4th bid rejected but sisu (1 Viewer)

dongonzalos · Dec 15, 2017

I think a lot of people find it a bit strange that a couple of people focus a lot of time on criticising and pulling apart either those who actively try to get rid of SISU or those who support those who try.
Then when it comes to pulling apart SISU themselves they just say well what’s the point we know they are rubbish and do not get stuck into to them with anywhere near or with anything like the same tenacity or passion they do with pulling apart the others.
Which is what leads to the bizzare wild allegations on both sides of the coin.
That people are Wasps and Council plants.
Or that people are influenced directly by SISU.

dongonzalos · Dec 15, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
Do we know what the consortium's plans for Ryton would be? Would they intend to keep it as the training ground, or pursue their original plan of finding a new training ground (to rent?)... while selling Ryton for housing?

I haven’t got a clue.
If this is how they came up with an extra 5 million by saying it’s no longer part of the deal to let SISU keep it. (as oppose to money from Dale)
Then I would guess that they would sell it for housing.
Then because they actually can build up relationships with people without antagonising them. I would guess that they build a new training centre/academy with the council’s help at say somewhere like the Higgs centre.
( just a complete guess)

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
focus a lot of time on criticising and pulling apart... those who... support those who try [to get rid of SISU].

I can't speak for anyone else, only myself.

Absolutely no problem with those who support people who want SISU gone. I'll leave the bickering that goes on to others.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask why to support this particular effort to get rid of them... whatever it is, however. Do you? Now (again!) I can think of one person (who sadly posts rather less than he used to) whose view I would respect greatly on such things, and he is very pro Hoffman's effort, and puts forward some decent arguments. Great. I'm not so convinced and I think my reasons are fair too. We can agree to differ. No point going through that yet again on a deal such as this one, though, as we've been here, done that. Your post after the one I'm responding to however:

dongonzalos said:
I haven’t got a clue.

is exactly why I refuse to rush to judgement. I don't have a clue either... I also know enough not to trust the surface, and wait for the depth before deciding. I can't get behind something I don't have a clue about and, frankly, I find the press coverage of each bid deeply unhelpful.

I too can think of one or two posters who belittle. There are also one or two mentalists the other way who if you're not 100% behind any anti-SISU, then you're supporting SISU. Fortunately that bank, too, are mad and in a vast minority.

In this instance though, I'm wondering what is the point of us doing this all over again? Surely this is a thread to leave the mentalists (on both sides of the argument!) to bicker wildly for no reason?

chiefdave · Dec 15, 2017

jimmyhillsfanclub said:
the consortium value Ryton @ £5m

When they put the last bid in the following was in the CT

would have allowed Sisu to keep the club’s Ryton training ground, with a view to selling off for housing in a deal which the Hoffman consortium claims could be worth upwards of £6million.

So we're actually going backwards (no change there) and people are acting surprised that SISU haven't snapped their hand off.

dongonzalos · Dec 15, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
I can't speak for anyone else, only myself.

Absolutely no problem with those who support people who want SISU gone. I'll leave the bickering that goes on to others.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask why to support this particular effort to get rid of them... whatever it is, however. Do you? Now (again!) I can think of one person (who sadly posts rather less than he used to) whose view I would respect greatly on such things, and he is very pro Hoffman's effort, and puts forward some decent arguments. Great. I'm not so convinced and I think my reasons are fair too. We can agree to differ. No point going through that yet again on a deal such as this one, though, as we've been here, done that. Your post after the one I'm responding to however:

is exactly why I refuse to rush to judgement. I don't have a clue either... I also know enough not to trust the surface, and wait for the depth before deciding. I can't get behind something I don't have a clue about and, frankly, I find the press coverage of each bid deeply unhelpful.

I too can think of one or two posters who belittle. There are also one or two mentalists the other way who if you're not 100% behind any anti-SISU, then you're supporting SISU. Fortunately that bank, too, are mad and in a vast minority.

In this instance though, I'm wondering what is the point of us doing this all over again? Surely this is a thread to leave the mentalists (on both sides of the argument!) to bicker wildly for no reason?

I don’t actually include you in my thinking of that small group of people as you do actually spend an equal amount of time pulling SISU apart as much as you do anyone else.

