Higgs Share Update (13 Viewers)

[rupert_bear]

I think offering ccfc ltd the half share deal kept everything above board and difficult for Sepalla to challenge in the courts, what she has to do to enable her company to put a bid in isn't the Higgs concern or problem. Isuspect all the scenerios legal or otherwise have been gone through with a fine tooth comb.

 

---

[Grendel]

Probably missed that amongst all the drivel.

Does anyone have a link?

PWKH said it in a radio interview with Shane O Connor

 

[oldfiver]

assuming that Wasps have a 250 year lease on the whole site as has been said then they can do, subject to planning permission and CCC freeholder permission, what they like on the site. But it has always been the case that ACL could develop the site, they just didn't have the money to do it, so what has actually changed?

At the moment the Liquidator requires expressions of serious and well founded intent in salvaging CCFC Ltd and needs to express to AEHC that there is a serious intent on his behalf to take up the option to bid. Has he done and got that?. This current deadline has not been about doing the deal, but acquiring the time to put a proper deal together. No one is going to release information even if there were not NDA's in place unless there is a serious intent and funds to do it.

If Wasps do not want a deal done by CCFC/Otium/ARVO/SISU for their fellow stakeholders shares and their own deal is covered by NDA's what would they be doing right now?...................

The Liquidator is not affected by NDA's ( I think )

I repeat we do not know the full deal to WASPS which may extend beyond the CCC /ACL shares

 

[RegTheDonk]

Evening Reg!:wave:

Afternoon CoB. Going posh tomorrow? See u there hopefully.

 

[rupert_bear]

Afternoon CoB. Going posh tomorrow? See u there hopefully.

Good chance as the bloke on the left of you might also be on your right !

 

[oldskyblue58]

Could it be that the Wasps deal has incorporated an obligation to build a hotel or other development targets within a certain timeframe? If so, that will require capital and it would not be unreasonable to ask for specifics.

BTW, would it be possible to revive ccfc ltd (out of liquidation and back into trading) and what would it take?
The lease part is I suppose the tricky part?

Possibly but what are they going to do if say Wasps cant raise the money to do it?

The reviving of CCFC Ltd I would guess is not going to be straight forward, for one thing why would you sell to or take in to partnership a company that has no visible sign of support and has huge creditors. Will need to get the creditors approval to revive and to take on more debt (thereby diluting original claims) in order to make a bid I would think...... just don't see how it works to be honest. The bid could work if say Otium owned the option but they do not despite claims of beneficial ownership (Where did we hear that before - didn't work that time either) the option has never been transferred from CCFC Ltd a fact clearly borne out because of the need to make a bid through the liquidator.

After all the legal shenanigans are gone through I just cant see CCFC Ltd buying the 50%. What seems to be going on here is dotting i's and crossing t's to ensure all contractual terms have been met by ACL, AEHC, CCC & Wasps so there is no possibility of a successful legal challenge now or some time in the future. SISU have been blindsided by it all and can not do much to change it. CCFC is the tool caught in the middle and increasingly at risk

 

[oldskyblue58]

The Liquidator is not affected by NDA's ( I think )

I repeat we do not know the full deal to WASPS which may extend beyond the CCC /ACL shares

no but ACL, AEHC, CCC & Wasps are affected by NDA's and they hold the info.

No we don't know the details of the deal and yes it might be more than the shares, there might be a development deal of some kind - there might not. But once they have the long leasehold if there was a development clause how are CCC going to force them to develop land if Wasps say they can't afford to do it?

Think we both agree however it is all speculation and the details are unlikely to come out for some time

 

[albatross]

Think Oldskyblue has it bang on. This is a process thing.

I cannot see WASPS entering into any agreement without there being a known outcome with due process.

SISU's incompetence is breathtaking and they have poorly served their investors by not being though and underestimating the other parties.

 

[oldfiver]

no but ACL, AEHC, CCC & Wasps are affected by NDA's and they hold the info.

