Bad reading for a couple of you (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/five-things-learned-higgs-v-6949909
Click to expand...

1. Sisu claim both the club and ACL were close to insolvencyOur verdict: Certainly the club was struggling and most people can agree the £1.3m rent was way too high. Chief executive Tim Fisher is quoted in Sisu's legal documents as saying that the club would file for insolvency if a stadium deal wasn't reached. ACL is a different matter.
The club not paying its rent made the business weak and evidence was presented that the business could do a lot better but Sisu's own document outlining their case quotes Yorkshire Bank, which had a loan to ACL, saying: "with appropriate cost savings, a solvent debt restructuring could be agreed".
In other words, it would appear that the bank thought the company could carry on in business and pay off its loan.
Click to expand...

So why did the council refinance the loan? Are you saying that it wasn't necessary and basically just a state aid to assist ACL?
 
Moff

Moff

Well-Known Member
Who are the couple?

Is it you and me, Grendel and MMM, Astute and Torch, Sky Blue Kid and the good Lord Summerisle, Hill and Valiant, OSB and PSGM1 ? The suspense is killing me!

(Apologies for missing many good posters out in the name match up)
 
hill83

hill83

Well-Known Member
Moff said:
Who are the couple?

Is it you and me, Grendel and MMM, Astute and Torch, Sky Blue Kid and the good Lord Summerisle, Hill and Valiant, OSB and PSGM1 ? The suspense is killing me!

(Apologies for missing many good posters out in the name match up)
Click to expand...

I found out the other day that Valiant has been banned. I miss him.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
I'd have thought as a reporter that Simon Gilbert would have actually read the court documents and understood them before putting out an article?

The charity and Sisu signed an outline agreement for the half-share in ACL for £1.5m up front and £4m in shares in the new stadium company which it could cash in at a later date. This £4m seemed to be a sticking point but why did the deal fail? After looking at the books Sisu wanted to pay the charity closer to £2m rather than the total of £5.5m originally agreed on.
Click to expand...

The 2 million pounds deal was cash, and was becuase Higgs wanted a deal outside the scope of the original agreement which involved more risk to Sisu.

The original offer would have still stood I think if stuck to the original terms.
 
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
This version of events has yet to be refuted but further evidence may emerge as part of the Judicial Review.
It's difficult to take Sisu's complaint seriously when the court also heard they used CBRE - the property firm working on their plan for a new stadium - to approach Yorkshire Bank behind the backs of the council and the charity.

what about this bit though ?
 
Last edited:
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
they are all as bad as each other that is the only answer i can come up with :censored:
 
ajsccfc

ajsccfc

Well-Known Member
They only banned Valiant when I owned up to using it as my third account. My second one is Glen.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
This version of events has yet to be refuted but further evidence may emerge as part of the Judicial Review.
It's difficult to take Sisu's complaint seriously when the court also heard they used CBRE - the property firm working on their plan for a new stadium - to approach Yorkshire Bank behind the backs of the council and the charity.

what about this bit though ?
Click to expand...

What was actually said and produced about that bit? Must have missed it myself trawling through the fucking hundreds of pages of crap!
 
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle said:
What was actually said and produced about that bit? Must have missed it myself trawling through the fucking hundreds of pages of crap!
Click to expand...

This was the bit mate :D


The Higgs charity and the council hatched a "secret and perverse plan" to do a deal with Yorkshire Bank without Sisu/the football clubOur verdict:

Mr Justice Leggatt certainly didn't seem to agree when he cleared the charity of any wrongdoing and went on to say Sisu's allegations were "misplaced and it is unfortunate that allegations were made in some of the terms which have been put forward by SISU in these proceedings". In court, Sisu pointed to the 'August report' - written by the council's Finance Director Chris West.

We haven't seen the full report but parts of it were been quoted in Sisu's 35-page document outlining its case. It says there was a "stalemate" with Sisu and outlined the need to "stick together to protect our joint interests".

Is there anything untoward in the council trying to protect a taxpayer asset? Interestingly, it also suggests continuing to discuss the main deal with Sisu "to keep communication open" adding "we may need a fallback position". Was it secret? Not on the charity's part as they testified in court that they had assurances from the council that Sisu would be told.
This apparent pledge by Chris West was made five months before the council agreed to buy ACL's debt and at that point it is clear that Sisu were not aware of the plan as it was voted on in private by the council.

This version of events has yet to be refuted but further evidence may emerge as part of the Judicial Review.
It's difficult to take Sisu's complaint seriously when the court also heard they used CBRE - the property firm working on their plan for a new stadium - to approach Yorkshire Bank behind the backs of the council and the charity.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
This was the bit mate :D


The Higgs charity and the council hatched a "secret and perverse plan" to do a deal with Yorkshire Bank without Sisu/the football clubOur verdict:Mr Justice Leggatt certainly didn't seem to agree when he cleared the charity of any wrongdoing and went on to say Sisu's allegations were "misplaced and it is unfortunate that allegations were made in some of the terms which have been put forward by SISU in these proceedings". In court, Sisu pointed to the 'August report' - written by the council's Finance Director Chris West.
We haven't seen the full report but parts of it were been quoted in Sisu's 35-page document outlining its case. It says there was a "stalemate" with Sisu and outlined the need to "stick together to protect our joint interests".

