Search results

so basically as clueless as ever

The Council has met already with the Sky Blue Trust – but not the Football Club. A former Labour colleague of George Duggins is John Fletcher, who was Labour Council leader from 1996 to 1999 and is on the board of the Sky Blue Trust. Is Mr Fletcher willing to use his position and many contacts...

is he on about now or 6 years ago ?

no i think it was a fax ......

Well if you wanted to harden attitudes even further that should do it. Given Boddy said last night the owners would make a statement i assume it is really from them not CCFC. I agree it is not a very professional statement, it is more of a personal attack, i am not sure it helps. Dont get me...

Just a thought regarding the alternative ground and signing the accounts To be able to sign off in the way they did the auditors had to have evidence that there were viable alternatives. The accounts were signed by the directors and auditors on 28th February. The audit work would have had to be...

Only if they put 50m in to the investment in the first place. Which they have not. Plus ARVO investment is not lost yet.

Trouble is we never get to see what is written down in terms conditions like the 6 miles. We have to rely on verbal comments from interested but untrustworthy parties There is no efl regulation requiring it and the condition surely applied to a return to Coventry from 30 miles away. What could...

It will be a short meeting sadly I feel

Pretty much covered what I want to say previously. Nothing much to add. Otium is the only trading part of the sbs&l group

It won't be Fisher delivering the news Boddy said sisu will issue statement before tomorrow's efl meeting

I see the CT have done their own analysis............. i gave up as soon as they said Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Limited had made an operational loss of £1.6m. It hasnt the group has, SBS&L doesn't trade at all, Otium made the loss............. usual lack of understanding dont know why i was...

Going to be pedantic fp sorry :) it is ARVO with the charge not SISU although everything points to SISU controlling ARVO

It isnt SISU making the loan it is ARVO. Assuming they feel it is recoverable then the ARVO fund value increases as the debt increases. SISU of course manage the funds so i assume take a management fee based on performance from that fund (i am not saying from Otium) It would be a tax charge not...

It doesnt really matter what i think. They charge around 16% pa for what is basically risky lending. You could argue it is a bit high but there is no formula of the right interest rate

Frankly for an academic who lectures on football finance he has got a lot wrong from the Twitter account I have seen. Might have been 56m losses for the group since sisu got here but the club in its current form is otium not sbsl. The old losses went with the administration in effect. But just...

It would be remiss of any director not to have other options

Like I said who knows the example was only a for instance. Could be different could be better or even worse

Yes because it is the losses of otium that is the club losses Not the sbs&l group because if you wanted to buy the club as it is then you buy only otium who have 9m in loans and nearly 7m in interest. Just an an article with no real understanding But even then you wouldn't buy the company...

Feeling confident of a win today 2 nil