Agree with you on the press side of things.
Also I though Hoffman made a wise comment that there will be no further bid until SISU are finished with their legal action.
Which to me makes sense as I think they believe the club has some value to them whilst the legal action is on.
Once it’s failed once and for all then then both the value of the club and the will to sell changes.
At the moment you would be throwing good money at SISU that will be desperately needed to run the club afterwards and over paying for the product.

covcity4life · Dec 15, 2017

OP is a good poster imo so a lil harsh/troll like to say only mouth breathers worked up by this

At least its an improved offer.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I don’t actually include you in my thinking of that small group of people as you do actually spend an equal amount of time pulling SISU apart as much as you do anyone else.

I know and unlike some, you did just say a couple, so that was fine. At the same time I've been reading this thread with a mixture of amusement and resignation, so it seemed as wise a time as any to jump in with both feet

At the moment you would be throwing good money at SISU that will be desperately needed to run the club afterwards and over paying for the product.

Isn't this the Catch 22 anyway? As it stands any offer SISU would accept would mean the prospective new owners had little sense. And if they won't accept a lower / 'realistic' offer, then what's the point of making it?

Esoterica · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I haven’t got a clue.
If this is how they came up with an extra 5 million by saying it’s no longer part of the deal to let SISU keep it. (as oppose to money from Dale)
Then I would guess that they would sell it for housing.
Then because they actually can build up relationships with people without antagonising them. I would guess that they build a new training centre/academy with the council’s help at say somewhere like the Higgs centre.
( just a complete guess)

Well, that is exactly the point isn't it? After the shit show we've had with SISU I don't want to guess what the plans of any new owners are. Some people seem to get very upset if any questions are asked of this consortium or any potential suitors but I do not want to find out when it's too late that Ryton must be sold to pay for the bid and we're relying on council goodwill to help us with a new training ground or that we're saddled with crazy debt for a L2 club from the off because money has been borrowed, or that investors are faceless or are all looking for some crazy return on their investment. The answers to those questions will very much determine how the club is run going forwards and wanting to know the answers to those questions does not in any way diminish my desire to be rid of SISU but we have a section of people who do not seem to be able to differentiate between that.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 15, 2017

covcity4life said:
At least its an improved offer.

It isn't if the intention is to flog Ryton for housing straight away.

covcity4life · Dec 15, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
It isn't if the intention is to flog Ryton for housing straight away.

i thought they had not bid for ryton? that would still be sisus?

oldskyblue58 · Dec 15, 2017

I would not be certain that this has only just happened ie this week.

I do wonder why the news is leaked now as there seems no reason to do so other than to say we are still here and trying (and failing). Perhaps it is to tie in with the 10 year "celebration/wake"

I would think that Seppala wants a clean break deal with everything up front. If the pivot point is around the ARVO investment then she is looking north of £16m up front. She wont be interested in achievement payments that may never happen. The other side of that is who in their right minds would pay that ? if they did then it would probably hamstring future investment and for me at least raise doubts about the future of the clubs finances

Also do we know she wants to retain Ryton ? and whether the consortium would do a rent to buy deal with her on it?

Two random thoughts. Firstly Seppala possibly retains the club whilst the legals are going on to prove the loss SISU investors have taken and if successful she would take the compensation then sell the club so accumulating a return on investment - the club could be worth more that way in her eyes. Every year retained means more potential loss financial & reputational to claim. Secondly does the City of Culture provide her with leverage to use in mediation/negotiations with CCC - you wouldn't want adverse publicity or public wranglings when 2021 City of Culture is going on would you.

I really do not see an end to the SISU tenure of CCFC any time soon - what a depressing thought. It is vital for the club to achieve success this season or face more fans walking away - but does that put the sale price up and increase the day to day costs as well as income?

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I don’t actually include you in my thinking of that small group of people as you do actually spend an equal amount of time pulling SISU apart as much as you do anyone else.

Agree with you on the press side of things.
Also I though Hoffman made a wise comment that there will be no further bid until SISU are finished with their legal action.
Which to me makes sense as I think they believe the club has some value to them whilst the legal action is on.
Once it’s failed once and for all then then both the value of the club and the will to sell changes.
At the moment you would be throwing good money at SISU that will be desperately needed to run the club afterwards and over paying for the product.

So if Hoffman ruled out more bids after the last one, what's the deal with this bid happening to come from a source on a certain day?

