acl v sisu (ccfc) (1 Viewer)

sky blue zam · Jan 2, 2013

so the courts opened today do you think anything has happened.

acl has gone from statutory demands and winding up threats to disscusions with their legal team. maybe sisu have played a great game of poker and acl have bottled it.

has anyone heard anything? snozzer?

oldskyblue58 · Jan 2, 2013

Would have thought that it was in everyones interest to keep talking. We have all just got back from the Xmas break perhaps a few days to talk again before anything happens would be a good idea.

Last thing everyone needs is to go to court...... would suspect that wont happen until it is the only thing left or something significant changes

I would be surprised if anything happened before middle of the month

coundonskyblue · Jan 2, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Would have thought that it was in everyones interest to keep talking. We have all just got back from the Xmas break perhaps a few days to talk again before anything happens would be a good idea.

Last thing everyone needs is to go to court...... would suspect that wont happen until it is the only thing left or something significant changes

I would be surprised if anything happened before middle of the month

Didnt the Telegraph say there were no further talks planned?

sky blue zam · Jan 2, 2013

telegraph says alot of things, that was probably a report from the start of the statutory demand ;-)

ashbyjan · Jan 2, 2013

I hope they are still communicating whether its by email, face to face, telephone, smoke signals or whatever but if they stop talking without resolution then it will be bad news for everyone. Sadly, like many the longer this drags on, like many on here I believe this whole sorry saga is about SISU getting ownership of the Arena and doing whatever it takes to try and achieve that even if that means court cases, administration, points deductions etc. SISU want the arena come hell or high water - the real worry is how they react if it becomes clear that the council won't back down. Will SISU simply decide that they have poured enough good money after bad and what does that mean for CCFC?

Otis · Jan 2, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Would have thought that it was in everyones interest to keep talking. We have all just got back from the Xmas break perhaps a few days to talk again before anything happens would be a good idea.

Last thing everyone needs is to go to court...... would suspect that wont happen until it is the only thing left or something significant changes

I would be surprised if anything happened before middle of the month

On CWR yesterday Stuart Linnell said he had been talking to a lawyer and he was told this;

1. It will take months for a winding-up order to come to court.

2. The judge might throw it out because it has been an on-going issue for some time and he may say they should have brought the action far sooner.

Not sure if this has any credence or not, and of course it is just one person's opinion.

sky blue zam · Jan 2, 2013

would sisu sacrifice ccfc to get the ricoh? is that possible?

rupert_bear · Jan 2, 2013

ACL hold all the aces. They can act if they want, when they want, how they want.

Tonylinc · Jan 2, 2013

Otis said:
On CWR yesterday Stuart Linnell said he had been talking to a lawyer and he was told this;

1. It will take months for a winding-up order to come to court.

2. The judge might throw it out because it has been an on-going issue for some time and he may say they should have brought the action far sooner.

Not sure if this has any credence or not, and of course it is just one person's opinion.

Not so. He may be correct on the first point but on the second, no judge would throw it out simply because it has been a problem for some time if Sisu ca show that discussions have been taking place during the period and they probably can! The real problem that Sisu will face however is the fact that they have paid NO rent during the contention period. To re-negotiate the rent they will be relying on equity law and one of the main principles of that law is that, "he who comes to equity must come with clean hands". I think that right there the case for them falls down in a big way!

kepit 2 yusen · Jan 2, 2013

sky blue zam said:
telegraph says alot of things, that was probably a report from the start of the statutory demand ;-)

<br />
<br />

Agreed the CET or CT holds more chips than it does useful news. A really really crap rag, which probably makes if good toilet paper !

Happy_Martian · Jan 2, 2013

rupert_bear said:
ACL hold all the aces. They can act if they want, when they want, how they want.

Sorry, I disagree. ACL need the football club for ongoing revenue more than CCFC need the Ricoh (as they have proved by looking elsewhere). My gut instinct is Joy and the team at SISU are playing a longterm financial game, maybe even hoping that ACL will go into administration/receivership, leaving them open to pay minimum for the stadium.

Just my tuppence worth

SkyBlueCharlie · Jan 2, 2013

Otis said:
On CWR yesterday Stuart Linnell said he had been talking to a lawyer and he was told this;

1. It will take months for a winding-up order to come to court.

2. The judge might throw it out because it has been an on-going issue for some time and he may say they should have brought the action far sooner.

Not sure if this has any credence or not, and of course it is just one person's opinion.

Of course, according to Linnell anyone that thought Andy Thorn was a bad manager knew nothing about football! About time the guy was pensioned off.

oldskyblue58 · Jan 2, 2013

winding up orders can take months Otis but that is usually because the debt has to be proven. ACL got the debt proven in court months ago, which included validity of the lease and its terms, all of which went unchallenged by CCFC.

