete the road map idea.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Because he looks at both sides and not just looking for what could be bad news for one side. He breaks down the numbers so we can all understand them even if a few would like to twist them......or even try to say he is all one sided like you are.

Now... I don't like entering a debae and talking about people, as it seems unfair; especially when they are polite to other posters, and willing to take to them and discuss, even when holding a different opinion.

Thing is... both flag up it's opinion, not objectivity, more than most.

And both are unfailingly polite.

Unfair to tar one and not the other, when they are slightly different sides of the same coin.