I'd have no issue personally if Hoffman took over, there are lots of things inside my head that need to be ticked off / answered before I jump aboard the bus begging and getting worked up about it.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 15, 2017

oldskyblue58 said:
Secondly does the City of Culture provide her with leverage to use in mediation/negotiations with CCC - you wouldn't want adverse publicity or public wranglings when 2021 City of Culture is going on would you.

That's an interesting thought. I would say however that wranglings didn't adversely affect their campaign, nor them winning it. Hell, Wasps as a title sponsor didn't affect it either! So I'd be fairly comfortable that that isn't in her thinking and, even if it was, it'd be an irrelevance to the council.

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

Esoterica said:
Well, that is exactly the point isn't it? After the shit show we've had with SISU I don't want to guess what the plans of any new owners are. Some people seem to get very upset if any questions are asked of this consortium or any potential suitors but I do not want to find out when it's too late that Ryton must be sold to pay for the bid and we're relying on council goodwill to help us with a new training ground or that we're saddled with crazy debt for a L2 club from the off because money has been borrowed, or that investors are faceless or are all looking for some crazy return on their investment. The answers to those questions will very much determine how the club is run going forwards and wanting to know the answers to those questions does not in any way diminish my desire to be rid of SISU but we have a section of people who do not seem to be able to differentiate between that.

That's the issue, it seems if you do ask basic questions you are defending others. It happened as well with the KCIC stuff about rental deals when people asked for basic info and people went mental.

It's far from it, it's people just wanting re-assurance before making the same mistakes as in the past (not that we have much say over who takes over anyway, but it's interesting that some of the people I remember being sceptical about SISU are still sceptical now).

sky blue john · Dec 15, 2017

The bickering is beyond boring now.
Please all play nicely!
They will be gone when it suits their investors, not before.
I just hope i'm still alive to see the day.

ccfcway · Dec 15, 2017

Nick said:
The thing is though, we have been told for years the pressure is too much and they have to go. Relegation they won't stick around, Sixfields they won't stick around etc. Don't get me wrong, I'd love the pressure to get too much and they do one tomorrow. Not going to get excited just yet though.

I could see the protests starting up again if we slide down the league with our traditional post xmas form

ccfcway · Dec 15, 2017

oldskyblue58 said:
Firstly Seppala possibly retains the club whilst the legals are going on to prove the loss SISU investors have taken and if successful she would take the compensation then sell the club so accumulating a return on investment - the club could be worth more that way in her eyes. Every year retained means more potential loss financial & reputational to claim.

that's always been my thought. Not only do they not care about the club, if its ran at break even, there could be an interest in us dropping further and further as compensation claim would be higher.

jimmyhillsfanclub · Dec 15, 2017

ccfcway said:
that's always been my thought. Not only do they not care about the club, if its ran at break even, there could be an interest in us dropping further and further as compensation claim would be higher.

Oi...you little ray of sunshine you.....can you leave this sort of talk until after the home defeat on Saturday please.......

....Happy Friday folks.

ccfcway · Dec 15, 2017

jimmyhillsfanclub said:
Oi...you little ray of sunshine you.....can you leave this sort of talk until after the home defeat on Saturday please.......

....Happy Friday folks.

ha. Hardly new news.

Captain Dart · Dec 15, 2017

jimmyhillsfanclub said:
Based upon that summary.......2 things stand out to me...

1. the consortium value Ryton @ £5m
2. Bid 3 appears better than Bid 4.

But until someone from the consortium can clarify what this muddled offer actually is......or someone at the CT grasps the basic skills required to write simple sentences......I'll guess we'll keep guessing.....

Bid 4 is better because there is cash up front and the bonuses are improved.
The only reason a worse bid be made is if SISU were up s**t creek and about to lose nearly everything.

dongonzalos · Dec 15, 2017

Esoterica said:
Well, that is exactly the point isn't it? After the shit show we've had with SISU I don't want to guess what the plans of any new owners are. Some people seem to get very upset if any questions are asked of this consortium or any potential suitors but I do not want to find out when it's too late that Ryton must be sold to pay for the bid and we're relying on council goodwill to help us with a new training ground or that we're saddled with crazy debt for a L2 club from the off because money has been borrowed, or that investors are faceless or are all looking for some crazy return on their investment. The answers to those questions will very much determine how the club is run going forwards and wanting to know the answers to those questions does not in any way diminish my desire to be rid of SISU but we have a section of people who do not seem to be able to differentiate between that.

