Ah the JOY of it.......Joy Seppalla talks (4 Viewers)

dongonzalos · May 1, 2012

Cet

Now you have done the hard bit and got joy to speak. You need to do a follow up with her and ask will she authorise a budget for next season and when will the books be submitted.

Also ask council and higgs is it just SISU they won't deal with or have they no intention to sell to anyone.
If it is SISU are they past redemption or what must they do to be considered viable.

Also ask the hoff. If the club are in Administration, would his investors bid yes or no.

dazzled2u · May 1, 2012

All part of Operation Premiership and sneaking in under the radar! :facepalm:

oldskyblue58 · May 1, 2012

Bottom line and this has always been the case.... both the council and charity have been open to discussions from day1. There are however certain criteria.

1) a viable and sustainable business plan for the football club
2) a stakeholder that is able to invest in further development of the site

Meet that and we could be getting somewhere. Yes the stadium is important to CCFC in terms of income but the Stadium and its future well being is also key to the development of a huge area of the city and simply can not be given away to a business with by anyone's standards a terrible track record.

The council and Charity took a leap of faith years ago, backed a brighter future for the football club in building the stadium. Both could have spent that money in other needy areas of our city. That faith has been let down once again with the club in financial turmoil yet again. But it is all the councils fault? all the charity fault ?and they should put themselves at risk of financial loss to help a club that until very recently has singularly failed to grasp simple financial realities?. The financial mess at CCFC is very largely of their own making, until they deal with that in a clear and sustained way why would any one take them at their word. It is all very well spouting about living within means, cutting cloth accordingly - do it!

dazzled2u · May 1, 2012

I think the simple maths is that current outgoings vastly out weighs current income.

Gates are down (for many reasons not least being the plight of the club), no income from the stadium, little sponsorship etc etc
Costs are less but still high -

We simple cant afford the RICOH in the current situation
If they can't come to a deal with the Stadium costs then I'm not sure what options they have as our income will never surpass our bills and we will never progress.

Brighton Sky Blue · May 1, 2012

Words are cheap Joy, actions are priceless. In your 5 year tenure your investment has been a complete failure-nobody wants SISU here and I'm sure SISU don't want to be here. Leave, cut your losses and save some face in the eyes of your investors. In 5 years the club has stagnated and eventually sunk lower-get out.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 1, 2012

Interview
"We will shit on the club all we want until we make the profit we deserve."

Otis · May 1, 2012

thorninmyside said:
Slag me off of you want but I was impressed that they replied so well. You can't accuse her of avoiding the question. A member here wrote "no mention of the squad" ... I think she made the point about the squad very well. She said "we must cut our cloth to suit our means" and made many references to the club "reaching a break even on the clubs income and it's expenditure". Nothing confusing there. The players that we will have will depend on the income and the expenditure breaking even. .. so at this point either the rent comes down or its the chop for most of our squad as the wage is too high.

I was impressed by the article. We now at least know the following

Hoffman is full of it. . No offers have been made and he hasn't been able to put the money where his mouth is.

We are NOT facing administration or liquidation.

Sisu have NOT taken any revenues from the the club AT ALL.

Sisu have invested 40 million so far and they want a profit.

Sisu are in it for the long term.

Sisu want to own all it part of the stadium to make money from the revenue streams. .. can you honeslty say they are not in the right to do so.

The problem for us is the council do not want to share the revenues with our cluB. Councillor mutton can dress it up however he wants but the loss in revenue from the ricoh has been detrimental smell we have suffered due to it.

Sisu are saying we allneed to work together. I think that means us and the council . Acl. Higgs. What's wrong with that. . If the council want to see a succesful club they need to stop the greed and give 50 percent of their ownership to the club on a model where sisu own it under certain conditions. The council still own the other 50percent of there ownership rights.

Then after 3 years it so after prooving its intentions sisu should buy the other 75 percent. At that point I think they should be able to recoup our and their losses.

Sisu are not the enemy. The council are

Hoffman is full of it. . No offers have been made and he hasn't been able to put the money where his mouth is.

Hang on, because someone who represents someone we don't trust comes out and says that no offer has been made, you believe it?

Why?

Hoffman says he has made a bid - You don't believe it.

Yet ...

Joy Seppala says there has been no bid - You choose to believe it.

Why believe one over the other? Fact is, none of us know the truth. You can't just accept this as true just because she has said it.

oldskyblue58 · May 1, 2012

You know what I would have liked the CT to ask .........

