Samo
Well-Known Member
How am I doing that?
Sisu refused permission to appeal... (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
How am I doing that?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Sisu winning wont do the club any good now. Wasps have the Ricoh and that is that. Best get used to it.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If I was in SISU's position I would be looking at:
1) getting the loan overturned, if it's ruled the loan should never have been made CCC may be forced to request repayment. Wasps, as a company losing £3m a year, will then need a loan to pay off a recalled debt for ACL, a company losing £.5m a year - who knows how easy or hard that will be. SISU's hope would be they can't get that loan and have to look to offload some or all of ACL.
2) compensation, if it's ruled CCC have been up to no good in anyway and SISU can structure a case that shows they have suffered financially as a result they could be up for significant compensation.
3) because they feel they are right, pretty much everyone has assumed SISU have been making things up left right and centre, what if it turns out they were at least partly right all along. If that was me I would want the other party involved to be held to account.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
You could argue that offering to pay more for something than what the council sold out to a franchise from London for is 'taking the right angle'
The fact that you conveniently brush aside AL blatantly lying about the state of ACL, yet vilify Fisher for even a sentence out of place.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
cant we just fast forward the whole proceedings to get to the 3 senior judges and be done with it ?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Was it ever going to benefit the club?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
The biggest benefit might be if they win and get a pay off they'll bugger off!
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
People best get used to us being a L1 club as well at best
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
It doesn't mean that.... the point is that the club were bent over a barrel by CCC and most of you still do your absolute best to defend them to the hilt.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Sorry to have to repeat myself but
It is all a bit to hard for some to work out or what , ACL as an ongoing business was in profit until / except for legal fees concerned with constant court cases being thrown at them by those who were trying to distress ACL business.
Is that simple enough ?
But no worries sisu can continue battering people in court
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
It wasn't state aid when being made to a company protecting it's own investment.
That is no longer the case, as you saaid yoursself, it would be state aid if maade to an entirely private company.
That is what has happened now.
Samo
Well-Known Member
It won't do it any harm either! Wasps have Ricoh for now... Let's see what happens.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
The club should have gone into administration in 2003. Instead they ran to the council begging for the deal that followed, all the while whipping up the local media and fans into pressuring the council to accept the deal. If anyone was bent over a barrel it was CCC.
CCC were wrong to bow to public pressure, they should have kept out of it and let CCFC go under.
Samo
Well-Known Member
But you're hero Anne has admitted that the Ricoh was not profitable without CCFC, legals or not, is that simple enough for you?
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
The amount owed to the bank was £19m, the Council agreed a deal to pay £14m.
MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM
Approved Judgment
R (Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd) v
68. Although SISU were in discussions with the Bank, and the Council feared that they
had made their own offer to purchase the debt and they were effectively in
competition, there is little available evidence as to SISU’s negotiations with the Bank.
However, what is now clear is that SISU considered that they may have been able to
purchase the ACL debt – for which the Bank was exposed to the tune of £19m – for
perhaps as low as £2m, but no more than £5m.
On the other hand, the Bank were satisfied that ACL could in fact service the entire debt albeit restructured, and were
not prepared to accept any figure in that area. The Bank (which was aware of the
relevant valuations) appears to have considered that ACL could service a restructured
loan of at least £15m, and that the debt was worth more than £12m. The Bank had not
made any provision for any of the debt.
In the circumstances, it is inconceivable that
the Bank would have accepted an offer to purchase the debt for £5m. In considering
the Bank would (or might) accept an offer of £2m-5m for the debt, SISU had entirely
unrealistic expectations. They were not prepared to offer more.
69. Thus, this element of SISU’s plan, too, was doomed to fail.
MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM
Approved Judgment
R (Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd) v
68. Although SISU were in discussions with the Bank, and the Council feared that they
had made their own offer to purchase the debt and they were effectively in
competition, there is little available evidence as to SISU’s negotiations with the Bank.
However, what is now clear is that SISU considered that they may have been able to
purchase the ACL debt – for which the Bank was exposed to the tune of £19m – for
perhaps as low as £2m, but no more than £5m.
On the other hand, the Bank were satisfied that ACL could in fact service the entire debt albeit restructured, and were
not prepared to accept any figure in that area. The Bank (which was aware of the
relevant valuations) appears to have considered that ACL could service a restructured
loan of at least £15m, and that the debt was worth more than £12m. The Bank had not
made any provision for any of the debt.
In the circumstances, it is inconceivable that
the Bank would have accepted an offer to purchase the debt for £5m. In considering
the Bank would (or might) accept an offer of £2m-5m for the debt, SISU had entirely
unrealistic expectations. They were not prepared to offer more.
69. Thus, this element of SISU’s plan, too, was doomed to fail.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Please stop making up lies about what I have said.
I would also stop making allegations that have proven to be false in court if I were you.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
But at the point the loan was made ACL was very profitable, and its then that matters. What happened after January 2013 is irrelevant.
Samo
Well-Known Member
Who do you support Ron? Because it sure ain't my club.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
In which case we will probably end up with a second JR.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Different scenarios completely but use it as a comparison if you like, there's a good clown.
Nick
Administrator
Weren't acl without ccfc when the loan was made?
Gynnsthetonic
Well-Known Member
SISU refused permission to appeal, but are going to appeal?
covmark
Well-Known Member
Absolute bollocks and you know it. Why are you so intent on defending these cretins. No other council in the country would be willing to fuck over the local football team like these shady fuckers have. Most councils see their football teams as an asset to their towns or cities, shame Coventry City council don't see ours that way.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Quotes from you.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...or-The-Accountants?highlight=acl+loan+illegal
Post 37.
See you in court?
Seek an oral hearing
No guarantee one will be forthcoming
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
From what I can make out they've been had the first application, which is made in writing, turned down. They can now go and make an application in person, basically argue their case.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
yep, if only they had built us a stadium and given us half of the management company for a mere £6m.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
You mean where I say it can only be state aid if the loan is to a private company?
Considering the time it must have taken for you to find that its pretty disappointing. Its a bit like RFC's smoking gun.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
I think that's how they were successful in getting the last one to Court. Do both sides put their point across at this hearing does anyone know?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
No it was about 6 months before. The original £1.3m rent agreement was still in place at the time of the loan.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately I really think sisu are getting ready to liquidate and wind us up. The continual cutbacks and no playing staff or the bare minimum with minimum contracts are all clear signs the end is coming.
Sisu wouldn't be here still unless there was a purpose to it. They obviously still have ccfc and im sure they can offload debts or use ccfc as a tax offset (I'm no tax man) I'm just guessing something can be used for ccfc and when all avenues are exhausted then ccfc is set up to end.
Why appeal the appeal? Oral hearing now? I mean it's obvious it won't work and there won't be a second JR. why keep lying about the new stadium? The answer to the above questions is because it keeps the gullible believing until it time to pull the plug.
Sisu wouldn't be here still unless there was a purpose to it. They obviously still have ccfc and im sure they can offload debts or use ccfc as a tax offset (I'm no tax man) I'm just guessing something can be used for ccfc and when all avenues are exhausted then ccfc is set up to end.
Why appeal the appeal? Oral hearing now? I mean it's obvious it won't work and there won't be a second JR. why keep lying about the new stadium? The answer to the above questions is because it keeps the gullible believing until it time to pull the plug.
covmark
Well-Known Member
yep, if only they had charged us £10m in rent, and then sold the management company to an out of town rugby club for nearly half of that amount. What generosity.
Is the oral one automatic now or direcessionary?
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
If you really think that SISU are going to liquidate the club then you really do defy stupidity.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Please show the evidence whether profitable without legals or not
Sisu had to pay £250,000 costs last time at court, yet this will have not been paid in those years account as the court case costs were paid by the council at the time.
I await your evidence