Is there anything untoward in the council trying to protect a taxpayer asset? Interestingly, it also suggests continuing to discuss the main deal with Sisu "to keep communication open" adding "we may need a fallback position". Was it secret? Not on the charity's part as they testified in court that they had assurances from the council that Sisu would be told.
This apparent pledge by Chris West was made five months before the council agreed to buy ACL's debt and at that point it is clear that Sisu were not aware of the plan as it was voted on in private by the council.

This version of events has yet to be refuted but further evidence may emerge as part of the Judicial Review.
It's difficult to take Sisu's complaint seriously when the court also heard they used CBRE - the property firm working on their plan for a new stadium - to approach Yorkshire Bank behind the backs of the council and the charity.
Click to expand...

That's just quoting what Simon Gilbert has written, meant the bit from the case about it?
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
This was the bit mate :D


The Higgs charity and the council hatched a "secret and perverse plan" to do a deal with Yorkshire Bank without Sisu/the football clubOur verdict:

Mr Justice Leggatt certainly didn't seem to agree when he cleared the charity of any wrongdoing and went on to say Sisu's allegations were "misplaced and it is unfortunate that allegations were made in some of the terms which have been put forward by SISU in these proceedings". In court, Sisu pointed to the 'August report' - written by the council's Finance Director Chris West.

We haven't seen the full report but parts of it were been quoted in Sisu's 35-page document outlining its case. It says there was a "stalemate" with Sisu and outlined the need to "stick together to protect our joint interests".

Is there anything untoward in the council trying to protect a taxpayer asset? Interestingly, it also suggests continuing to discuss the main deal with Sisu "to keep communication open" adding "we may need a fallback position". Was it secret? Not on the charity's part as they testified in court that they had assurances from the council that Sisu would be told.
This apparent pledge by Chris West was made five months before the council agreed to buy ACL's debt and at that point it is clear that Sisu were not aware of the plan as it was voted on in private by the council.

This version of events has yet to be refuted but further evidence may emerge as part of the Judicial Review.
It's difficult to take Sisu's complaint seriously when the court also heard they used CBRE - the property firm working on their plan for a new stadium - to approach Yorkshire Bank behind the backs of the council and the charity.
Click to expand...

I think he means in the court documents, not the article.

Has anyone got a link I'll have a look, just do CTRL+F and look for CBRE I'd imagine.
 
hill83

hill83

Well-Known Member
He was last spotted in Asda

[video=youtube_share;YmNScMobXlM]http://youtu.be/YmNScMobXlM [/video]
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
I think he means in the court documents, not the article.

Has anyone got a link I'll have a look, just do CTRL+F and look for CBRE I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

Just had a look the phrase CBRE doesn't appear and I've done quick searches for "YB" "consultant" and "approach" but can't see anything. That said he does say "the court heard" so maybe it was in testimony not in the documents. I'd say you gotta trust him as he was there.
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Moff said:
Who are the couple?

Is it you and me, Grendel and MMM, Astute and Torch, Sky Blue Kid and the good Lord Summerisle, Hill and Valiant, OSB and PSGM1 ? The suspense is killing me!

(Apologies for missing many good posters out in the name match up)
Click to expand...

You are right a handful would have been a far more apt title
 
Norman Binns

Norman Binns

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
So there was no need to use state aid then? Brilliant strengthens the JR case for sisu.
Click to expand...

Whether there was a need for it is inconsequential and irrelevant. It's whether it was legal or not. I can't see it strengthening SISU's case.
 
Last edited:
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Just had a look the phrase CBRE doesn't appear and I've done quick searches for "YB" "consultant" and "approach" but can't see anything. That said he does say "the court heard" so maybe it was in testimony not in the documents. I'd say you gotta trust him as he was there.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it appear in the transcripts then?
 
lewys33

lewys33

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Just had a look the phrase CBRE doesn't appear and I've done quick searches for "YB" "consultant" and "approach" but can't see anything. That said he does say "the court heard" so maybe it was in testimony not in the documents. I'd say you gotta trust him as he was there.
Click to expand...

Is it actually CBRE or is that a shortened version of the full name?
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
lordsummerisle said:
I'd have thought as a reporter that Simon Gilbert would have actually read the court documents and understood them before putting out an article?



The 2 million pounds deal was cash, and was becuase Higgs wanted a deal outside the scope of the original agreement which involved more risk to Sisu.

The original offer would have still stood I think if stuck to the original terms.
Click to expand...

But the judge in his written judgement makes clear there was no such "deal" for £2m merely a conversation LS. The Trustees never agreed to it. It is also on the trial transcript page 151 Day 3
 
Last edited:
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Just had a look the phrase CBRE doesn't appear and I've done quick searches for "YB" "consultant" and "approach" but can't see anything. That said he does say "the court heard" so maybe it was in testimony not in the documents. I'd say you gotta trust him as he was there.
Click to expand...

There are doubtless supporting documents we as ordinary fans haven't seen, especially given how much stuff we saw the Sisu team wheeling into the court in one of Simon's excellent reports.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
But the judge in his written judgement makes clear there was no such "deal" for £2m merely a conversation LS. The Trustees never agreed to it. It is also on the trial transcript page 151 Day 3
Click to expand...


Ah, so the original deal would have stood then if all stuck to the same terms agreed?

Didn't notice Simon Gilbert mentioning the bit where CCC thought that what Sisu were offering Higgs in that deal was more than the valuation that CCC put on it.

Maybe he will next time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top