"you say that there have been mistakes ........... what were they and how could or should you have done it better ?"

but then this wasnt an actual interview was it ..... this was written replies to set questions..... replies carefully crafted and set out ..... or am i being too cynical?

Otis · May 1, 2012

dongonzalos said:
Folks the question are sisu in this for the long term. Read it, do you think she actually answered that question.

They are only 'in it' until they can get their money back.

The Reverend Skyblue · May 1, 2012

Just more bullshit from SISU trying to sell season tickets for next season.
I have decided that my season ticket money for mine,my wife and my daughters will stay firmly in my bank account ,until the time they either leave or this public bullshiting actually comes to something.

Its very coincidental they speak now, just when they expect the fans to be buying there season tickets, they are treating us as mugs,everyone of us, they think we will believe absolutely anything they say. This waffle means nothing, and they should hang there heads in shame for the way they have treated the fans.

The Rev

Nonleagueherewecome · May 1, 2012

MayallMan said:
"is there a chance the track could bend?"

"Not on your life, my Hindu friend!" :claping hands:

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 1, 2012

oldskyblue58 said:
You know what I would have liked the CT to ask .........

"you say that there have been mistakes ........... what were they and how could or should you have done it better ?"

but then this wasnt an actual interview was it ..... this was written replies to set questions..... replies carefully crafted and set out ..... or am i being too cynical?

No I think that was exactly how it was, no way was this a face to face interview. SISU probably been carefully preparing these answers for the past few weeks.

SkyBlueM · May 1, 2012

I'm a bit confused with peeps saying the council should relent and give us a share of the stadium - why should they ? The situation regarding stadium ownership we are in is our own fault. My facts may be wrong but far as I was aware, did we not sell our share of the stadium complex right at the start and negotiate a buy back clause for that share that was valid for x years (7 ?) at a set price following a formula which I guess included inflation, market forces etc. Just because we never took that option up - both previous owners and SISU, wecannot expect to get something for free that we have already sold on.

skyblueinBaku · May 1, 2012

oldskyblue58 said:
You know what I would have liked the CT to ask .........

"you say that there have been mistakes ........... what were they and how could or should you have done it better ?"

but then this wasnt an actual interview was it ..... this was written replies to set questions..... replies carefully crafted and set out ..... or am i being too cynical?

Not cynical at all, OSB - experienced in the ways of Sisu

Brighton Sky Blue · May 1, 2012

thorninmyside said:
Slag me off of you want but I was impressed that they replied so well. You can't accuse her of avoiding the question. A member here wrote "no mention of the squad" ... I think she made the point about the squad very well. She said "we must cut our cloth to suit our means" and made many references to the club "reaching a break even on the clubs income and it's expenditure". Nothing confusing there. The players that we will have will depend on the income and the expenditure breaking even. .. so at this point either the rent comes down or its the chop for most of our squad as the wage is too high.

I was impressed by the article. We now at least know the following

Hoffman is full of it. . No offers have been made and he hasn't been able to put the money where his mouth is.

We are NOT facing administration or liquidation.

Sisu have NOT taken any revenues from the the club AT ALL.

Sisu have invested 40 million so far and they want a profit.

Sisu are in it for the long term.

Sisu want to own all it part of the stadium to make money from the revenue streams. .. can you honeslty say they are not in the right to do so.

The problem for us is the council do not want to share the revenues with our cluB. Councillor mutton can dress it up however he wants but the loss in revenue from the ricoh has been detrimental smell we have suffered due to it.

Sisu are saying we allneed to work together. I think that means us and the council . Acl. Higgs. What's wrong with that. . If the council want to see a succesful club they need to stop the greed and give 50 percent of their ownership to the club on a model where sisu own it under certain conditions. The council still own the other 50percent of there ownership rights.

Then after 3 years it so after prooving its intentions sisu should buy the other 75 percent. At that point I think they should be able to recoup our and their losses.

Sisu are not the enemy. The council are

You have posted some nonsense before but this takes the biscuit. What is all this bile about the council being the enemy of the club? Pathetic drivel and in my eyes, future posts from yourself have no credibility.

Nonleagueherewecome · May 1, 2012

thorninmyside said:
Lets put it this way. I have never met Martin Luther king but I believe everything he said.

