administrator's report (2 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
This is the only reason I'd want Sisu gone: they've lost too much trust.

But then I'm not so sure that a bunch of ill informed conspiracy theorists should be able to force an owner out of the club.

Sounds harsh but its not SISUs fault fans don't understand finance. Should they only do things your average Cov fan understands?

It's an interesting question. And I'm not sure which side I come down on.
Click to expand...

good post shmmeee, the fans should not need a degree in finace to support their club, but because of the underhand tactics and sham directors and very poor owners we have had everybody is focused on the off the field events more than the on field events. And this blame squarely lies at SISU feet, transfer embargos, not paying rent, closing the club shop falling out with the council,threatening to move our home games out of the city, its no wonder every fan is looking into the finacial side of our club because that is what is effecting every fan that wants the team to do well on the pitch. We can not do well on the pitch because of the piss poor running off it.
 
S

SonofErnie

Well-Known Member
What really irritates me is the Telegraph's complicity with SISU in reporting the £60m figure as fact. The 1st line of their report this morning states:

"Paul Appleton will issue his report tomorrow to the High Court in London and creditors of the club, which owes £60million". If they'd prefixed the £60m with the word 'purportedly' then it would change the context completely.

Surely the administrator's report will have to give a breakdown of the £60m debt i.e. who it's owed to and what it relates to, then he will have to justify these figures to the court. Until he has justified these numbers then the £60m figure is pure speculation.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
good post shmmeee, the fans should not need a degree in finace to support their club, but because of the underhand tactics and sham directors and very poor owners we have had everybody is focused on the off the field events more than the on field events. And this blame squarely lies at SISU feet, transfer embargos, not paying rent, closing the club shop falling out with the council,threatening to move our home games out of the city, its no wonder every fan is looking into the finacial side of our club because that is what is effecting every fan that wants the team to do well on the pitch. We can not do well on the pitch because of the piss poor running off it.
Click to expand...

That's the thing though there's an argument that most of the things you've listed are done to help the club. It's not normal (the rent tactics, willingly going into embargo) but you can see how someone would see it as a potential route.

When Sisu came in and we found out their reputation there were a lot of posters who expressed delight at the thought of City being run by "hard nosed businessmen" as we'd previously been a soft touch.

I'm still not convinced Sisu have done that much wrong but much like when a good manager loses the dressing room, sometimes a position becomes untenable.

All of this leaves the question of what next: as Godiva said Sisu have an investment to protect and whoever takes over the club will have to address issues around lack of income/expenditure too high.

This is what scares me about fans distancing themselves from the owners. Eventually we're going to need to answer questions about the clubs financial viability together, as a club.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
SonofErnie said:
What really irritates me is the Telegraph's complicity with SISU in reporting the £60m figure as fact. The 1st line of their report this morning states:

"Paul Appleton will issue his report tomorrow to the High Court in London and creditors of the club, which owes £60million". If they'd prefixed the £60m with the word 'purportedly' then it would change the context completely.

Surely the administrator's report will have to give a breakdown of the £60m debt i.e. who it's owed to and what it relates to, then he will have to justify these figures to the court. Until he has justified these numbers then the £60m figure is pure speculation.
Click to expand...

But sadly it's true. ccfc ltd owes £60m. Mostly to ccfc Holdings.

Here's the link to skybluesquirrel again: http://aprisonofmeasuredtime.wordpr...try-city-and-sisu-capital-60-million-in-debt/
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
good post shmmeee, the fans should not need a degree in finace to support their club, but because of the underhand tactics and sham directors and very poor owners we have had everybody is focused on the off the field events more than the on field events. And this blame squarely lies at SISU feet, transfer embargos, not paying rent, closing the club shop falling out with the council,threatening to move our home games out of the city, its no wonder every fan is looking into the finacial side of our club because that is what is effecting every fan that wants the team to do well on the pitch. We can not do well on the pitch because of the piss poor running off it.
Click to expand...