No we don't know the details of the deal and yes it might be more than the shares, there might be a development deal of some kind - there might not. But once they have the long leasehold if there was a development clause how are CCC going to force them to develop land if Wasps say they can't afford to do it?

Think we both agree however it is all speculation and the details are unlikely to come out for some time

But would the "development deal " be for the benefit ACL or a WASPs outpost? Is it even to develop the Ricoh site or other land nearby

 

[duffer]

I want closure on this.
Waiting for Wasps to fall over just drags it on and on.

Sisu need to buy into the other 50%, if they can.

Completely agree with the sentiments here - but I suspect that everyone else involved (Wasps, CCC, Higgs) will do everything they can to stop that happening.

I do have serious questions about Wasps model - apart from the odd game against Saints, Tigers and Euro games against the Irish clubs I can't see them getting big crowds. It could be that SISU are taking a wait-and-see approach.

If Wasps go pop, then the council won't be able to bail them out. Even if the lease does revert back to the council, now we know the truth about how successful ACL is without CCFC they won't be able to justify sitting on an empty stadium again.

I'm not advocating this by the way - like you say the thought of watching CCFC slowly decline even further whilst SISU dither over a new stadium or wait for Wasps for die, isn't particularly appealing...

 

[oldskyblue58]

But would the "development deal " be for the benefit ACL or a WASPs outpost? Is it even to develop the Ricoh site or other land nearby

well they have already said that they will be developing a training ground in the area ....... that doesn't have to be at the Ricoh.

 

[oldfiver]

Think Oldskyblue has it bang on. This is a process thing.

I cannot see WASPS entering into any agreement without there being a known outcome with due process.

SISU's incompetence is breathtaking and they have poorly served their investors by not being though and underestimation the other parties.

CCC may have promised them an outcome which may not include CCFC as shareholders. There is no definte proof WASPs have completed their deal yet and no one will confirm they have or can

 

[oldfiver]

well they have already said that they will be developing a training ground in the area ....... that doesn't have to be at the Ricoh.

If this turns out to be a property development led deal what will peoples reaction be after all the criticism at SISU for the same thing?

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think the main driving force is that Wasps wanted a place for the team.

The planning consents on the Ricoh site for development have been there for some years and formed part of the demise for the lease. Any development would help improve income streams at the Ricoh

If there is an agreement to build a training ground then it is not a deal to cash in on property profits

What SISU wanted to do was to get their hands on the stadium and associated land cheaply and flip it for big profit and walk away. CCFC were the tool to do that. The Wasps deal doesn't from what we know look to be the same at all.

 

[albatross]

I don't think that anyone would begrudge SISU / CCC/ HIGGS/WASPS or any potential owner the right to build sporting success upon a property portfolio that delivers revenue into the club and regenerates north of the city and the local economy. That is exactly what was the plan when Brian Richardson took us from Highfield road.

 

[duffer]

I don't think that anyone would begrudge SISU / CCC/ HIGGS/WASPS or any potential owner the right to build sporting success upon a property portfolio that delivers revenue into the club and regenerates north of the city and the local economy. That is exactly what was the plan when Brian Richardson took us from Highfield road.

I would much rather it was a Coventry team doing this, but I see what you're saying.

I'm far from convinced as to the motives of Wasps owners though. I'm not sure that Wasps survival is necessarily the key driver here - what I see is someone motivated by profit who saw a very cheap stadium and land deal available. Like SISU, the motivation is money, not sporting success or the betterment of the city. As long as the latter aligns with the former it will be OK, if at some point it doesn't then it will be tough titty for both Wasps and the city I'd venture.

I also have real doubts that we'll ever see the large training facility promised to the Council built. I'm not convinced that Wasps have either the money, or that the RFU will be overly keen on seeing them move their academy from London. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that there's nothing contractual - just a vague promise...

Personally, I think that the council have been spun a line by Wasps, but because it let them get out of the Ricoh they were happy to buy it. I guess we'll see.

 

[Jack Griffin]

If this turns out to be a property development led deal what will peoples reaction be after all the criticism at SISU for the same thing?

SISU did not commit to property development in Coventry, that I think is one major issue about them..

As for property outside Coventry, well that is up to them if they find a site. TBH I don't think they are anywhere close to a land deal.

As OSB says, they wanted to grab the land & arena, flip it & go.. well they got outsmarted.. & now they are up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

I agree the Wasps deal is also money motivated, but unlike SISU I think they intend to stay..

 

[albatross]

I agree about a local team doing it but....

WASPS have shown quiet determination to make this happen and cut a deal. They then announced a local Coventry Sponsor, Whitley based Land Rover, they then set about addressing their own fans concerns about the relocation and given the antiquated protest at the live match against Bath it seems to have been accepted fopr what it is, the survival of the team.

I have no doubt that they will deliver on the training facility in Coventry. There is at least one lower league union side with better facilities than both Coventry City or Cov RFC so there is much scope to partner with a local team to develop an academy and training structure either as a stand alone or Joint Venture. Most of our local Rugby clubs own an area at least as big as Ryton.

I just get the impression that these guys will make it stick.

 

[skybluetony176]

PWKH said it in a radio interview with Shane O Connor

Cheers. Yep, missed that interview.

 

[stupot07]

I agree about a local team doing it but....

WASPS have shown quiet determination to make this happen and cut a deal. They then announced a local Coventry Sponsor, Whitley based Land Rover, they then set about addressing their own fans concerns about the relocation and given the antiquated protest at the live match against Bath it seems to have been accepted fopr what it is, the survival of the team.

I have no doubt that they will deliver on the training facility in Coventry. There is at least one lower league union side with better facilities than both Coventry City or Cov RFC so there is much scope to partner with a local team to develop an academy and training structure either as a stand alone or Joint Venture. Most of our local Rugby clubs own an area at least as big as Ryton.

I just get the impression that these guys will make it stick.

Personally, I hope they fail. I hope people don't attend their games, I hope they go bust. I won't ever recognise them as a Coventry team.


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

 

[torchomatic]

Ah, I was on side until you said "but".

I agree about a local team doing it but....

WASPS have shown quiet determination to make this happen and cut a deal. They then announced a local Coventry Sponsor, Whitley based Land Rover, they then set about addressing their own fans concerns about the relocation and given the antiquated protest at the live match against Bath it seems to have been accepted fopr what it is, the survival of the team.

I have no doubt that they will deliver on the training facility in Coventry. There is at least one lower league union side with better facilities than both Coventry City or Cov RFC so there is much scope to partner with a local team to develop an academy and training structure either as a stand alone or Joint Venture. Most of our local Rugby clubs own an area at least as big as Ryton.

I just get the impression that these guys will make it stick.

 

[skybluetony176]

Here's a Theory. Probably a bad one.

It sounds from reading OSB's posts that every door is quickly being slammed closed in SISU's face where the Ricoh is concerned. Could this be the start of a takeover bid for CCFC by the Wasps Consortium? Lets face it they may well get us at a knock down price with just a settlement on the ARVO debt. What other options do SISU have? Build a stadium? I dont think it matters which "group" of fans you are in with the exception of a few crack pots i think not believing this is going to happen is the one thing we're united on.

i would think that an established stadium in the centre of the country with road and rail link as well as a hotel, casino, exhibition hall, land ripe for development, a professional rugby team AND a professional football team would be a nice portfolio for some investors.

 

[torchomatic]

Wouldn't we just be swapping Cayman for Malta though?

And "investors". Like those faceless people behind SISU? It's all so depressing.

 

[skybluetony176]

Wouldn't we just be swapping Cayman for Malta though?

And "investors". Like those faceless people behind SISU? It's all so depressing.

We would. But like many have said about SISU owning the Ricoh, at least we would be owned by the same faceless people who own our ground.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Wouldn't we just be swapping Cayman for Malta though?

And "investors". Like those faceless people behind SISU? It's all so depressing.

It is not as is SISU have done any good for the club, why do you cling to them?

 

[Nick]

We would. But like many have said about SISU owning the Ricoh, at least we would be owned by the same faceless people who own our ground.

Wouldn't that just be the same as SISU owning the Ricoh, which many don't want to happen?

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Sorry Wingy the entire purchase price had to be dropped 10m just so Wasps could have the funding in place.

Why couldn't they do that for CCFC?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Wouldn't that just be the same as SISU owning the Ricoh, which many don't want to happen?

I think there are people who don't want them to own the Ricoh, but I don't recall many, if any, posts saying that they don't want them to own or buy into ACL.

 

[chiefdave]

well they have already said that they will be developing a training ground in the area ....... that doesn't have to be at the Ricoh.

From what I saw having a nose round the Wasps forum their fans have seen the plans (but not the location) and it has indoor and outdoor pitches so sounds like something that would be too big to add onto the Ricoh site.

If this turns out to be a property development led deal what will peoples reaction be after all the criticism at SISU for the same thing?

I've never understood the property development idea, if you want to be a property developer what's stopping you doing just that, you don't need to have all the hassle of owning a football and rugby club as well.

Personally, I hope they fail. I hope people don't attend their games, I hope they go bust. I won't ever recognise them as a Coventry team.

While I wouldn't wish going bust on another team but if it does all go horribly wrong won't they need someone to buy ACL off them?

 

[Warwickhunt]

ah, i was on side until you said "but".

broadstreet

 

[duffer]

I agree about a local team doing it but....

WASPS have shown quiet determination to make this happen and cut a deal. They then announced a local Coventry Sponsor, Whitley based Land Rover, they then set about addressing their own fans concerns about the relocation and given the antiquated protest at the live match against Bath it seems to have been accepted fopr what it is, the survival of the team.

I have no doubt that they will deliver on the training facility in Coventry. There is at least one lower league union side with better facilities than both Coventry City or Cov RFC so there is much scope to partner with a local team to develop an academy and training structure either as a stand alone or Joint Venture. Most of our local Rugby clubs own an area at least as big as Ryton.

I just get the impression that these guys will make it stick.

The problem with the training academy though, that isn't just financial - the governing board (presumably the RFU) said this...

"Wasps' relocation to the Midlands is purely for matches and should not come into conflict with the Academy systems run by other professional clubs in the Midlands - champions Northampton, Premiership rivals Leicester and Championship side Worcester, who opened a new regional development centre in the city, at Broadstreet RFC, in May."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/29631938

That seems to directly contradict the idea that the council and Wasps are trying to sell, that they're moving their academy and training facilities up here. Even if they had the cash, it doesn't look likely that the RFU would let it happen.

To me this is just another example of someone spinning a line, and the council buying it because it suits them.

 

[torchomatic]

I'm not. But nor am I attracted to swapping like for like.

It is not as is SISU have done any good for the club, why do you cling to them?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The problem with the training academy though, that isn't just financial - the governing board (presumably the RFU) said this...

"Wasps' relocation to the Midlands is purely for matches and should not come into conflict with the Academy systems run by other professional clubs in the Midlands - champions Northampton, Premiership rivals Leicester and Championship side Worcester, who opened a new regional development centre in the city, at Broadstreet RFC, in May."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/29631938

That seems to directly contradict the idea that the council and Wasps are trying to sell, that they're moving their academy and training facilities up here. Even if they had the cash, it doesn't look likely that the RFU would let it happen.

To me this is just another example of someone spinning a line, and the council buying it because it suits them.

They can't move the academy, they can build a training facility. No spin involved, two different things.

 

[duffer]

They can't move the academy, they can build a training facility. No spin involved, two different things.

So they'd end up with a training facility up here, but their academy, which is in essence their whole development setup, that will remain in London?

How will that work then?

And how will that improve take up of sport in the city (something that councillors made a huge deal of in the debate), given that our kids aren't really based in London?

This is what I mean about people not looking critically at all of the stuff that's come out of Wasps and the Council.

 

[torchomatic]

So kids in Cov won't get the chance and kids in London will, if they are happy to come up to Coventry?

They can't move the academy, they can build a training facility. No spin involved, two different things.