Grendel
Well-Known Member
Pure comedy gold. Case closed.
I will have to educate you just because they could teach you to reed.
He was signed for £750,000. If you dispute that your call - however as he was league 1 player of the year even someone as dumb as you must know he cost something - he left for nothing.
Juke was the other one that we profited on 5 players in total.
AS the fee was undisclosed where did you dream up the £750,000 from and carlisle had a sell on clause we did not offer a good deal to him(bad move by SISU) they were not going to lose much money
I will have to educate you just because they could teach you to reed ,they forgot to tell you should not believe what you read in the papers especially in the sports football pages.
This point you keep making is ignoring the point made by VOR though isn't it.
If Joy won't pay a reasonable amount for both then what do we do to force the council to make a sale? There's doubtless regulations in place to stop the sale of council assets at below market value, especially if they aren't costing the council anything to run. Now I admit that I don't know whether ACL is costing the council anything but if you strip out the legal costs that SISU have burdened them and ACL with and factor in the lower interest payments then it isn't impossible that it costs them nothing. Also if ACL don't default on the loan and pay the full term as you've pointed out the council make a minor profit on the loan. As I also posted before there could be an independent valuation done like this....Okay so as OSB58 and me reckon Joy/SISU made a derisory bid of £10m or lower at the ownership meeting earlier in the year. The actual value is probably far more than that just as development land let alone with the ricoh complex on it (I know nothing about land values and am guessing here but working on the £60m Tesco paid). What may be causing problems is that the ricoh is doubtless worth more, with our club as tenants to any potential purchaser. The council won't sell cheaply and would have to factor ACL into the price so would like the club back even if only to boost the value. Joy won't allow the club to come back to the ricoh unless she owns it and she might not want to pay anything like the council want or need to satisfy any rules/regulations. So it appears to be a bit of a difficult situation, with no obvious solution that doesn't disadvantaged the council or mean Joy has to compromise her stated position.
Does that not depend if the asking price is realistic? I'd much rather independent people value it it get 3 and do the average, can't say much fairer can they?
I agree that a third party or two would be better but why get ones done by the choice of either side? If it was set up by some truly independent person, who picks the firms, who in turn aren't getting paid directly by either party (maybe the money goes into an escrow account first) and no-one knows who has been chosen until the reports are done. Less chance of what shmmeee thinks might happen occurring then.
AS the fee was undisclosed where did you dream up the £750,000 from and carlisle had a sell on clause we did not offer a good deal to him(bad move by SISU) they were not going to lose much money
I know no bids came in for christy and i also know if any come in at christmas he will be off, would you want to play at sixfields.
Ill find the sauce and reed it too u
So you now try and change your angle by finding spelling mistakes to get away from your mistaken quotes.
If you look at Stupots post, and the links to two different newspaper articles clearly stating Westwood was signed for 750k, you will see that Grendel isnt getting away from any mistaken quote, as his quote was correct.
I am sure an apology is on its way
If Joy won't pay a reasonable amount for both then what do we do to force the council to make a sale? There's doubtless regulations in place to stop the sale of council assets at below market value, especially if they aren't costing the council anything to run.
Is there? Do you have the statute for that?
http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/local-news/sky-blues-see-youthful-potential-3959264
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/carlis...750-000-1.125803?firstComment=0&commentview=1
You need to read carefully, it said undisclosed fee BELIVED TO BE £750,000 that highlighted bit is the newspapers makeing up a story and as grendle is not very clever he belived it and now tells ever one it is true and more people spread it around. Just do not belive anything Grendel posts.I am now wasting so much time checking my spelling so he will not be very happy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
If you look at Stupots post, and the links to two different newspaper articles clearly stating Westwood was signed for 750k, you will see that Grendel isnt getting away from any mistaken quote, as his quote was correct.
No future with SISU - the thinking man's CJ Parker
Is there? Do you have the statute for that?
The goverment has a department to check up on council spending or giving things away for nothing.
Once again caught posting incorrect information and then calling people names trying to make your self look clever.
Really? What department is that? Who heads it up?
It seems all agree with me and none with you.
You need to read carefully as the NEWS&STAR put the headline £750,000 for the idiot to read and then lower down say it is£500,000. Which figure do you belive , my advice is none as you can not belive what is written by the newspapers or Grendel
You need to read carefully as the NEWS&STAR put the headline £750,000 for the idiot to read and then lower down say it is£500,000. Which figure do you belive , my advice is none as you can not belive what is written by the newspapers or Grendel
If there aren't laws in place to prevent abuses, then are very likely to occur. You may remember the Homes for Votes scandal that happened in Westminster which was a serious abuse.Is there? Do you have the statute for that?
If there aren't laws in place to prevent abuses, then are very likely to occur. You may remember the Homes for Votes scandal that happened in Westminster which was a serious abuse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homes_for_votes_scandal
They were described as negligently depositing the money in the Icelandic Banks by the Audit Comission, http://www.24dash.com/news/local_go...-millions-in-icelandic-banks-audit-commission I haven't read the report to find out what happened. However it then emerged that the Audit Comission had £10m in an Icelandic Bank http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2008/10/audit-commission-joins-the-list-of-icelandic-shame/What about when many councils lost millions in the Iceland bank investments? What ramifications did the councils have then?
No but they are audited on their books, at the moment by the Audit Comission and would be held to account if they were selling off assets cheaply or wasting money. They are now going to have to get their own auditing done from an audit firm who will have to bid for the contract (as the Audit Comission is closing). Otherwise the council could just sell the freehold to the Trust (or a mate of someone on the council, or Arthur Daley, or Delboy, or Geoffrey Robinson, or anyone) for £1 who could then do with it what they like and maybe sell off for a large profit. Look at the criticism the Government is facing for selling off the royal mail too cheaply.Are you saying that councils have to have independent valuations for any asset they dispose of? Really? That seems a long winded process? Are you saying a formal im depth valuation process needs to be done? In that case we should be able to look at valuations of every asset every counc has sold? Are you saying if an asset is disposed of for one penny less than the value then this is illegal?
The National Audit Office would be just as interested in the Council borrowing £14m to prop up a company as they would of them disposing of an asset.
But the NAO wouldn't be involved it would have been the Audit Commission and now they will only be overseeing the companies who will be auditing the local councils. Also don't forget as Grendel told me unless ACL default on the loan and don't pay the money back, it is making the council a "minor profit".
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?