italiahorse
Well-Known Member
So the Council said ACL was doing perfectly well?
Perhaps that was their way of fending off Sisu saying they were building a new stadium.
Who knows ? You guys don't !!
A positive thread (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter MichaelCCFC
- Start date
So the Council said ACL was doing perfectly well?
Perhaps that was their way of fending off Sisu saying they were building a new stadium.
Who knows ? You guys don't !!
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
To be honest I have never seen you post any idea that might be worth considering.
Keep doing what you do best ..... sniping :claping hands:
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Is that not what they said in the JR?
The document that you love to quote from like it's scripture.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Plan A worked. ACL failed clearly hence the fire sale. Sisu stupidly assumed the council would value the local community over hatred
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You of course 100% supported the rent strike and devaluation strategy. You even came up with a natty little slogan for sisu. Now what was it again?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Oh really? What price have SISU offered the council at any stage over the past seven years for the councils share?
Astute
Well-Known Member
More like SISU stupidly assumed just like you did that the Ricoh was a white elephant and nobody else would be interested in it. There was hatred involved. It was for the time and money wasted with the way that SISU tried to get the Ricoh. But no. Some think that we should blame CCC. They were cunts for letting it go to Wasps. But SISU were bigger cunts in the way that they took the piss out of everyone including ourselves. And they continue to wreck our club whilst looking for a plan B.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I think it was a soulless concrete white elephant that grendull use to call it. Apparently that's all changed and it's a community asset now.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Don't let the little fact that if SISU hadn't taken out the JR in the first place, he wouldn't be able to make the quote from the "Scripture" would he?
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
chiefdave...........Quote [My expection was that any offer deemed acceptable to CCC and Higgs for the sale of ACL, especially one that involved parachuting in a sporting franchise from many miles away, should have been made known to CCFC and the club given the oppertunity to match the offer.] Unquote.............Wasps made a £2.77m offer for ACL......SISU actually topped that with a £2.8m offer. Now! the reason SISU were turned down and sold to the Wasps, let me see now...Although SISU offered £30k more cash, it was full of conditions about disclosures of CCC/ACL defence plans for the JR. Wasps offer was totally UNCONDITIONAL. No brainer if you ask me guys. 
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Do you mean in the same way that those who shout the loudest once shouted down anyone who questioned sisu's involvement in the club? I'd prefer to think for myself that go along with whatever they think thanks.
Nick
Administrator
Guess who?
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/36194-Locals-Swelling-Sixfieds-Attendance/
I personally like this one:
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...-free-tickets-they-will-give-away-next-Sunday
I wonder if the poster will come clean about the Free Wasps ticket they got? That would be a laugh wouldn't it? :laugh: I am sure people will miss the irony in that greatly
this one is good too:
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/36143-SISU-handing-tickets-out-to-Northampton-Fans
Amazing how giving away free tickets goes from up there with murder to genius just depending who is doing it, according to the same people.
"But Rugby is different"
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
chiefdave...........Quote [My expection was that any offer deemed acceptable to CCC and Higgs for the sale of ACL, especially one that involved parachuting in a sporting franchise from many miles away, should have been made known to CCFC and the club given the oppertunity to match the offer.] Unquote.............Wasps made a £2.77m offer for ACL......SISU actually topped that with a £2.8m offer. Now! the reason SISU were turned down and sold to the Wasps, let me see now...Although SISU offered £30k more cash, it was full of conditions about disclosures of CCC/ACL defence plans for the JR. Wasps offer was totally UNCONDITIONAL. No brainer if you ask me guys.
This deal is in relation to a 50% share of ACL... Notably the Higgs proportion. The other 50% has already been sold to Wasps and they potentially had veto over the sale.
So to use this an example is not relevant at all is it.....
Nick
Administrator
And it's been confirmed by Wasps people they would have used the veto and it was always 100%
Also, does anybody know if it was totally unconditional?
I would say a right to veto is a condition.
Nick
Administrator
Does that not come as standard in normal business? I don't know how it works.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I thought the veto was part of the business they purchased from CCC.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
... and I obviously need to quote again.
- ACL were dependent upon the rental income from CCFC to enable it to makerepayments of the Bank loan. Without the rent regularly being paid, as SISU well-knew, ACL would not be able to continue to make those repayments. In thosecircumstances (or if CCFC were to go into administration or, worse, liquidation, eachof which SISU suggested they contemplated as possibilities), SISU and the Council,as well as ACL, knew that ACL would be at the mercy of the Bank or anyone whopurchased the loan from the Bank.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
I never supported the rent strike. Previous to it I had supported Sisu balancing the books.