So with that in mind the comments by Linnell would seem wide of the mark on both counts.

" ACL need the football club for ongoing revenue more than CCFC need the Ricoh (as they have proved by looking elsewhere)." Are you sure of that Happy Martian :thinking about: Why does every body think that ACL are just sitting there waiting to do as they are told by SISU. Is it possible that they can change things so that ACL are not reliant on CCFC ? :thinking about: Change the cost structure of their business, reduce management costs and bring in alternative income for example

Given the options that CCFC have apparently looked at have capacities of less than 7000 do you really think given the other costs in the CCFC cost structure that they can afford to forego over £100k per home game in income whilst increasing costs by paying rent elsewhere?

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jan 2, 2013

Question are people on this site really that stupid to think that Sisu are really thinking about us playing in either Rushden or Hinckley or anywhere else than the Ricoh? People complain that they cant get to the Ricoh so they are really going to travel to another town please people get real on here. Ther4e are many peope on here who remember who built the Ricoh who helped us ok they had to be persuaded dont turn on them now. Als why did the poster put acl v sisu (ccfc) and not just sisu? just a thought

Warwickhunt · Jan 2, 2013

sky blue zam said:
would sisu sacrifice ccfc to get the ricoh? is that possible?

put it this way! YES they bleedin well would

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jan 2, 2013

My last reply was actually to two different threads did want to answer twice

dongonzalos · Jan 2, 2013

Happy_Martian said:
Sorry, I disagree. ACL need the football club for ongoing revenue more than CCFC need the Ricoh (as they have proved by looking elsewhere). My gut instinct is Joy and the team at SISU are playing a longterm financial game, maybe even hoping that ACL will go into administration/receivership, leaving them open to pay minimum for the stadium.

Just my tuppence worth

It costs them more in lost revenue moving elsewhere than paying the full rent never mind the deal on the table.

Jack Griffin · Jan 3, 2013

Just for laughs the google map image of Hinckleys ground... what superb facillities

i.e. It is not even a top notch conference ground is it!

Rushden&D is a lot bigger & better, but a long way away, 45miles & 1 hour by car from coventry (so what another £15 petrol there & back).. and not good enough for a championship side.

And as a finale the perennial Butts Stadium, another wee ground with no parking to speak of. capacity, ermm.. 4000 or so.

In conclusion.. none is feasible, all stories about the skyblues moving to any of these stadiums is so much bull crap.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jan 3, 2013

I've played on in the Butts' Arena. Shit pitch.

psgm1 · Jan 3, 2013

SiSU knew this all along- they will bluster and villify, give the vile propaganda in the papers, give "exclusives to their puppet Stuart Linnell, and do every little dirty trick in their arsenal to squirm out of paying this. They are counting on this being so expensive to ACL, that they will go bust or will be forced into doing a deal.

It is a disgusting way to behave, and ANYONE backing them is out of order in my book. They are infamous for doing this in every dealing (so much so that an article detailing their bad business practices was once published in a national newspaper!)

The ONLY way SiSU will pay what they owe is when they are FORCED BY LAW to do so - and that means going to the courts!

Then you get idiots like OSB droning on and on and on how SiSU "saved" the club - trouble is, the only reason the club was saved with 30 minutes to go, was because SiSU refused to sign the deal, until the got the shares for free, and had backed the then board into a corner - in any other circumstance that would be considered blackmail!

So please spare us your "wisened" words. SiSU have had their chance to do the right thing, it is SiSU who are refusing to talk! ACL offered them a 2/3 reduction in the rent! If they had a genuine desire for dialogue, they would have snapped ACL's hand off!

OH and don't forget, we only have SiSU's word that the "average" rent is 170k - where did they get this figure from? Is it based on the size of the stadium? No one knows, as there aren't enough teams with similar facilities to compare against!

It makes my blood boil when you get fools like that taking what SiSU say as gospel, yet accuse ACL of lying!

Who is it who has renaged on their contractual obligations?

Whose fault is it that Cov found themselves in league 1 in the first place!

I cannot believe anyone can dare call themselves a cov fan yet support SiSU!!!

If it meant SiSU had to disband CCFC to get their grubby little hands on the Ricoh (to turn into another O2), they wouldn't think twice. SiSU must be removed as soon as possible - how short peoples memories are!

sky blue zam · Jan 3, 2013

psgm1 said:
SiSU knew this all along- they will bluster and villify, give the vile propaganda in the papers, give "exclusives to their puppet Stuart Linnell, and do every little dirty trick in their arsenal to squirm out of paying this. They are counting on this being so expensive to ACL, that they will go bust or will be forced into doing a deal.

It is a disgusting way to behave, and ANYONE backing them is out of order in my book. They are infamous for doing this in every dealing (so much so that an article detailing their bad business practices was once published in a national newspaper!)

The ONLY way SiSU will pay what they owe is when they are FORCED BY LAW to do so - and that means going to the courts!

Then you get idiots like OSB droning on and on and on how SiSU "saved" the club - trouble is, the only reason the club was saved with 30 minutes to go, was because SiSU refused to sign the deal, until the got the shares for free, and had backed the then board into a corner - in any other circumstance that would be considered blackmail!

So please spare us your "wisened" words. SiSU have had their chance to do the right thing, it is SiSU who are refusing to talk! ACL offered them a 2/3 reduction in the rent! If they had a genuine desire for dialogue, they would have snapped ACL's hand off!

OH and don't forget, we only have SiSU's word that the "average" rent is 170k - where did they get this figure from? Is it based on the size of the stadium? No one knows, as there aren't enough teams with similar facilities to compare against!

It makes my blood boil when you get fools like that taking what SiSU say as gospel, yet accuse ACL of lying!

Who is it who has renaged on their contractual obligations?

Whose fault is it that Cov found themselves in league 1 in the first place!

I cannot believe anyone can dare call themselves a cov fan yet support SiSU!!!

If it meant SiSU had to disband CCFC to get their grubby little hands on the Ricoh (to turn into another O2), they wouldn't think twice. SiSU must be removed as soon as possible - how short peoples memories are!

cant argue alot with this and lenny brody did say the ricoh could be the new 02. but i do think youre wrong about osb, he gives a very balanced view from what i read and does often explain things better for people and sees a bigger pucture

oldskyblue58 · Jan 3, 2013

"Then you get idiots like OSB droning on and on and on how SiSU "saved" the club - trouble is, the only reason the club was saved with 30 minutes to go,"

meanwhile in the real world ........ i think you will discover it very hard to find i have ever said anything of the sort. But then actually reading what is written would seem to be a problem for you

The posting above is more supportive of ACL if anything.

You will also find that i was alerting people as to what was going on way before you had any form of joined up financial thinking.

"So please spare us your "wisened" words""............ At least I have some words perhaps considered wise chap ......... but you? well thats quite another matter :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

seems some things never change ............. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

TommyAtkins · Jan 3, 2013

And of course, the key factor here is that for CCFC to ever have a chance of a sustainable future, some sort of deal over the Ricoh is essential.

Which is why every fan should be backing SISU, albeit the taxpayers of Cov deserve a fair deal but blind hatred is clouding reality

Don't forget that ACL and the Council believe that the club can afford the rent, if the club diverts funds from players wages.

Therefore, if you want a weaker squad, back ACL and the Council.

Facts.......so inconvenient, aren't they.......

Astute · Jan 3, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
You will also find that i was alerting people as to what was going on way before you had any form of thinking and you still have none that makes any sense

Corrected you there OSB

Click to expand...

blueflint · Jan 3, 2013

acl

TommyAtkins said:
And of course, the key factor here is that for CCFC to ever have a chance of a sustainable future, some sort of deal over the Ricoh is essential.

Which is why every fan should be backing SISU, albeit the taxpayers of Cov deserve a fair deal but blind hatred is clouding reality

Don't forget that ACL and the Council believe that the club can afford the rent, if the club diverts funds from players wages.

Therefore, if you want a weaker squad, back ACL and the Council.

Facts.......so inconvenient, aren't they.......

how the fffin hell do you reach that conclusion . if you had tennants doing that to you you would have them in court faster than ACL have with sisu m8

skyblueinBaku · Jan 3, 2013

psgm1 said:
Then you get idiots like OSB droning on and on and on how SiSU "saved" the club

I can't find any post where OSB has said this, psgm1. Can you tell me the thread title and approximate date?

blueflint · Jan 3, 2013

i would just like to add oldskyblue in my opinion has never supported sisu in this he gives a true and fair reasoning as to what sisu want.he never says thats what he wants so read his posts properly you may learn something

Sky Blues · Jan 3, 2013

TommyAtkins said:
And of course, the key factor here is that for CCFC to ever have a chance of a sustainable future, some sort of deal over the Ricoh is essential.

Which is why every fan should be backing SISU, albeit the taxpayers of Cov deserve a fair deal but blind hatred is clouding reality

Don't forget that ACL and the Council believe that the club can afford the rent, if the club diverts funds from players wages.

Therefore, if you want a weaker squad, back ACL and the Council.

Facts.......so inconvenient, aren't they.......

