Appeal Decision? (2 Viewers)

[lapsed_skyblue]

You just been taken to court by your tenant (alright, ACL 's tenant), indeed proceedings are still potentially unfinished.
Despite apparently winning the case comprehensively and having been awarded costs these are in dispute and you could face a six figure sum shortfall in their recovery.

Yet you are being urged to enter into another contract with the same people, on the grounds of civic duty and the fact that they are the only logical tenant for the facility. Furthermore, you are being urged to enter into a relationship which will require you to effectively bear your throat if they happen to be carrying a knife.

What is logical in doing this?

Thoughts that would go through my head -
Can our facility cope without this tenant?
Can we find a less troublesome tenant?
Can we manage long enough for this tenant to go away and the football club to be in the hands of someone who really wants to deal?

If a deal with SISU/OEG is truly the only deal in town then I cannot see it as any more than a rent only deal: forget the subtleties of pie money etc as they would require a degree of openess that would not seem prudent. Besides, as it is only supposed to be a short term deal pending a new stadium being bought. (can you buy a stadium and then get it delivered?)
SISU,'s problem could well be that, knowing that a new stadium isn't going to happen, any short term deal for the Ricoh could form the basis for a long term deal, so they have to go in hard now.

 

---

[lewys33]

Take it to the argument thread ladies

Every time someone puts "well you said" I am going to masturbate furiously in to a box of corn flakes in Ricoh tescos. You have all been warned.

 

[lapsed_skyblue]

Every time someone puts "well you said" I am going to masturbate furiously in to a box of corn flakes in Ricoh tescos. You have all been warned.

Not a problem. I don't shop at Tesco at the Ricoh and prefer bran flakes.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Every time someone puts "well you said" I am going to masturbate furiously in to a box of corn flakes in Ricoh tescos. You have all been warned.

You just f***ing well stay away from Cannon Hill Park Tescos.

 

[lewys33]

Not a problem. I don't shop at Tesco at the Ricoh and prefer bran flakes.

I'll choose whatever the fuck variant of breakfast cereal I want to masturbate in to, fuk da police!

 

[lewys33]

You just f***ing well stay away from Cannon Hill Park Tescos.

Jesus I only want to furiously masturbate, I don't want to get shot!

 

[No future with SISU]

Says the man who said Owen Oysten was a good owner of a football club.

I have made no stupid comments on this thread at all. I don't support sisu but I am outlining their strategy.

You are making assumptions about their strategies. Unless you work for them you have no idea what their strategy is and every thing you write is just guess work (Bullshit is what you write).

 

[No future with SISU]

If they get as far as a European Commission that could take 2 years or more I'd guess.

Could be the Conference by then unless their is a total boycott of Sixfields. It is the only tool left to the fans.

 

[skybluetony176]

Bloody hell, now I'm nodding sagely at one of your posts.

wtf is going on in the world today?!?

Don't feel to bad, I had a love in with Torch earlier and it was only last week I was calling him "Grendull's apprentice".

There's something in the air

 

[Como]

You just been taken to court by your tenant (alright, ACL 's tenant), indeed proceedings are still potentially unfinished.
Despite apparently winning the case comprehensively and having been awarded costs these are in dispute and you could face a six figure sum shortfall in their recovery.

Yet you are being urged to enter into another contract with the same people, on the grounds of civic duty and the fact that they are the only logical tenant for the facility. Furthermore, you are being urged to enter into a relationship which will require you to effectively bear your throat if they happen to be carrying a knife.

What is logical in doing this?

Thoughts that would go through my head -
Can our facility cope without this tenant?
Can we find a less troublesome tenant?
Can we manage long enough for this tenant to go away and the football club to be in the hands of someone who really wants to deal?

If a deal with SISU/OEG is truly the only deal in town then I cannot see it as any more than a rent only deal: forget the subtleties of pie money etc as they would require a degree of openess that would not seem prudent. Besides, as it is only supposed to be a short term deal pending a new stadium being bought. (can you buy a stadium and then get it delivered?)
SISU,'s problem could well be that, knowing that a new stadium isn't going to happen, any short term deal for the Ricoh could form the basis for a long term deal, so they have to go in hard now.

Well to consider that I would be looking for a very nice rent.

 

[1966skyblue]

The club was going backwards at Highfield road, it is why they had £60m of debt then. The ground was falling apart and could only hold 24,000, which ment they could not compete in the prem. That is why they decided to build a new stadium, but their debt forced the council to bail them out to get the stadium built. Then Higgs had to bail them out as well and then the worse owners ever came in, downhill all the way since. There was no way back to highfield road as they had allready sold it and were paying £1.2m in rent on a 24,000 seat stadium.

Highfield road was in good condition, new stand and others refurbished.

 

[Grendel]

You are making assumptions about their strategies. Unless you work for them you have no idea what their strategy is and every thing you write is just guess work (Bullshit is what you write).

Abusive post.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

So now the appeal has been rejected, the owed money is set to be decided by the football league on August 7th. Does this mean ACL are ready to look at SISU's proposal to come back to the Ricoh?

 

[ccfc92]

So now the appear has been rejected, the owed money is set to be decided by the football league on August 7th. Does this mean ACL are ready to look at SISU's proposal to come back to the Ricoh?

I was wondering this. In theory, the case is over unless SISU launch ANOTHER appeal.

On another note, who's paying the legal costs? CCFC or SISU?

 

[skybluetony176]

Abusive post.

Too funny. It's comedy gold on here today.

 

[Astute]

Abusive post.

But very true

 

[ccfc92]

Too funny. It's comedy gold on here today.

Now that's an impressive statement. There's so many of his posts to choose from

 

[skybluetony176]

Has there been any comment from sisu yet?

I've been looking online in all the usual places but can't find anything.

 

[Houchens Head]

Joy leaves court clutching her favourite magazine!

 

[ccfc92]

Has there been any comment from sisu yet?

I've been looking online in all the usual places but can't find anything.

Have you checked the CCFC website?

That seems to be their mouthpiece :thinking about:

 

[skybluetony176]

Have you checked the CCFC website?

That seems to be their mouthpiece :thinking about:

Unless I completely missed it, nothing.

I'll keep checking on their Facebook page for a Lee Mair comment. I'm pretty sure he's their official mouth piece on there

 

[Grendel]

But very true

p

Unlike your statement I abused PWKH which was a total lie.

 

[Sub]

Have you checked the CCFC website?

That seems to be their mouthpiece :thinking about:

I thought it was nothing to do with CCFC and a total separate thing between SISU and CCC ?

 

[ccfc92]

I thought it was nothing to do with CCFC and a total separate thing between SISU and CCC ?

Glad that didn't go over everyone's heads

 

[Sub]

Glad that didn't go over everyone's heads

a few more beers on this hot evening there would of been a good chance I would of missed it

 

[Samo]

I looked at the CT article on the way home from work and it stated that SISU had been told to pay CCC costs to the tune of 250k. By the time I got home the article had been changed, anybody else see that?
Sorry if this has already been posted, havnt read the whole thread!

 

[RegTheDonk]

I was wondering this. In theory, the case is over unless SISU launch ANOTHER appeal.

On another note, who's paying the legal costs? CCFC or SISU?

Dunno, but I would not be surprised if it was either used as another bargaining chip for SISU, or ACL will have to take them to court to get them to pay it.

 

[Kingokings204]

So as pointed out with the loss of ticket income of around 3m and court costs of around 1 million and sold Wilson for 2 million. Couldn't of sisu bought Higgs share?

Oh and not lost 90% fan base and completed business is a correct and professional manor?

Baffling

 

[duffer]

Not that hard at the moment. Meet with FL and show them details of two potential sites, the impact assessments and that they are trying to negotiate a deal for one of them. Bear in mind that the FL have had lots of experience with the likes of Rotherham (approx. 610 days from leaving Millmoor to purchasing land for new stadium) and Brighton (years) so I doubt there will be too much pressure from the FL before next spring.

I'm not wishing the club into a new stadium BTW but I am slightly concerned by the number of people dismissing the idea of a new venue out of hand, especially as Sisu do have form when it comes to this kind of thing.

Yep, that's a fair point mate, and I wouldn't deny it - although both Brighton's and Rotherham's circumstances were slightly different perhaps.

I think what might make the FL be somewhat more stern is the sheer amount of stuff going against SISU at the moment. The fans are still (largely) against what's going on, SISU have fiddled around with regard to what they're supposed to be paying ACL, they've been tanked in court, and right now there is actually zero evidence that they'll be able to put us into a new stadium within the timescales required. Plus the FL have the Govt on their case at the moment, and there might be votes in this somewhere...

To me though, what really blows up the new venue idea is the financials. Even on a £30m build, half funded with equity, and half through borrowing, interest payments alone will be crippling. And that's for a smaller stadium, with a bigger, established neighbour on your doorstep competing for all of your non-football business (exhibitions, gigs etc). Accepted though, that the financial implausibility may not make much difference to the FL - it's entirely fair to say it could be years before they can see what's happening.

I'd rather, as much discussed, SISU dropped the case and started talking to ACL. If they drop the case and ACL still refuse to talk, then I'll be on the barricades with you Rob.

 

[cloughie]

Abusive post.

Far from it , I thought it was spot on and truthful, but the truth hurts

 

[Ian1779]

Hopefully the silence from SISU means they are going to leave it alone regarding the appeal. If that is the case, we know that the FL are dealing with the 590K monies so I can't now see a reason if this happens for talks not to start.

 

[shmmeee]

I looked at the CT article on the way home from work and it stated that SISU had been told to pay CCC costs to the tune of 250k. By the time I got home the article had been changed, anybody else see that?
Sorry if this has already been posted, havnt read the whole thread!

Just checked it. You're right, it now has something about checking with Justice Hickinbottom about costs. Wonder what changed.

 

[hill83]

At the risk of sounding like the spelling/grammar police can I just say one thing. It's been annoying me for a while. I won't mention it again after this.

Couldn't have
Shouldn't have
Wouldn't have

Not

Couldn't of
Wouldn't of
Shouldn't of

It's basic maths. FANX

 

[ccfcway]

awaits the "we haver put a sizeable amount of money in an account and we are disputing the figure"

well, that didn't take long did it !!

"The judge has also ordered club owners Sisu to pay the council at least £250,000 in costs - with £100,000 due within a week and a further £150,000 due within 14 days.
The council claims it has spent in excess of £580,000 in legal costs but Sisu disputes the figures, meaning the remaining £330,000 will be scrutinised before a final figure is paid"

 

[ccfc92]

Dunno, but I would not be surprised if it was either used as another bargaining chip for SISU, or ACL will have to take them to court to get them to pay it.

If a judge has ordered a confirmed figure to be payed to CCC (ACL have to pay their own costs according to the article), then SURELY SISU wouldn't have an excuse to refuse paying this time?