You again put 2 and 2 together and made 5.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
This thread seems to be lacking something......
that's it bit of positivity !
that's it bit of positivity !
Astute
Well-Known Member
Are you trying to deflect blame away from SISU again or is it just trying to make some look bigger cunts than they are? We need to remember who got the stadium built and who gave our club a 50% share of ACL. It wasn't CCC that sold the ACL share. It wasn't CCC that didn't want our club to get it back. The road map showed this. It wasn't CCC that refused to negotiate. It was CCC that told SISU that they wouldn't wait forever and set a deadline. They are still cunts for letting Wasps have the arena. But the biggest cunts are those that are in charge of our club. So they saved us from admin when they took over. So what. Look what has happened since. Is there anyone that would like to say in any way that we were better for them taking us over?
It is the same as those on here that say that SISU did the right thing by not taking the arena over because of the outstanding loan yet keep having a go at the price Wasps paid. Or was the same price offered to our club. Joy wasn't interested in negotiating so how was she supposed to get the price down or lease extended? It was to be extended on the road map. But we all know what happened there.
Nick
Administrator
No I was replying to the post I quoted?
Astute
Well-Known Member
If you were Wasps would you want to go into partnership with SISU? They have shown themselves to be 100% untrustworthy. Our club has been shafted under their leadership. Each time they got offered what they said they wanted they changed their mind and wanted more. SISU had enough chances to get the arena but kept taking the piss. Now they and our club have lost out massively.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
So ACL did need the club, they were not in the financially strong position they claimed to be. So the council, including Anne Lucas lied.
Nick
Administrator
Nice rant, but what has that got to do with anything I was talking about?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
No that was the extract from the JR you got wrong.
With CCC taking over the loan the situation changed.
Initially the rescheduling of the loan enabled ACL to offer a more favourable rent as they were not tied in as in the quote above.
Because the club rejected it, I guess it also removed the dependency on the club and made them at least break even.
Who knows if that was acceptable as a long term business model but I guess the Wasps offer changed that.
As I said both sides were verbally upping the situation to increase their hands, whether you call it lying or not is open to debate.
Nick
Administrator
Whether you call it lying is whether it was SISU or CCC saying it I guess...
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
It does not matter which extract it comes from, it does not change the fact that how they portrayed ACL as a business was a lie.
The argument that the loan from CCC put them in a stronger position than before falls down because they sold the business for even less afterwards.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ Ian1779.......Why does my post become irrellavent? because I stated, Wasps offer = Unconditional, and SISU's offer = Conditional? There is no mention of "Veto" in ACL's reply...Please read... www.coventrytelegraph.net/.../alan-edward-higgs-charity-reveal-8115323
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Becuase you are talking about the entire purchase of ACL - and using the example of what was only a 50% purchase... when the first 50% was already owned by Wasps.
albatross
Well-Known Member
On what do you base that argument?
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
They sold ACL to Wasps and a 250 year lease for less than the 'deal' they had looked to do with SISU previously (before the loan was re-financed)
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ Ian1779...No I'm not. Don't try and twist my words. The link I put up CLEARLY states "Bids for 50% of ACL shares." I suggest you borrow a pair of glasses mate, then re-read what is written.
albatross
Well-Known Member
I agree with the general statement but you have to consider the value of ACL at the time.
sometime in 2012 Richard Ellis performed a sensitivity analysis, which indicated that, if the anchor tenant rent was nil, the value of the lease would be only£6.4m; at £200,000 rent, £8.6m; and, at £400,000 rent, £10.8m.
consider that that was before CCFC moved out. The value of ACL at a later date with the rent strike and the team moved would at that point probably be below the £6.4M as it was then a reality rather than a possibility. Also SISU were looking to purchase the Loan from the Bank at a price that the bank did not find acceptable.
Take a look at the judicial review http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/uploads/other/01_07_2014_01_48_11_01.07.14.pdf (section 13 for this extract) not trying to be a clever dick but the Value of ACL has changed a lot over the years.
in 2006 ACL was considered to be worth £37m
- As a condition of drawdown, clause 5.2 of the facilityletter required a valuation report from C B Richard Ellis (“Richard Ellis”) of current market value of £37m; and thereafter valuations at regular intervals onvarious bases, e.g. a valuation of £31m after 20 years, and of £26.9m after 5years on the basis that the Football Club had ceased to trade. (Point 9 vi)
People should take a look at this report as as whole , I have selected bits in this thread (not trying to take them out of context) it reportedly cost nearly £1m to produce and is in essence impartial.