We don't know for sure, but Sisu's end game might have nothing to do with a rent deal and might be about distressing ACL to pick up ownership of the stadium on the cheap. If they do get hold of it, do you trust Sisu completely to reunite the ground with the club and to not mortgage it, place a charge on it, shuffle it into a separate company or in any other way risk the possibility of CCFC again being divorced from its own ground? If you are utterly confident of that, and you also have no qualms about the way in which Sisu has gone about its business, then I can see where you might be coming from.

But me, I'm not sure I trust Sisu that much and I'm not sure I like the way they have gone about their business so far.

oldskyblue58 · Jan 3, 2013

TommyAtkins said:
And of course, the key factor here is that for CCFC to ever have a chance of a sustainable future, some sort of deal over the Ricoh is essential.

Which is why every fan should be backing SISU, albeit the taxpayers of Cov deserve a fair deal but blind hatred is clouding reality

Don't forget that ACL and the Council believe that the club can afford the rent, if the club diverts funds from players wages.

Therefore, if you want a weaker squad, back ACL and the Council.

Facts.......so inconvenient, aren't they.......

I agree a fair deal should be put in place ......... thats a deal fair to both sides. SISU have every right to challenge the current rent but ACL have as much right to demand a proper return. BUT it is not about the rent in the first place

Sustainable future ............ So the way to do that is to set out a business plan that relies on not paying known debts yet paying more wages out than the club has money to pay even without paying the rent....... and expect £3m+ in operational losses. Only one way that is heading....... and it isnt towards a sustainable future

As you say facts can be inconvenient

SkyBlueCharlie · Jan 3, 2013

psgm1 said:
Then you get idiots like OSB droning on and on and on how SiSU "saved" the club - trouble is, the only reason the club was saved with 30 minutes to go, was because SiSU refused to sign the deal, until the got the shares for free, and had backed the then board into a corner - in any other circumstance that would be considered blackmail!

So please spare us your "wisened" words. SiSU have had their chance to do the right thing, it is SiSU who are refusing to talk! ACL offered them a 2/3 reduction in the rent! If they had a genuine desire for dialogue, they would have snapped ACL's hand off!

Nick, we really do need that ''bullshit' button.

TommyAtkins · Jan 3, 2013

blueflint said:
how the fffin hell do you reach that conclusion . if you had tennants doing that to you you would have them in court faster than ACL have with sisu m8

I am afraid you are missing the point - I made no reference to legalities, only that the club needs some sort of deal over the stadium to survive into the future.

TommyAtkins · Jan 3, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
I agree a fair deal should be put in place ......... thats a deal fair to both sides. SISU have every right to challenge the current rent but ACL have as much right to demand a proper return. BUT it is not about the rent in the first place

Sustainable future ............ So the way to do that is to set out a business plan that relies on not paying known debts yet paying more wages out than the club has money to pay even without paying the rent....... and expect £3m+ in operational losses. Only one way that is heading....... and it isnt towards a sustainable future

As you say facts can be inconvenient

I quite agree with you.

But the club cannot ever be sustainable until it secures a deal.

Perhaps the best thing Ranson could have done was not spend any money on players and invest all the initial money on securing the clubs home.

lordsummerisle · Jan 3, 2013

blueflint said:
how the fffin hell do you reach that conclusion . if you had tennants doing that to you you would have them in court faster than ACL have with sisu m8

If Tommy had a 3 bedroom detached to rent for about £600 per month he could probably find some new tenants quite quickly.

If Tommy however has an Arena to rent for about £1.2million a year he may find it a bit trickier to find somebody else to come instead.

Mind you Tommy is rich officer type, so probably rents out Polo Grounds or something!

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jan 3, 2013

TommyAtkins said:
But the club cannot ever be sustainable until it secures a deal.

That's quite probably the case, dear chap. But why wasn't this lack of forward viability picked up during SISU's due diligence? And of so profoundly obvious, why not renegotiated at that point, or SISU walk away?

And given Fisher's own figures cite a £41m loss in five years; even if 'the club' do achieve a deal, how do they then become viable? As even existing rent free and with match-day income, we'd have accrued huge losses anyway.

If you believe Fisher's figures, the difference between us paying a huge rent (as is), or no rent is only the difference between us losing an enormous amount and a gargantuan amount.

SISU were given shares for a promise of a better tomorrow. Now it appears even if they get the Ricoh, the figures still don't add up. What next? Do they want the cathedral?

TommyAtkins · Jan 3, 2013

lordsummerisle said:
If Tommy had a 3 bedroom detached to rent for about £600 per month he could probably find some new tenants quite quickly.

If Tommy however has an Arena to rent for about £1.2million a year he may find it a bit trickier to find somebody else to come instead.

Mind you Tommy is rich officer type, so probably rents out Polo Grounds or something!

And a Happy New Year to you too.

acl v sisu (ccfc) (1 Viewer)

Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Banned

Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency