fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Higgs had no legal entitlement to the £29k. Would you have paid it?
Tim Fisher reveals details of Ricoh bid (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
As apposed to a £29k + legal bill? You'd be stupid not to wouldn't you? It's no like SISU gained from it did they?
If they hadn't put in the ridiculous counter claim that forced it from county to crown Court and then turned up with an army of lawyers they may have stood a chance of saving some money of the £29k Higgs were looking for but that's not what happened was it? It ended up costing them considerably more.
Nick
Administrator
OK then, you should give me a grand right now. It is going to cost you more in court bills if you fight it, so just give me the grand please.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
I'm sure you've just typed SISU's mission statement out.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
How do I owe you a grand when I've never even met you?
Nick
Administrator
There is a skybluetony176 tax on this site so your legal bill is going to be massive, so just pay up
If it was really going to happen, you would fight it wouldn't you if you thought you didn't have to pay it rather than just hand it over or give me half as a gesture.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Or you could look at it from the other way... you buy half of a company that 'potentially' could be successful for at least one of the parties. So you could sell up later down the line for more than you paid for it... providing some finance for your 'new stadium', have something tangible to allow you to sell you share in the club as a whole, or even pick up the share off your partner because it hasn't worked out for them.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
There is a skybluetony176 tax on this site so your legal bill is going to be massive, so just pay up
If it was really going to happen, you would fight it wouldn't you if you thought you didn't have to pay it rather than just hand it over or give me half as a gesture.
I'd let you take it to the small claims court. I wouldn't put in a counter offer that meant it went to crown Court. What's your point?
Nick
Administrator
What if it cost you more than a grand in legal fees in total? Why would you spend more when you could just pay up? My point is that you said they were stupid not to pay it as their legal fees were higher.
Sorry Simon but this is the sort of thing that should be in the article and not just a list of Tim Fisher quotes without challenge. Obviously you could be a bit more tactful in asking this sort of thing to Fisher but ask you should. Along with does your "Generous offer" at least match or preferably beat the amount Wasps paid for the other half of the shares and if he can't at least confirm that we know the bid is pointless. That said the bid is almost certainly dead in the water anyway with their insistence to build a new stadium anyway. There is no way they are going to win with a temporary bid.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
wanting to run a football club and being able to run a football club are two totally different things
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
maybe they have offered to drop the JR appeal?
mattylad
Member
Yep that is exactly why you do. Cold hard business reasons.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If they won their counter claim you'd have a point but given the speed it was dismissed I can't believe that they weren't advised that it had no chance. So that only ever left 2 options, lose and pay the £ 29k plus all court costs or draw and pay your own now considerable cost as you've dragged it up to crown Court.
So why wouldn't you just pay the £ 29k and save yourself the extra cost's and the negative publicity that surrounded it?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
It's a point of principle and the court case allowed us the fans to see that it was not just sisu that walked away, that all 3 parties had lost he appetite for a deal. That part largely falls on deaf ears.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The JR is nothing to do with Higgs.
blueflint
Well-Known Member
Now there's a caption competition waiting to happen.
can't even use the correct finger
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It's a point of principle and the court case allowed us the fans to see that it was not just sisu that walked away, that all 3 parties had lost he appetite for a deal. That part largely falls on deaf ears.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
LOL.
Are we really meant to believe that SISU did it as a point of principle? Please!
mattylad
Member
Its a good piece of manouvering by SISU.
If as expected the bid is rejected they have a perfect media bomb that burns Wasps on how CCFC are the wronged party and that the outsiders from London have denied the people of Coventry the opportunity of having a progessive forward moving football club in the city based at its true home. Furthermore the Higgs Charity will get burned because it will have been seen to be acting against the interests of the people of Coventry and fundamentally failing to uphold the core of what they are trying to achieve because this deal seems to offer more than just cash but the ability to work in partnership with one of the communities most far reaching organisations.
Check but not Check mate I would say.
If as expected the bid is rejected they have a perfect media bomb that burns Wasps on how CCFC are the wronged party and that the outsiders from London have denied the people of Coventry the opportunity of having a progessive forward moving football club in the city based at its true home. Furthermore the Higgs Charity will get burned because it will have been seen to be acting against the interests of the people of Coventry and fundamentally failing to uphold the core of what they are trying to achieve because this deal seems to offer more than just cash but the ability to work in partnership with one of the communities most far reaching organisations.
Check but not Check mate I would say.
blueflint
Well-Known Member
It's a point of principle and the court case allowed us the fans to see that it was not just sisu that walked away, that all 3 parties had lost he appetite for a deal. That part largely falls on deaf ears.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
yes but who were the main protagonists in all this SISU were
mattylad
Member
I dont think it was a point of principle but the court made it very clear that there was no appetite to do a deal on any side which is why everyone lost.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
And they had to go to crown Court to do this? They couldn't have got the same result at County Court?
mattylad
Member
Absolutely but it should not have changed the outcome and that is what the original post was aimed at.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
No, but then I also wouldn't have counter claimed for ten times that given that they have something we need and might have to offer to buy in the future.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
There was a solicitor who basically did just that I'll have a look for the details later.
Nick
Administrator
Actually, in that instance Higgs started the legal action.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Has it been made clear who has actually made/put the bid to the liquidator? SISU or SBS&L or Otium or another SISU entity?
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
They certainly did.
They also had an agreement with Higgs that they would pay up to 29k of their costs if the sale never went through.
So how many think that it was a good move to spend a sixfigure sum to get out of paying 29k and create so much bad blood that Higgs don't want anything to do with them now?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
mattylad
Member
the bid is from CCFC Ltd via the liquidator as I believe. Now how those funds are going to be moved into CCFC ltd has not been made clear but you have to presume the deal includes a level of refinancing of CCFC Ltd by Otium.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
in which case if it is from Otium I wonder if rather than refinancing CCFC Ltd and having to pay out money that they claim beneficial ownership of the option in the same way they did with the golden share. Perhaps they could argue they acquired the rights to it when they paid out the £1.5m to the liquidator?
Although my understanding has always been that the option could not be transferred or claimed by a third party without the AEHC permission
Who would object?
ACL? The new director team from Wasps?
Higgs? What would they gain?
CCC? Surely they are out of this?
mattylad
Member
“Through the liquidator the club has been given an opportunity to purchase the Higgs’ shares in ACL and we have made a very generous offer" so does that mean that Appleton has chosen to offer them beneficial ownership or that he has just said well CCFC Ltd is not yet liquidated and remains part of the club structur so if you choose to you can make a bid?
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
What if Wasps or for that matter a third party make a higher bid than ccfc ltd. Would Higgs have to consider the better offer for their charity ?