I don’t think the issue is with those ask questions about the consortium. That’s just normal and definitely should happen.
I think the issue is with those who very rarely ask questions of the current owners. Then become like the cook report when it comes into asking questions about anybody criticising the owners or anybody trying to oust the owners. Where is this tenacity and passion when it comes to delving into the activities of the actual people causing harm to the club.
For that they just say well everybody wants SISU gone so what’s the point in saying it.

dongonzalos · Dec 15, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
It isn't if the intention is to flog Ryton for housing straight away.

It is an improved offer, as they take the hassle of selling Ryton from SISU and they are promising £20 million in the future if things work out.
From an outside perspective SISU should bite their hands off as the only thing they consistently shown over 10 years is they have absolutely no idea how to run a football club.
They new people maybe able to do deals with Wasps and the Council that SISU will never be able to do.
There is more chance of them raising some money through the Football club than SISU.
However the legal action needs to get blown out of the water before that will happen.

jimmyhillsfanclub · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I don’t think the issue is with those ask questions about the consortium. That’s just normal and definitely should happen.
I think the issue is with those who very rarely ask questions of the current owners. Then become like the cook report when it comes into asking questions about anybody criticising the owners or anybody trying to oust the owners. Where is this tenacity and passion when it comes to delving into the activities of the actual people causing harm to the club.
For that they just say well everybody wants SISU gone so what’s the point in saying it.

...but sisu have been here for 10 years now.....and they've proved to every single one of us beyond all reasonable doubt that they are shyster cunts of the highest order......

.....all others on here are saying is maybe a bit more scrutiny before accepting more self-proclaimed club saviours with open arms may be in order this time around.....should the current crop of parasitic shitbags finally do one....

well, thats how I read it anyhow.......

Liquid Gold · Dec 15, 2017

It is improved but not by much. When I saw the headline figure of £7m I thought that would be it but with Ryton taking out the improvement is marginal.

Hopefully this has been released because a new bid of a few million more is on the way and they cant say they've improved their offer by £Xm in a week, take it or leave it.

Captain Dart · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I haven’t got a clue.
If this is how they came up with an extra 5 million by saying it’s no longer part of the deal to let SISU keep it. (as oppose to money from Dale)
Then I would guess that they would sell it for housing.
Then because they actually can build up relationships with people without antagonising them. I would guess that they build a new training centre/academy with the council’s help at say somewhere like the Higgs centre.
( just a complete guess)

Oh dear, frankly IMHO if the offer was Ryton + £7M and potential bonuses I think Joy would bite Hoffman's hand off. There is no way he has upped his bid by £5M in one go!
PS Though OSB thinks £16M is the real price, he may be right if that's what ARVO have put in so far.

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

jimmyhillsfanclub said:
...but sisu have been here for 10 years now.....and they've proved to every single one of us beyond all reasonable doubt that they are shyster cunts of the highest order......

.....all others on here are saying is maybe a bit more scrutiny before accepting more self-proclaimed club saviours with open arms may be in order this time around.....should the current crop of parasitic shitbags finally do one....

well, thats how I read it anyhow.......

Pretty much!

See how many of the people acting outraged about any questions or things being pointed out will be in the match thread tomorrow with their passion for ccfc if we win.

jimmyhillsfanclub · Dec 15, 2017

Nick said:
Pretty much!

See how many of the people acting outraged about any questions or things being pointed out will be in the match thread tomorrow with their passion for ccfc if we win.

Thats not a helpful response either though is it.......

...& I won't be in the match thread either.....

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

jimmyhillsfanclub said:
Thats not a helpful response either though is it.......

...& I won't be in the match thread either.....

Nope and it wasn't aimed at you btw.

It seems it's far too easy to throw the lazy SISU lover lines about if anybody says anything or points anything out about a potential offer / deal rather than actually discuss what's being said.

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I don’t think the issue is with those ask questions about the consortium. That’s just normal and definitely should happen.
I think the issue is with those who very rarely ask questions of the current owners. Then become like the cook report when it comes into asking questions about anybody criticising the owners or anybody trying to oust the owners. Where is this tenacity and passion when it comes to delving into the activities of the actual people causing harm to the club.
For that they just say well everybody wants SISU gone so what’s the point in saying it.

Where is the tenacity and passion of everybody outraged about CCFC when games kick off or when we win?

It's not really the Cook report, people look into it to see how realistic it is that it happens. Look at the Dale Evans stuff, obvious from the start it was nonsense and people like Otis get abused because they dared to mention it. People were genuinely excited, people actually thought he was going to save the club and live happily ever after.