But do you not agree that there seem to be a chain-of-events here:
Club loses money. That leads to sisu requesting cost cuts - revenue increase. That leads to further planning, discussion with ccc/acl/lawyers/financial experts. That leads to sisu not signing off books on time. That leads to transfer embargo. Joint plan with ccc leads to rent strike. That leads to dispute between acl and ccfc. That leads to acl chairman leaving and become director at Yorkshire Bank. That leads to capsizing the joint plan. That leads to legel procedures from acl towards ccfc. That leads to ccfc looking for a new venue ....

It's all happening off the pitch (and it is certainly more thrilling than anything happening on the pitch).

It all starts here: The club loses money!
It continues here: Ranson/Hoffman/Elliott failed miserably and spent all promised funds from sisu without reducing the defecits.

It has to change. Who are more qualified to obtain that than a hedge fund?
 
NorthernWisdom

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
SonofErnie said:
Yes, but surely that's the whole point of this debate. The accounts were prepared by SISU and their associates and are potentially dubious.
Click to expand...

The auditor wouldn't sign them off if they were illegal.

OK we haven't had recent accounts published, but that's probably like last time, the difficulties in getting our backers to commit to ongoing funding.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
SonofErnie said:
Yes, but surely that's the whole point of this debate. The accounts were prepared by SISU and their associates and are potentially dubious.
Click to expand...

You use the word 'dubious' because your emotion is: sisu out.
You would use the word 'protective' if your emotion was: sisu stay.

Most would use the word 'dubious'.

It's really a great testiment that sisu have completely failed in building rapport with the fans.
 
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
But do you not agree that there seem to be a chain-of-events here:
Club loses money. That leads to sisu requesting cost cuts - revenue increase. That leads to further planning, discussion with ccc/acl/lawyers/financial experts. That leads to sisu not signing off books on time. That leads to transfer embargo. Joint plan with ccc leads to rent strike. That leads to dispute between acl and ccfc. That leads to acl chairman leaving and become director at Yorkshire Bank. That leads to capsizing the joint plan. That leads to legel procedures from acl towards ccfc. That leads to ccfc looking for a new venue ....

It's all happening off the pitch (and it is certainly more thrilling than anything happening on the pitch).

It all starts here: The club loses money!
It continues here: Ranson/Hoffman/Elliott failed miserably and spent all promised funds from sisu without reducing the defecits.

It has to change. Who are more qualified to obtain that than a hedge fund?
Click to expand...

i agree with alot of that, not that a hedge fund are the best option though;), also you missed the bit where we got relegated because of selling players and not replacing with loans etc, where a small out lay would of saved the club millions in tv rights etc and helped fund the deficit the club has always been making. Do you not see that the previous directors have caused alot of the money problems now? hacking the squad to bits with no replacements ment we were going to be relegated costing us more money leading us further down the administration process, alienating the fans (the customers SISU only stream of cash for the club) is not the best way to get on an even keel is it ? SISU think they can play hardball with everybody from the council to the fans we are not like a normal company we are a football club and that for me is the bit SISU do not get!! If they had been straight and not lied to the fans from the start they would of had more of a fighting chance, but as the saying goes those who live by the sword die by the sword and most of the fans will never trust a word they say.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
i agree with alot of that, not that a hedge fund are the best option though;), also you missed the bit where we got relegated because of selling players and not replacing with loans etc, where a small out lay would of saved the club millions in tv rights etc and helped fund the deficit the club has always been making. Do you not see that the previous directors have caused alot of the money problems now? hacking the squad to bits with no replacements ment we were going to be relegated costing us more money leading us further down the administration process, alienating the fans (the customers SISU only stream of cash for the club) is not the best way to get on an even keel is it ? SISU think they can play hardball with everybody from the council to the fans we are not like a normal company we are a football club and that for me is the bit SISU do not get!! If they had been straight and not lied to the fans from the start they would of had more of a fighting chance, but as the saying goes those who live by the sword die by the sword and most of the fans will never trust a word they say.
Click to expand...

So many things I want to reply to ... so little time between meetings :)

Let me hand pick a few things:
1: Selling Juke was probably necessary to reduce the funding needed. There are two possibilities here. Either put in extra funds (on top of the funds needed to keep up with the losses) to keep Juke in the squad or sell juke and reduce the need for extra funding. At the time he was sold we were not in a relegation battle. It would seem the board were thinking: We're unlikely to gain promotion, let's reduce cost and funding and see if we can rebuild over the summer. BTW - he was replaced by two loanees.

2: Previous directors have indeed caused a lot of the money problems. Especially Ranson/Hoffman and Elliot. They had the best chances with a 'clean slate' and £25m to play with. Their objectives were clear as Ranson said: First we stabilize the finances, then we get promoted to PL and then we buy the stadium. Can you tell me why any of the three should be trusted back into the engine room of this club?
 
A

Ashdown1

New Member
Thanks for your input Godiva, I'm obviously very dubious about some of your points and deeply suspicious of the hedge funds real aims and would much prefer to see them replaced with a more open and transparent regime but its nice to get a reasoned response without all the usual name calling. I'm certain there are posters on this site with a vested interest on either side of the divide but most of us favour neither of the protagonists but just want what is best for the football club, along with a stable and robust economy building around the footfall that the club creates.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
We weren't in a relegation battle?
Click to expand...

We were. Forgive me, I was wrong and didn't check before posting. What should have been a slow day in the office turned into chaos.
Seems like my memory has completely shut down on last season. Which is a relieve, I guess.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
We were. Forgive me, I was wrong and didn't check before posting. What should have been a slow day in the office turned into chaos.
Seems like my memory has completely shut down on last season. Which is a relieve, I guess.
Click to expand...

Not to worry-I have degree class determining exams starting tomorrow so in a similar position!
 
Nonleagueherewecome

Nonleagueherewecome

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
So many things I want to reply to ... so little time between meetings :)

Let me hand pick a few things:
1: Selling Juke was probably necessary to reduce the funding needed. There are two possibilities here. Either put in extra funds (on top of the funds needed to keep up with the losses) to keep Juke in the squad or sell juke and reduce the need for extra funding. At the time he was sold we were not in a relegation battle. It would seem the board were thinking: We're unlikely to gain promotion, let's reduce cost and funding and see if we can rebuild over the summer. BTW - he was replaced by two loanees.

2: Previous directors have indeed caused a lot of the money problems. Especially Ranson/Hoffman and Elliot. They had the best chances with a 'clean slate' and £25m to play with. Their objectives were clear as Ranson said: First we stabilize the finances, then we get promoted to PL and then we buy the stadium. Can you tell me why any of the three should be trusted back into the engine room of this club?
Click to expand...


You have a very strange notion of what constitutes a relegation battle...we were in one from the moment the first ball was kicked to the end of the season! I can appreciate how SISU can't see this but a fan? Oh right, now I get it...
 
Nonleagueherewecome

Nonleagueherewecome

Well-Known Member
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Nonleagueherewecome said:
You have a very strange notion of what constitutes a relegation battle...we were in one from the moment the first ball was kicked to the end of the season! I can appreciate how SISU can't see this but a fan? Oh right, now I get it...
Click to expand...

You posted the above 1 hour after I admitted and apologized my mistake.
Did you not see it, or is it your mission in life to ridicule fellow fans?
 
Nonleagueherewecome

Nonleagueherewecome

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
You posted the above 1 hour after I admitted and apologized my mistake.
Did you not see it, or is it your mission in life to ridicule fellow fans?
Click to expand...

No I didn't see it. And no, not fellow fans, just you ;)
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
You posted the above 1 hour after I admitted and apologized my mistake.
Did you not see it, or is it your mission in life to ridicule fellow fans?
Click to expand...

You sound stressed today ,dashing in and out of meetings ,they're not rent/lease related are they ??:thinking about:;):facepalm:
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
I think it is obvious that SISU wanted relegation from the Championship because then they could trim costs because of FFP.. they may not have so much coming in, but also have a lot less going out..

FFP in the Championship allows a club to run at a loss, it isn't running to the same formula as in League One.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top