So basically, everything stays the same. It's Sixfields.
I agree with a full investigation and I agree not signing the CVA to get it.
Unfortunately I think they will sign it as that will mean more money. Also who does the full investigation and do you have confidence in him.....
So basically, everything stays the same. It's Sixfields.
Not quite the way I heard it torchy. If there's anything to take away from this, I think it's that it's not all over yet.
But it doesn't sound like we should bank on much help from the FL, unless the path of least resistance that they seem determined to follow suddenly gets a bit harder...
Hopefully, it's not over yet but we're now just over three weeks away until the first game at home, so if it is to be the Ricoh then something needs sorting ASAbloodyP.
I don't think it would be worth the minus 15 points and not be able to use this trandsfer window.
They may find 'something' but surely not enough to send someone to prison or change the terms of the administration.
With all the of accountants and lawyers in sisu's armory, I don't think they would leave anything major to be found.
It's over to you Tim, ACL have said they will negotiate with Otium so the ball is in your court remain in Coventry at the Ricoh.. :thinking about:
If CVA is voted for investigation stops into movement of assets
Couldn't offer to Otium with no status
FL now speaking to JS ( who is making all decisions)
If Otium do have GS then ACL happy to talk to Otium.
Get JS to do it she makes the decisions anyway
They agree something with TF then have to wait for JS to agree it or not
They have been threatened by SISU's lawyers
Unfortunately even though it seems weak, it silences the council
Not quite the way I heard it torchy. If there's anything to take away from this, I think it's that it's not all over yet.
But it doesn't sound like we should bank on much help from the FL, unless the path of least resistance that they seem determined to follow suddenly gets a bit harder...
I know he didn't say it directly but I got the feeling he was suggesting liquidating CCFC ltd is only liquidating a lease and was not significant.
Could he had meant not significant as in wont lead to minus 15?
Over to Joy by the sounds if it
I don't think it would be worth the minus 15 points and not be able to use this trandsfer window.
They may find 'something' but surely not enough to send someone to prison or change the terms of the administration.
With all the of accountants and lawyers in sisu's armory, I don't think they would leave anything major to be found.
I know he didn't say it directly but I got the feeling he was suggesting liquidating CCFC ltd is only liquidating a lease and was not significant.
Could he had meant not significant as in wont lead to minus 15?
Def say no to the CVA then as there needs to be an investigation
Sounds like ACL have tabled the offer directly the the FL to show CCFC can play at the Ricoh, question now will be what happens when Joy says no.
Is this the first time ACL have confirmed they will speak to Otium? Fisher can't hide behind his 'they won't talk to us' now.
This makes sense, seems a waste of time talking to Fisher if he can't agree anything.
What a shocking revelation, who would have thought SISU would threaten someone with legal action?!
that answers the question of why the council have been so silent. could it be SISU know it has no legs but just wanted to silence the council?
Roughly what time was PWKH on? Might give it a listen on iplayer.
Actually, I'd differ. I think it's a risk well worth taking. As I recall there is the power to unwind transfers of assets that have taken place within three years, for companies that have gone into administration.
Plus there's the possiblity that our directors conduct would make them unfit to hold further posts, or even be guilty of illegal practices. Imagine how that would change things.
I don't think it's time to give up this fight yet - I'd like nothing more than to get to the truth in this whole rotten mess.
Thanks for the updates - CWR reception is poor in Poland!
At this moment in time hate to say it but minus 15 point is the last of our concerns. Relegation seems likely anyway we are unable to recruit because of this embargo, deliberately done imo to put a gun to heads
I don't think it would be worth the minus 15 points and not be able to use this trandsfer window.
They may find 'something' but surely not enough to send someone to prison or change the terms of the administration.
With all the of accountants and lawyers in sisu's armory, I don't think they would leave anything major to be found.
At this moment in time hate to say it but minus 15 point is the last of our concerns. Relegation seems likely anyway we are unable to recruit because of this embargo, deliberately done imo to put a gun to heads
A bold prediction there my friend...wish i had an ounce of your confidenceLast term we lost at least 10 points in the start of the season and was further deducted 10 points towards the end. We still was some way above the relegation zone. And we still have the backbone of the squad: Murphy, Baker, Moussa, Clarke. We won't get relegated!
Def say no to the CVA then as there needs to be an investigation
Sounds like ACL have tabled the offer directly the the FL to show CCFC can play at the Ricoh, question now will be what happens when Joy says no.
Is this the first time ACL have confirmed they will speak to Otium? Fisher can't hide behind his 'they won't talk to us' now.
This makes sense, seems a waste of time talking to Fisher if he can't agree anything.
What a shocking revelation, who would have thought SISU would threaten someone with legal action?!
that answers the question of why the council have been so silent. could it be SISU know it has no legs but just wanted to silence the council?
Roughly what time was PWKH on? Might give it a listen on iplayer.
Yeah that's how I heard it, although would like to hear back to confirm
Kind of feel PWKH is the wrong person to be interviewed here. I mean this with no disrespect and in fact, praise as my lay reading is they've found themselves trapped in the middle of a dispute that isn't theirs. What would be far more interesting is that chat with the council!
Good question! But surely refusing a CVA will leave to a severe points penalty?
I think he meant that the club would live on - it wouldn't die altogether as has previously been a myth on this board.
Two things we need to remember:
1) Holdings and Limited shared the same bank account. That mean it will be extremely difficult to argue for/against any transfer involving cash - e.g. player transfers.
2) Limited was established in 1995 - and since then there have been multiple boards, multiple accountants, multiple accounting policies and the company has changed purpose of trading at least twice.
I am NOT an accountant, but I would be hugely surprised if anyone can build a case against the club for other than filing signed accounts without changing the 'purpose of the company' to reflect change in trading. And that won't put anyone in jail or lead to any reverse asset transfer.
Have you not seen our pre-season friendly results, mate! LOL!
pre season results are not far off meaningless especially when the opposition is as low level as the germans from yesterday, nuneaton struggled in the conference last year yet are still 4 or 5 leagues higher quality than the Germans and there is certainly reasons to worry about weather some of our best players cristie/clark/baker etc will still be with us.
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say relegation is likely but it is likely that we will be battling to avoid it.
Holdings & Limited are different legal entities.
The law regarding asset stripping is specifically designed to stop the transfer of assets out of a company, leaving it with only liabilities.
I'm not an accountant either, but I've run my own business, worked in banking, and I've some experience of financial laws and regulations. I can also read accounts (though not to the forensic level of others on here). Saying that the accounts are a bit of a 'mess' doesn't usually cut much ice with the courts.
I'm not on my own in thinking that something extremely dodgy has gone on. Smarter people than me have their doubts too. Frankly, I'd be hugely surprised if there hasn't been something going on, but the only way we'll really know is if there's a proper investigation. I hope we'll get one.
Two things we need to remember:
1) Holdings and Limited shared the same bank account. That mean it will be extremely difficult to argue for/against any transfer involving cash - e.g. player transfers.
2) Limited was established in 1995 - and since then there have been multiple boards, multiple accountants, multiple accounting policies and the company has changed purpose of trading at least twice.
I am NOT an accountant, but I would be hugely surprised if anyone can build a case against the club for other than filing signed accounts without changing the 'purpose of the company' to reflect change in trading. And that won't put anyone in jail or lead to any reverse asset transfer.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?