Acl to comment on Ricoh arena position (7 Viewers)

[Deleted member 5849]

But in this instance you were having a go at ACL only, I was merely suggesting that it is exactly what SISU have been doing for over a year and a half.

So one and a half years of SISU rubbish/spin/lies/fantasy vs one statement by ACL in about 9 months.

I was having a go at acl, because it's a thread about acl's actions.

i was also sayingit's easy for the league to resolve it.

 

---

[oldskyblue58]

Whilst I understand the reactions surely what we need is clarity. The tone is perhaps a little too confrontational. BUT we, SISU and FL now know what it takes to get negotiations started. It is clear and to the point. None of this nonsense of we are thinking about doing something, we are not coming back, we are moving on, oh we might make an offer.

Personally I believe that Otium are going to be about break even this financial year so wont be bleeding funds - can stay at Sixfields in a monetary sense even though that might be suicide long term in relations to the fans. ACL tell us that they can survive without CCFC but clearly need to utilise the stadium bowl - however for a number of years the main income source has not been from football.

So you have to ask who would benefit most from a return to the Ricoh - last set of accounts for CCFC showed income at 6.9m. currently at sixfields excluding player sales I would guess 1.5m in total? ACL do not get the match ticket sales, CCFC do that's worth £3m at the Ricoh or under £500k at Sixfields.... let alone other income. In return say ACL would have rent and match day costs £400k from a CCFC return but lose some income because other events can not be held or hotel rooms not available etc. Other sources well that's where the negotiation comes I guess.

I think what ACL are saying is put up or shut up ...... but if you want to talk of any return this is what you have to do.... do that and we will talk. Sets the parameters and now we all know

Got to be honest if I had a former client threatening to take legal action against me but owing a debt to me and wanting my services then I would want that sorted first - wouldn't you?

 

[oldskyblue58]

@ OSB58 & Simon Gilbert

Am I right in thinking that ACL asked the FL for a copy of the contract between the FL & OEG regarding the payment (not an unreasonable request you would think by ACL as they are supposed to be the recipient) only for the FL to tell them point blank NO?

No idea tony but the FL are quite within their rights to say no. ACL are not party to the agreement and I would think have no legal right to see it even if they do benefit from it

 

[blueflint]

If nothing else, I think this shows the importance of club and stadium being fully united under SBS&L.

The statement can be read in many ways, but not really as a 'come let's talk'.
Is it a sign that ACL is not in a position to offer any discount, but badly need all the cash?
Like earlier (in 2012) when they were not in a position to offer the rent level requested by the club?



if you really think SBS.L should own the Ricoh then your more gullible than i thought

On the other hand, ACL are owed money. OSB may well be right that they are owed the full amount, but without knowing the exact wording of the agreement with the FL ... and keep in mind that sisu may have had some influence on the agreement ... we cannot know if McGinnity/Robinson have paid some of the debt.
Oh, and should it be that McGinnity/Robinson actually have paid some of the debt, then the amount owed to ACL is not reduced by £300t but £500t. The discount ACL gave will still count towards reducing the debt.
But as we don't know the wording, we can't really say how much ACL are owed, and since it is 6 weeks overdue already it seems that the FL are in doubt too.

 

[Snozz_is_god]

Don't we teach our kids that 2 wrongs don't make a right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I don't have any children, never wanted them, they puke, shit, bawl and generally cost loads of money.

However, if I did have kids shouldn't I also teach them to stand up to bullies? or just role over and die.

ACL are standing up to the bully known as SISU and I applaud them.

p.s. I tell you what, if I did have kids, I did I certainly wouldn't take them to Sixfields, just because little Johnny thinks he's missing out.

 

[Hobo]

So where's the fresh start?

Where's the desire to move on?

Where's the tone to help make a deal?

Nothing ever changes does it? It's almost like they want to push them to do the 'or else'!

SISU has a history of asking for a foot then demanding two.
The fresh start is them starting to honour agreements. The desire to move on is we can't until they show some willingness to.

I think they have outlined the base required to move forward....otherwise we will forever be in washy washy SISU agreement land.

 

[stupot07]

I don't have any children, never wanted them, they puke, shit, bawl and generally cost loads of money.

However, if I did have kids shouldn't I also teach them to stand up to bullies? or just role over and die.

ACL are standing up to the bully known as SISU and I applaud them.

p.s. I tell you what, if I did have kids, I did I certainly wouldn't take them to Sixfields, just because little Johnny thinks he's missing out.

The general consensus is that you tell them to tell an adult if they are being bullied. They are not standing up to a bully they're being confrontational.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[blueflint]

The general consensus is that you tell them to tell an adult if they are being bullied. They are not standing up to a bully they're being confrontational.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

i was taught to deal with a bully by confrontation

 

[RoboCCFC90]

At the end of the day the Club should pay the outstanding monies that they are obliged to pay as per their agreement with the Football League and then both parties should grow a pair and get behind a table to discuss a deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

i was taught to deal with a bully by confrontation

Good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Grendel]

here is a thought for you ...... the Alan Higgs centre took a similar stance of pay what you owe before we talk. Obviously the figures are much less but its the same principle. The academy now have an (3yr ?) agreement at allard way.... seems to have worked

As for Lucas taking control do you think that the council were not aware of the statement made - they have two council officers as directors of ACL. It would be reasonable given what has gone on in the last 18months to assume somewhat better communication between ACL and its stakeholders. There is only a rent deal available in my opinion and Lucas is not in a position to offer that - the directors of ACL are

Are ACL in a position of weakness to make this statement? Offer a discount on what? there is no rental agreement in place and surely the ACL financial plans have to be set up ignoring the club coming back or the receipt of the £590k to do otherwise would be irresponsible by the directors surely?

We do not know what is the detail of the OEG/FL agreement certainly. We do know the details of the FL insolvency policy. The fact that any sum is still outstanding and not paid seems to me to be in breach of that FL policy. Whilst ACL might state that the money must be paid they have no contractual right to recover it. However the FL has the right to demand payment.

Still comes back to a much bigger picture - the principle of the football creditors rule is potentially at risk. The FL must decide who to back and make a decision. Or put a different way in one or another for or against - grow some!

The timing of the statement seems very odd. Makes you wonder if the Football League has decreed the payment isn't owed after all.

 

[blueflint]

The timing of the statement seems very odd. Makes you wonder if the Football League has decreed the payment isn't owed after all.

conspiracy theories

 

[skybluetony176]

At the end of the day the Club should pay the outstanding monies that they are obliged to pay as per their agreement with the Football League and then both parties should grow a pair and get behind a table to discuss a deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That would be ideal. It probably will happen eventually but you can bet you're bottom dollar the road will be long, winding and bumpy. Very bumpy.

 

[skybluetony176]

The timing of the statement seems very odd. Makes you wonder if the Football League has decreed the payment isn't owed after all.

I would say you're just trying to put a positive sisu gloss on it as usual but given that this involves the FL anything is possible.

 

[Grendel]

I would say you're just trying to put a positive sisu gloss on it as usual but given that this involves the FL anything is possible.

I am hardly putting a spin on anything merely pointing to a plausible explanation. Just seems an odd communication to make.

 

[Samo]

The end game draws near.

 

[Jack Griffin]

It seems apparent

1) ACL are sure they have the upper hand
2) ACL don't need CCFC this year

And I would say the strategy is to say to SISU, either come back on our terms or prove you are not talking bollocks and build your stadium, ACL are prepared to wait it out.

Meanwhile they apply pressure to the FL.

For ACL it makes no sense tactically to take a conciliatory stance when you reckon you have all but won the game (one SISU started).

 

[stupot07]

It seems apparent

1) ACL are sure they have the upper hand
2) ACL don't need CCFC this year

And I would say the strategy is to say to SISU, either come back on our terms or prove you are not talking bollocks and build your stadium, ACL are prepared to wait it out.

Meanwhile they apply pressure to the FL.

For ACL it makes no sense tactically to take a conciliatory stance when you reckon you have all but won the game (one SISU started).

Or it could be a double bluff.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[ccfc92]

well at least someone has the intelligence to get it, thank you CSB

sorry, I probably misread what you meant

I'm not sure if CUFC would be ideal though, maybe a bigger team/club whatever the sport?

 

[SkyblueBazza]

FULL STORY:

The operators of the Ricoh Arena have said the Sky Blues must pay the £590,000 it owes them....Sisu-owned Otium Entertainment Group, had not yet met its obligation to pay ACL the £590,000

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PLEASE STOP doing this!!!
The Sky Blues/CCFC/The Club are one in the same. SISU/Otium own the Club...they are NOT the Club.
The FANS are the Club.
Fans leave = no Club.
Players/Manager/Owner leaves = enter someone else (good or bad!)


PUSB

 

[ccfc92]

You must realise the balls in SISU's court, only they can bring the club back, how about having a go at SISU.

where's SISU's frest start?, where's the desire from SISU to move on? Where's the tone from SISU to make a deal?

I appauld ACL for having the balls to say it straight, nothing in their statement is spin, it's all the truth, it just some of you don't want to accept it?

More than likely :thinking about:

Agree with that post 100%

 

[Grendel]

It seems apparent

1) ACL are sure they have the upper hand
2) ACL don't need CCFC this year

And I would say the strategy is to say to SISU, either come back on our terms or prove you are not talking bollocks and build your stadium, ACL are prepared to wait it out.

Meanwhile they apply pressure to the FL.

For ACL it makes no sense tactically to take a conciliatory stance when you reckon you have all but won the game (one SISU started).

Exactly the opposite i would have thought. They need the cash hence the "threat". Unless of course they've got a few more to get their kit off and run across the pitch again.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Exactly the opposite i would have thought. They need the cash hence the "threat". Unless of course they've got a few more to get their kit off and run across the pitch again.

Well you are wrong again then.

 

[dongonzalos]

Higgs managed to do a deal with SISU recently. If I am correct an agreement was arranged regarding all legally owned debts first.
So it can be done and has been done before.
SISU should give ACL the money minus the 300k.
Then give the FL the 300k and leave it to them to decide.
Shame it seems by this statement that no negotiations have even started yet.

 

[Grendel]

Well you are wrong again then.

Am I? We will have to see will we not?

You seem desperate for the club to pay even if its not owed.

The other odd thing on this thread is your vague recollection the Middlesbrough may have had a points deduction for failing to fulfil a fixture.

How that recollection is vague to a fan I also find very odd.

 

[dongonzalos]

Oh yeah. Loads of them about. Most fans have been used to running a multi pound loss making enterprise.

What happens to the 590k?

One has been doing just that

 

[ccfc92]

Exactly the opposite i would have thought. They need the cash hence the "threat". Unless of course they've got a few more to get their kit off and run across the pitch again.

Do you have proof that they need the cash? Is there any recent accounts available to view?

 

[Grendel]

Do you have proof that they need the cash? Is there any recent accounts available to view?

How would accounts tell you that out of interest?

 

[ccfc92]

How would accounts tell you that out of interest?

well surely if they are making a profit, they technically don't "need the cash".

obviously no business turns down revenue, but my point is, if their bills and mortgage repayments are up to date, and they are making (if only a small) profit, then they are not desperate surely?

 

[RegTheDonk]

Perhaps ACL, figuring they are owed the money and SISU won't be doing a rent deal (bearing in mind TF said on CWR they are going to appeal the JR which drags it on and on and on...), see this as forcing the FL's hand to get SISU to pay in full?

Another thought, maybe the know something we don't, ie. SISU are not going to build the stadium and want to do a deal ... so they are ensuring the get their dosh first?

Head hurts trying to second guess all these clowns

 

[FRY-CCFC]

Wait, so are we getting a points deduction?

 

[Grendel]

well surely if they are making a profit, they technically don't "need the cash".

obviously no business turns down revenue, but my point is, if they're bills and mortgage repayments are up to date, and they are making (if only a small) profit, then they are not desperate surely?

That's not actually correct. Many companies have profitable balance sheets and yet struggle and sometimes go bust due to cash flow. I don't know if bills are up to date - do you?

Conversely I am an associate director in a company that is making losses but is cash rich. Its profit and loss account looks poor but the bills will be paid for years due to the cash in the bank.

 

[Grendel]

Wait, so are we getting a points deduction?

Much to Jacks disappointment I don't think so.

 

[FRY-CCFC]

Thank Christ for that

 

[ccfc92]

That's not actually correct. Many companies have profitable balance sheets and yet struggle and sometimes go bust due to cash flow. I don't know if bills are up to date - do you?

Conversely I am an associate director in a company that is making losses but is cash rich. Its profit and loss account looks poor but the bills will be paid for years due to the cash in the bank.

Yes, I know it's not as simple as income - expenditure = a good business. I mean if ACL are sustainable, then they are not desperate surely?

It was purely a question of your post, not an argument over exact finances