SISU are here at the minute, I want somebody to come and buy the club so I will look at what's being offered, what they are saying to assure myself it's actually going to happen rather than being told how to feel / think by fans groups / media writing lists and bullet points day in day out to keep people angry.

Esoterica · Dec 15, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I don’t think the issue is with those ask questions about the consortium. That’s just normal and definitely should happen.
I think the issue is with those who very rarely ask questions of the current owners. Then become like the cook report when it comes into asking questions about anybody criticising the owners or anybody trying to oust the owners. Where is this tenacity and passion when it comes to delving into the activities of the actual people causing harm to the club.
For that they just say well everybody wants SISU gone so what’s the point in saying it.

SISU are a self serving faceless hedge fund who have ignored the fan base for months on end and then lied about their intentions when they do speak. The truths we would all like to know are hidden out of reach of the fans - wrapped up in commercial confidentiality, undisclosed transfer fees and rolled up generic entries in finanical accounts. Their activities are very deliberately not accessible to be delved into. Banging your head against that brick wall is not my idea of tenacity or passion and after 10 years of trying to do so I'm not surprised by some of the cognitive dissonance that gets displayed round here.
This consortium are supposedly fans though and if the damage done by SISU is to be repaired, they need to be as transparent as they are legally allowed to be to win back the trust of all corners of the fanbase and even though this is still just at a bid stage, there are some quite large question marks. Much more pertinent to be asking them the questions than repeating years old still unanswered questions to SISU.

Nick · Dec 15, 2017

Esoterica said:
SISU are a self serving faceless hedge fund who have ignored the fan base for months on end and then lied about their intentions when they do speak. The truths we would all like to know are hidden out of reach of the fans - wrapped up in commercial confidentiality, undisclosed transfer fees and rolled up generic entries in finanical accounts. Their activities are very deliberately not accessible to be delved into. Banging your head against that brick wall is not my idea of tenacity or passion and after 10 years of trying to do so I'm not surprised by some of the cognitive dissonance that gets displayed round here.
This consortium are supposedly fans though and if the damage done by SISU is to be repaired, they need to be as transparent as they are legally allowed to be to win back the trust of all corners of the fanbase and even though this is still just at a bid stage, there are some quite large question marks. Much more pertinent to be asking them the questions than repeating years old still unanswered questions to SISU.

It's always weird when people justify things because SISU do it. It seems to happen so much as well and if you ask anything there's always a justification that SISU do it.

Simple example.

"Anybody know who their investors are?"
"Why should they tell us, SISU don't"
"I thought you were angry that SISU didn't though?"
"Stop defending SISU"

Anybody who comes in I want to be the opposite, so much so it would impossible to compare them both in the same sentence. Hoffman etc are fans, they should go out of their way to do everything the opposite to SISU.

People always want to ignore bigger pictures, it may not always be correct to be cynical and try and look beyond for reasoning and logic from other sides to try and see what's going on but it keeps going that way.

Bumberclart · Dec 15, 2017

A lot more factors at play here than any of us will ever know.
SISU must be getting legal advice that tells them they will the court case eventually. Once its won, it opens up all sorts of options for damages, potentially totaling £millions, and may lead to SISU being able to snatch ownership of the Ricoh for a knock down price.
Are there any tax benefits to SISU owning a loss making company like CCFC? Does it offset tax owed by another part of their empire?

If a takeover does happen, SISU won't give a damn who they sell to. The only test the new owners will have to pass is the FAs 'fit and proper owners' test, which as we all know is an utter joke.
Lets hope, if it does happen, we're not all on here in 5 years, wishing we had stayed in the fryingpan.

Chipfat · Dec 15, 2017

Any word from the club or Hoffman regarding this 4th bid?

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Dec 15, 2017

The good thing is that they are still trying, and they are trying to be flexible with their bid.

I know everyone deep down wants SISU to be gone, and Hoffman is certainly a better prospect, although the same cannot be said for Dale. Despite that, I think the bickering needs to be put to one side. I see no reason why we shouldn't do our best to get behind this.

Captain Dart · Dec 15, 2017

Nick said:
Where is the tenacity and passion of everybody outraged about CCFC when games kick off or when we win?

I want that from the owners, but they don't give a stuff so why should anyone else?

4th bid rejected but sisu (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Administrator

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency