Nick
Administrator
So it doesn't actually say they expected it for free then if it doesn't say zero? Less than wasps isn't zero is it?
Have sisu received the management fees? I thought it was moving money?
You need to apply a little common sense when you read the document (I can help if you want)
Whether the Sisu thinking was actually zero we will never know but they were hopeful of getting it for a lot less than Wasps got it and the expectation of getting the bank loan for as little as £2M in reality put the figure well down there in real terms.
Are you now denying that Sisu have taken upward of £2M in management fees ?
Extract from https://aprisonofmeasuredtime.wordp...try-city-and-sisu-capital-60-million-in-debt/
I have no reason to believe anything has changed.
"CCFC Holdings Ltd has a total income in the year to 31 May 2011 of £4,478,157 (2010, £4,432,954), which is a small increase on the previous year, with sponsorship, advertising, club shop & promotions contributing £1,791,315 (2010, £1,663,196) and charging management fees of £2,686,842 (2010, £2,769,758). Who these management fees are paid to is not disclosed."
Ha ha bollocks. OSB has confirmed that management fees were the movement of funds between holdings and ltd.
I think it's fair to assume there will be some yield to holding so much debt as a tax offset within their portfolio
I think it's fair to assume there will be some yield to holding so much debt as a tax offset within their portfolio
There is never any advantage in having debt but if you do have it in one of your businesses you can use it against profits in another.
So the debt in CCFC will be used to minimise taxes in another Sisu company.
That's hardly the same thing as money going out of CCFC into SISU's bank account.
Agreed StuAnother reason why they wont be in a rush to boom or bust if the JR goes tits up for them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Haven't people seen them to confirm it?I'll let you know when I see the accounts.
Until then I refuse to believe they do it for nothing so the only question is how much ?
Haven't people seen them to confirm it?
No wonder these away fans you talk to always agree with you, they are probably misinformed.
Haven't people seen them to confirm it?
No wonder these away fans you talk to always agree with you, they are probably misinformed.
Its ironic how he goes on about people lapping up the bs from SISU when he continue to regurgitate his own bs when people much more knowledgeable in the field have said he is wrong.
So you have seen no proof they have taken any money you mean?I've seen nothing to suggest where this money has gone.
People ? You mean person and even OSB58 cannot be 100% sure himself with Sisu CCFC related accounts.
Well those that exist !!
I'll let you know when I see the accounts.
Until then I refuse to believe they do it for nothing so the only question is how much ?
I've seen nothing to suggest where this money has gone.
People ? You mean person and even OSB58 cannot be 100% sure himself with Sisu CCFC related accounts.
Well those that exist !!
You made he statement they take money out.
Back the statement up with some evidence or shut up,
Ive shown you the evidence from previous years. Can you show me where that money went?
If you can't then you need to stop protecting them and ask the question.
Probably the same reason wasps moved, to get a cheap stadium.
The evidence you have shown us is from where OSB says it's the movement between holdings to ltd and vice versa and that it balances as neutral across the group accounts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Of course it does.
But that probably means taking it out of CCFC account and putting it into Sisu investors accounts.
Sisu investors are not going to let CCFC run with debt unless they get something out of it.
You guys can turn a blind eye to Sisu business practices but I want them out.
TF the sooner the better.
No it doesn't - here's OSB's analysis of the same accounts in that blog. Movement of money between holdings and ltd not to sisu. Nowhere in the accounts does it suggest money has been taken out. Even OSB has said this numerous times.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/17823-CCFC-Holdings-Ltd-Accounts-2011
We all know sisu are shits, but you have no proof they are taking money out. Sisu's investors money will be spread against numerous funds, so their likely to get their money back/payments through those.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Serious question. If we have cleared our debts after administration, what is the £2.1M loan interest payable in the 2014 Otium accounts?
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/otium-signed-accounts144-2316099.pdf
OSB would be better explaining this, but only 1 of the group business was in admin, not the whole lot - a subsidiary to SBS&L. We haven't cleared all our debts, just a large proportion of them.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/54673-commentary-on-SBS-amp-L-group-2014-accounts
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I may be wrong but something not right and I'm not clever enough to get into the detail.
Can someone also explain the last paragraph in section 18 because I fear the worse ?
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/otium-signed-accounts144-2316099.pdf
I'm applying simple logic here and ask the following questions.
If a company goes into administration and comes out of it with debtors satisfied by a lesser amount.
Does that not mean that the buyer of the company starts with zero debt in that company?
If so, how come we still have £36M debt and other debt in the form of Preference shares ?
I quote ODB58 ....
"Bottom line is that the Group still owes ARVO and SISU investors substantial funds 36.7m and the preference shares are in reality a lower level of debt but still a debt of sorts."
OSB would be better explaining this, but only 1 of the group business was in admin, not the whole lot - a subsidiary to SBS&L. The group wad made of 3 companies - SBS&L, Holding and Ltd and only one them (the one with the golden share and lease) went in to admin. You have to remember we were out in admin because of the rent dispute not because sisu had run out of money and couldn't afford to keep us as a going concern. We haven't cleared all our debts, just a large proportion of them.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/54673-commentary-on-SBS-amp-L-group-2014-accounts
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Serious question. If we have cleared our debts after administration, what is the £2.1M loan interest payable in the 2014 Otium accounts?
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/otium-signed-accounts144-2316099.pdf
I could be wrong but wasn't it actually a small portion of the debt? Wasn't it also the historical debt i.e. the debt that we already had before SISU turned up? Wasn't it also true that the FL had to insist that this debt was written off rather than transferred to Otium in exchange for the Golden Share? Hence the scramble by SISU and the administrator to try and prove that the golden share laid in one of the other companies?
As I recall this was probably the only favour the FL actually did for the club otherwise the debt still would have been current.
Wasn't it also the historical debt i.e. the debt that we already had before SISU turned up?
Wasn't it also true that the FL had to insist that this debt was written off rather than transferred to Otium in exchange for the Golden Share? Hence the scramble by SISU and the administrator to try and prove that the golden share laid in one of the other companies?
Yeah I think you're right, I seem to remember it be more than it actually was.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
It was along those lines. So lets say Robinson was owed £15m (totally made up figure BTW) but accepted £1.5m to walk away SISU only actually paid £1.5m but the £15m debt stayed on the books but was now owed to SISU.
It was the money to ACL that had to be paid wasn't it? Hence why they didn't agree to the CVA. They could reject the CVA to try and force a change of ownership whilst knowing they would still get the same amount back.
So have sisu received any actual cash or not?
Not yet. But they are accumulating interest to the "not real debt" that will have to be paid or start being paid at some point.
Or written off. Most likely if and when the club is sold a pence in the pound offer will be made on the debt, as when SISU took over. Having the debt still on the books is to their advantage when the other option is just to write it off any not receive a penny.
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?