If you look at this purely from an owners point of veiw you have to say she has been open honest and candid in this article. Like I previously stated the ground was built for our club. Ccfc were not built due that ground.

Its only natural the club want the revenues. If you owned the club you would be doing exactly the same as sisu. She said we aren't going to liqudate or administrate. What more do you want from a company being shat on by the council

But surely you believe Luther King due to his good character as evidenced by his actions? Whereas SISU..

mattylad · May 1, 2012

Like a longtime absent parent trying to get back in to a childs life SISU must understand this will take a lot of time, a lot of actions speaking louder than words and if just once they promise and don't deliver then we will turn our backs on them for good.

They have held out an olive branch but they will have to wait until were ready to pick it up.

Otis · May 1, 2012

The one thing I do have sympathy here is the 1.2m rent. Why is it purported to be one of the highest in the land?

Everyone knows that it is not sustainable.

Sub · May 1, 2012

can anyone post the onye igwi interveiw he did for tv?? be intresting to see what he said in comparison to joy:thinking about::thinking about:

Godiva · May 1, 2012

thorninmyside said:
Slag me off of you want but I was impressed that they replied so well. You can't accuse her of avoiding the question. A member here wrote "no mention of the squad" ... I think she made the point about the squad very well. She said "we must cut our cloth to suit our means" and made many references to the club "reaching a break even on the clubs income and it's expenditure". Nothing confusing there. The players that we will have will depend on the income and the expenditure breaking even. .. so at this point either the rent comes down or its the chop for most of our squad as the wage is too high.

I was impressed by the article. We now at least know the following

Hoffman is full of it. . No offers have been made and he hasn't been able to put the money where his mouth is.
I don't think we can conclude that from what she says, only that Hoffman has so far been unable to match conditions sisu are looking for.

We are NOT facing administration or liquidation.
Nowhere does she make that assurance - she just says it won't help the club and that they will try to cut the costs (especially the rent) to get to break-even point. If they cannot do that, then sisu can still walk away.

Sisu have NOT taken any revenues from the the club AT ALL.
We new that already - OSB has been digging deep into the published accounts and found no evidence that they have reclaimed one single penny.

Sisu have invested 40 million so far and they want a profit.
I am not sure about the £40m ... there are many ways to calculate and report investments made, but is it 'we have taken £40m out of our pockets and put them into the clubs coffer?' I am not so sure.
The £40m looks (to me) more like a price-tag for potential buyers.
They want a profit ... well, how surprising!

Sisu are in it for the long term.
They have been here for 5 years ... that's already long term, and nowhere does she say they are staying for another long term. They will probably be more than willing to let in new owners, providing sisu was paid out the £40m they value their investment to be at present. There seem to be no potential new owners though, so they are stuck.

Sisu want to own all it part of the stadium to make money from the revenue streams. .. can you honeslty say they are not in the right to do so.
The club and the stadium have to be owned by the same umbrella. I agree sisu should own the stadium ... or at least half. She is fully aware that the council will not part with the total control and accepts that leaving a bit owned by the council (maybe even a decive vote) is the only negotiable way to buy into the stadiums revenue streams.

The problem for us is the council do not want to share the revenues with our cluB. Councillor mutton can dress it up however he wants but the loss in revenue from the ricoh has been detrimental smell we have suffered due to it.

Sisu are saying we allneed to work together. I think that means us and the council . Acl. Higgs. What's wrong with that. . If the council want to see a succesful club they need to stop the greed and give 50 percent of their ownership to the club on a model where sisu own it under certain conditions. The council still own the other 50percent of there ownership rights.
I agree - we should work with sisu, not against them. And we should forget the mantra 'sisu-out'. It is not helping the club ... and never has.

Sisu are not the enemy. The council are.
None of them are OUR enemies. But they seem to be each others enemies.

Comments in red above.

Let me add: I believe she's telling the truth as she see's it, but that is not necessarily the whole truth. The fans wanted better communication from sisu, and she has responded positively. It even looks like she has been browsing this forum and found that 'we want to own shares' is a possible way to regain some trust. It will be most interesting how they handle that. I would imagine they will sell them as B-shares at £10 a piece, and ring fence the money towards player purchase. We'll see.
A positive dialogue requires two parties ... now sisu have made the first move, it's time we respond in a positive way too.

Nonleagueherewecome · May 1, 2012

dazzled2u said:
I'm no lover of SISU or the way the have conducted themselves but the interview reads fair.

They are purely speaking from a financial perpsective as their is no passion for the club as a football club as their only real aim is to make a return for their investors. They've tried to balance the books and minimise expenses by selling and cutting the squad much to our dislike - this has proved to be false economy as we've been relegated and the income has reduced even more!

They are correct the biggest problem we have as a club is the RICOH, if the move from Highfield Road was managed better we wouldn't be where we are today as the income from the stadium into the club would be much higher plus we would of been taken over by other investors.

The best chance of SISU making any kind of return would be by owning part of the RICOH, there's nothing strange or wrong in that idea as any other owner would want the same.

As a club we can never progress without owning or part owning the ground, if this isn't resolved in before the start of the new season I think administration will become a necessity as they won't fund the increasing loses.

Yes, and we-and SISU-knew all that before they bought us. That's why the key plank of the Ranson plan was to purchase the stadium within 18 months, but, as he says, "it just didn't happen". We've never had an answer why from SISU. Would we have given up shares otherwise? You can assume Credit Crunch, but that has still never been communicated-such a great excuse, yet they won't use it?

They must think we have very short memories indeed-they also think we are very stupid!

mattylad · May 1, 2012

Otis said:
The one thing I do have sympathy here is the 1.2m rent. Why is it purported to be one of the highest in the land?

Everyone knows that it is not sustainable.

Yes but only because most big clubs own their stadium and do not pay rent. I can go out today and rent a ferrari or a skoda and one is going to be dearer.

Wrenstreetcarpark · May 1, 2012

As the judge said:

" I have no doubt that all of the witnesses who gave oral evidence are honest people,
none of whom is deliberately lying or attempting to mislead the court except that I do
have some reservation in the case of Ms Seppala"

nuff said.

kg82 · May 1, 2012

Wrenstreetcarpark said:
As the judge said:

" I have no doubt that all of the witnesses who gave oral evidence are honest people,
none of whom is deliberately lying or attempting to mislead the court except that I do
have some reservation in the case of Ms Seppala"

nuff said.

What's this?

Sub · May 1, 2012

Godiva said:
Comments in red above.

Let me add: I believe she's telling the truth as she see's it, but that is not necessarily the whole truth. The fans wanted better communication from sisu, and she has responded positively. It even looks like she has been browsing this forum and found that 'we want to own shares' is a possible way to regain some trust. It will be most interesting how they handle that. I would imagine they will sell them as B-shares at £10 a piece, and ring fence the money towards player purchase. We'll see.
A positive dialogue requires two parties ... now sisu have made the first move, it's time we respond in a positive way too.

Godiva do serious belive that anybody will want to pay out for shares again that were demanded back for free or they would of let the club go into admin so SISU could take complete control of the club and possibly make a profit? but now there plan has gone tits up you think we should pay again to bail them out of the hole they have dug themselves??? :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 1, 2012

Brighton Sky Blue said:
You have posted some nonsense before but this takes the biscuit. What is all this bile about the council being the enemy of the club? Pathetic drivel and in my eyes, future posts from yourself have no credibility.

I had concluded that a long time ago. The irony of it is during the Southampton match he was saying things like "Joe Henderson, fucking shit what a joke" or similar drivel and then he tries to stick up with SISU here when it is because of them we had to play such players.

SkyBlueUkeman · May 1, 2012

Nonleagueherewecome said:
"Not on your life, my Hindu friend!" :claping hands:

Were you sent here by the devil?

Mumford and Daughter · May 1, 2012

Godiva said:
Comments in red above.

Let me add: I believe she's telling the truth as she see's it, but that is not necessarily the whole truth. The fans wanted better communication from sisu, and she has responded positively. It even looks like she has been browsing this forum and found that 'we want to own shares' is a possible way to regain some trust. It will be most interesting how they handle that. I would imagine they will sell them as B-shares at £10 a piece, and ring fence the money towards player purchase. We'll see.
A positive dialogue requires two parties ... now sisu have made the first move, it's time we respond in a positive way too.

hello joy ....

SkyBlueUkeman · May 1, 2012

I saw that she had answered some questin in the CT today but I didn't have time to read it. was it just general Buisness mumbo jumbo twaddle-lies?

Brighton Sky Blue · May 1, 2012

SkyBlueUkeman said:
Were you sent here by the devil?

No good sir I'm on the level!

Godiva · May 1, 2012

Sub said:
Godiva do serious belive that anybody will want to pay out for shares again that were demanded back for free or they would of let the club go into admin so SISU could take complete control of the club and possibly make a profit? but now there plan has gone tits up you think we should pay again to bail them out of the hole they have dug themselves??? :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Yes I do seriously believe that someone is ready to pay for shares in the club. Especially if the revenue goes towards player purchase.
The old shares are history and claiming them will not help the club. And it's not about bailing sisu out - it's about helping the club to survive.

cloughie · May 1, 2012

thorninmyside said:
Lets put it this way. I have never met Martin Luther king but I believe everything he said.

If you look at this purely from an owners point of veiw you have to say she has been open honest and candid in this article. Like I previously stated the ground was built for our club. Ccfc were not built due that ground.

Its only natural the club want the revenues. If you owned the club you would be doing exactly the same as sisu. She said we aren't going to liqudate or administrate. What more do you want from a company being shat on by the council

Martin Luther King spoke from a position of integrity
whilst seppall was basically called a liar by the judge in a court regarding one of her previous sissu and avro liquidation cases in the USA. So why would anyone believe a word she says as she has no integrity.

Only this morning a spokesman from the Higgs trust said why would anyone go into partnership with sissu considering their previous track record they would have to be mad !

ACL don't rely on CCFC for their income it is only about 20% of it, they can suvive without CCFC

THE QUESTION IS WOULD ACL SURVIVE WITH SISU OWNING IT ?

I doubt it as we would be like man utd mortgaged upto the max so sissu could get their money back and do a runner. I wouldn't believe her regarding admin or liquidation either, as all the cards are stacked towards sissu/avro getting as much out of it as possible

Wrenstreetcarpark · May 1, 2012

here is the rest of what the judge said:

135. I have no doubt that all of the witnesses who gave oral evidence are honest people,
none of whom is deliberately lying or attempting to mislead the court except that I do
have some reservation in the case of Ms Seppala which I come to in a moment. They do,
however, have different recollections of certain events and have very different

perceptions of the events as they unfolded.

138. Ms Seppala was the least satisfactory of all the witnesses. In making my general
comments above, I said that no-one was deliberately lying. But I fear Ms Seppala has a
distorted recollection of some events – particularly about what happened at the meetings
in New York in January 2005 – and, with the benefit of hindsight, has introduced a “spin”
(I am sorry not to be able to find a better word) which suits the Applicants’ case. She is
also prone to exaggerate – the Respondents would characterise it as lying, but I give her
the benefit of the doubt on that – for instance her suggestion (eventually withdrawn by
her) that Mr Wallace had “continually” represented to the Applicants that the RCF Banks
had a strong direct claim against TXU Corp when in fact he never said that at all. She also
recollects (and she may well have believed what she was saying) events which did not, as
I conclude, take place (namely a conversation with Mr Wallace “in a small room” and Mr
Olin reading and explaining a position paper in New York on 11 January 2005). She is, I
am quite sure, an astute and effective business woman. I totally reject her description of
herself as naïve. I am quite sure that she was closely involved in developments as the
representative of SISU as a Committee Creditor. But she had many other business
matters on her mind and when it came to producing her witness statement and giving her
evidence.

smouch1975 · May 1, 2012

Ok Joy, you have laid out your stall and have indeed made some very valid points. The club, our club, certainly need revenue streams from the RICOH

It needs, revenue from food, beverage and concert sales absolutely.

Simple, find the money to buy a percentage of the stadium and it's revenue streams.

If you can't, leave, sell, admin or liquidated. Better a headline than five pages of maybe's.

Sub · May 1, 2012

Godiva said:
Yes I do seriously believe that someone is ready to pay for shares in the club. Especially if the revenue goes towards player purchase.
The old shares are history and claiming them will not help the club. And it's not about bailing sisu out - it's about helping the club to survive.

It is about bailing SISU out !!! they have run out of money by miss managing the club the fans and the council. they now want a return on their so called investment. they brought a club they wanted to make a killing on by spending nothing or very little and recouping a big profit, they bottled it and went away from the plan that would of made them a fourtune with players that could of been brought on the cheap and sold for a profit also the possibility of play offs or promotion. They have made the mess and you think the fans should pay for that more than they have already ?? :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Ah the JOY of it.......Joy Seppalla talks (4 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

New Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency