cant get over 10pt deduction (4 Viewers)

[RoboCCFC90]

Threats of legal action by SISU? There was this statement by ACL.

"Ms Seppala also stated at this meeting her intention to continue to threaten ACL and its shareholders with expensive litigation at every possible opportunity."

http://www.supporters-direct.org/ne...joy-seppala-threats-to-aclfl-must-bring-in-fa

Ms Seppala also stated at this meeting her intention to continue to threaten ACL and its shareholders with expensive litigation at every possible opportunity. Perhaps the fact that Mr Fisher was not himself present at this meeting has distorted his view of what was really discussed. - See more at: http://www.supporters-direct.org/ne...o-aclfl-must-bring-in-fa#sthash.XpTG3deT.dpuf

Appreciate that it's one sided, but I note that it's never really been denied, and the recent actions of SISU (threatening to sue the trust, counter-claiming against Higgs, and the JR, all tend to suggest a clear strategy).

Unfortunately as you mentioned Duffer it's one sided, yes it could have been threatened, but easily it could be manipulated words.

 

---

[RoboCCFC90]

What I think is that if Sisu had bothered to negotiate instead of just going on the rent boycott we might not be in this mess. Yes the rent was too high and needed to be re-assessed but doing what they did when and in the manner Sisu did it was wrong.

Most things can (for me at any rate) be traced back to that one act of starting the boycott & not negotiating. We couldn't buy the Higgs share at the formula price, once the boycott had started as we owed money to ACL. We were lucky in that they were still willing to talk to us even then, before Sisu allegedly walked away from the talks with them.

Tim then talks about liquidation in a national newspaper whilst owing ACL a sizeable sum which wasn't particularly clever given the likely response from the main creditor ACL. Then after ACL do take legal steps to recover the cash, Sisu put us into administration on Black Thursday so that they can beat ACL to the punch and appoint their own administrator. Our club then left the Ricoh and we ended up in Northampton playing to our lowest ever attendances.*

Why on earth did they not negotiate?

For the record I am happy for Sisu to build their new stadium and wish they'd hurry up and announce progress on it.

* This is a bit simplistic in that it ignores the lower rent offers etc.

James I don't disagree with that first bit because you're bang on, Sisu should have discussed it previously and brought those re-negotations on the rent out into the open, if then ACL had said no I wouldn't blame Sisu for how they acted.

With regards to the Administrator would it have made a difference, as I said to MMM earlier in the thread the other potential buyers had no real substance to formulate a decent offer, lets say PH4 had the Freehold and planned to invest £20M it could have been a different situation for Mr Appleton, the fact he hasn't been pulled up in front of a judge to discuss the Administration as a fault process means they see no errors.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

I think you're confusing your arguments here - you're certainly confusing me!

Let's just stick with what we know.

There's an offer to move back to the Ricoh that would make financial sense to the club. There's no remaining threat to sue NTFC, no way that ACL or anyone else can change the owners at the club.

The move would make financial sense even if the club wanted to build their own ground for £25m. They'd make more money whilst they're at the Ricoh planning and building a new stadium, than being in Northampton doing it.

So, let's keep it simple. Explain why SISU won't do this?

Duffer Tim Fisher recently stated they will not return to the Ricoh under a tennancy agreement because they cannot trust ACL, telling me there is an offer for them on the table to return as tennants for better or worse is irrelevant.

 

[duffer]

Unfortunately as you mentioned Duffer it's one sided, yes it could have been threatened, but easily it could be manipulated words.

Yes, but it's not just words is it, we've seen SISU's actions which would seem to suggest that this was said.

And to get back on track, here again is the nub of the question (which I'm sure you didn't mean to ignore).

There's an offer to move back to the Ricoh that would make financial sense to the club even if ultimately they wanted to build their own ground.

Explain why SISU won't take the offer?

The only reason I can see it that it doesn't fit in with their long-term plan of distressing ACL. Happy to be corrected though.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Yes, but it's not just words is it, we've seen SISU's actions which would seem to suggest that this was said.

And to get back on track, here again is the nub of the question (which I'm sure you didn't mean to ignore).

There's an offer to move back to the Ricoh that would make financial sense to the club even if ultimately they wanted to build their own ground.

Explain why SISU won't take the offer?

The only reason I can see it that it doesn't fit in with their long-term plan of distressing ACL. Happy to be corrected though.

You mean post #144 Duffer

 

[duffer]

Duffer Tim Fisher recently stated they will not return to the Ricoh under a tennancy agreement because they cannot trust ACL, telling me there is an offer for them on the table to return as tennants for better or worse is irrelevant.

Sorry, crossed posts there.

It's far from irrelevant. It's absolutely key to where we play for the next few years.

I'm sure ACL don't trust SISU either, but they've made a reasonable offer to play at the Ricoh whilst the mess is sorted out, or the club actually move on to building a new stadium.

To ignore this and yet continue to criticise the council or ACL for being intransigent seems remarkably one-eyed to me, sorry.

 

[Astute]

Duffer Tim Fisher recently stated they will not return to the Ricoh under a tennancy agreement because they cannot trust ACL, telling me there is an offer for them on the table to return as tennants for better or worse is irrelevant.

But since that statement from Timothy he made another where he said that they might rent the Ricoh. Maybe covering his arse for when the JR goes against them.

 

[The Gentleman]

Duffer Tim Fisher recently stated they will not return to the Ricoh under a tennancy agreement because they cannot trust ACL, telling me there is an offer for them on the table to return as tennants for better or worse is irrelevant.

Tim Fisher said back in July 2013 that the plans were 3 weeks away.........

 

[shmmeee]

Maybe so, but there was no reason why he couldn't of purchased the Arena from ACL before the deadline final offer was needed by this is my point.

He could have. The whole thing was a mess though. No-one other than Sisu was ever going to own the club. I think if Joe had a smoking gun for CCFC Ltd being the club we'd have seen a better offer. Also if Sisu looked like wanting out.

Sorry, maybe I was missing your point, I thought you were talking about Sisu's claims of "the council trying to line up another owner".

 

[shmmeee]

James I don't disagree with that first bit because you're bang on, Sisu should have discussed it previously and brought those re-negotations on the rent out into the open, if then ACL had said no I wouldn't blame Sisu for how they acted.

With regards to the Administrator would it have made a difference, as I said to MMM earlier in the thread the other potential buyers had no real substance to formulate a decent offer, lets say PH4 had the Freehold and planned to invest £20M it could have been a different situation for Mr Appleton, the fact he hasn't been pulled up in front of a judge to discuss the Administration as a fault process means they see no errors.

Just a note: ACL never did challenge the admin procedure. I'd be interested to know why. Has this ever been put to them?

 

[James Smith]

James I don't disagree with that first bit because you're bang on, Sisu should have discussed it previously and brought those re-negotations on the rent out into the open, if then ACL had said no I wouldn't blame Sisu for how they acted.

With regards to the Administrator would it have made a difference, as I said to MMM earlier in the thread the other potential buyers had no real substance to formulate a decent offer, lets say PH4 had the Freehold and planned to invest £20M it could have been a different situation for Mr Appleton, the fact he hasn't been pulled up in front of a judge to discuss the Administration as a fault process means they see no errors.

Sorry I wasn't trying to imply that Mr Appleton wasn't doing his job correctly, I'm no expert on insolvency law so it wouldn't be my place to comment. I was just trying to point out that Sisu wanted their own administrator just as much as ACL wanted theirs. No idea if anyone would bid serious amounts based on the fact that they didn't know who would get the Golden Share at the end of the day - but I know I wouldn't.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Tim Fisher said back in July 2013 that the plans were 3 weeks away.........

Or was he misquoted like Labovich? :thinking about:

I think the journo's must be playing a song a called "3 weeks" on their iPads & failing to concentrate on whats said..

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Sorry I wasn't trying to imply that Mr Appleton wasn't doing his job correctly, I'm no expert on insolvency law so it wouldn't be my place to comment. I was just trying to point out that Sisu wanted their own administrator just as much as ACL wanted theirs. No idea if anyone would bid serious amounts based on the fact that they didn't know who would get the Golden Share at the end of the day - but I know I wouldn't.

Absolutely I agree with that stance James, but I am sure there are many posters on this forum who believe Mr Appleton didn't perform his duties well enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Just a note: ACL never did challenge the admin procedure. I'd be interested to know why. Has this ever been put to them?

Because there is no case I would assume..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RoboCCFC90]

He could have. The whole thing was a mess though. No-one other than Sisu was ever going to own the club. I think if Joe had a smoking gun for CCFC Ltd being the club we'd have seen a better offer. Also if Sisu looked like wanting out.

Sorry, maybe I was missing your point, I thought you were talking about Sisu's claims of "the council trying to line up another owner".

That is Sisu's claim and the probably the thesis of there whole JR, I agree the whole thing was mess I was hopeful but could never see anyone but Sisu walking away with the Club and that isn't because I believe they were underhanded just simply because they could offer more on the table.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Yeah great form thanks, the loan from Northampton Council isn't to Sisu though is it? It's to Northampton Town, plus the loan or "state aid" from CCC wasn't to our Club it was to a bank, two different scenarios, it's like trying to compare a Boot and a Sandle when considering if they will give you the same benefits.

Are you really suggesting the Council have loaned the money to a bank?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Sorry, crossed posts there.

It's far from irrelevant. It's absolutely key to where we play for the next few years.

I'm sure ACL don't trust SISU either, but they've made a reasonable offer to play at the Ricoh whilst the mess is sorted out, or the club actually move on to building a new stadium.

To ignore this and yet continue to criticise the council or ACL for being intransigent seems remarkably one-eyed to me, sorry.

I am not ignoring it but it is blindly obvious that Sisu will not return to a tenancy agreement, if that's not clear then why not return up until now when the Tim Fishers predictions were proved to be as wide as America?

Unfortunately the Ricoh is only relevant as long as there is way Sisu can own it or a 50% stake in it. I do question why Sisu don't try to get back round the table with Higgs and purchase their share, maybe perhaps Waggott at the front of negotiations it might help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Are you really suggesting the Council have loaned the money to a bank?

The Council paid the money to Yorkshire Bank and effectively became ACL's lender, sorry for not making that clearer I thought it wasn't news and common knowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Because there is no case I would assume..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But I'd like to know why there isn't a case. It all seemed to be going one way with the leaked documents and the mountains of evidence that Ltd was the club. Then Appleton made his decision and it all went quiet. I'm just curious if something came up or what, last I heard was ACL were thinking about appealing, then never did. Seems a bit strange.

Re: no underhandedness. I still feel that the blurring of the lines between the two CCFC entities was underhanded. People with a long history at the club were producing fairly damning evidence and Sisu never produced anything in return other than "it's complicated". Once we moved to Northampton it's as if everyone forgot about that. Is Ltd even liquidated yet? If not, could Sisu pull it back from the dead and resurrect the Higgs rights (assuming debts were paid)?

 

[The Gentleman]

I am not ignoring it but it is blindly obvious that Sisu will not return to a tenancy agreement, if that's not clear then why not return up until now when the Tim Fishers predictions were proved to be as wide as America?

Unfortunately the Ricoh is only relevant as long as there is way Sisu can own it or a 50% stake in it. I do question why Sisu don't try to get back round the table with Higgs and purchase their share, maybe perhaps Waggott at the front of negotiations it might help.

It's not in Waggot's remit is it? as some suggested on here, he is involved in footballing matters only and besides, wouldn't he only be able to negotiate upto an 18 months deal.........

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The Council paid the money to Yorkshire Bank and effectively became ACL's lender, sorry for not making that clearer I thought it wasn't news and common knowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll take that as a no then. So are you still saying SISU's moral stand on state aid only applies when it is in Coventry?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Tim Fisher said back in July 2013 that the plans were 3 weeks away.........

It's all good quoting what Tim Fisher says Gent, but as I asked Duffer if they were going to back track on the rent deal why not do it already once they knew things weren't going as they hoped, it's not like they're accustom to rent.

But since that statement from Timothy he made another where he said that they might rent the Ricoh. Maybe covering his arse for when the JR goes against them.

Are you sure that will happen?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

But I'd like to know why there isn't a case. It all seemed to be going one way with the leaked documents and the mountains of evidence that Ltd was the club. Then Appleton made his decision and it all went quiet. I'm just curious if something came up or what, last I heard was ACL were thinking about appealing, then never did. Seems a bit strange.

Re: no underhandedness. I still feel that the blurring of the lines between the two CCFC entities was underhanded. People with a long history at the club were producing fairly damning evidence and Sisu never produced anything in return other than "it's complicated". Once we moved to Northampton it's as if everyone forgot about that. Is Ltd even liquidated yet? If not, could Sisu pull it back from the dead and resurrect the Higgs rights (assuming debts were paid)?

Like I said if there was a genuine fault with the process that Appleton made during the Admin I am sure ACL would have acted by now as any issue would have been a black hole.

 

[shmmeee]

It's all good quoting what Tim Fisher says Gent, but as I asked Duffer if they were going to back track on the rent deal why not do it already once they knew things weren't going as they hoped, it's not like they're accustom to rent.

Well firstly because the initial plan is to distress ACL and secondly because at first that offer wasn't on the table IIRC (not sure of exactly when you'd say Sixfields was obviously not a goer).

It doesn't mean that if Plan A doesn't work they won't fall back on Plan B (or C or D). Ultimately the club is still healthier in that situation and therefore easier to sell than left to rot in Northampton.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Well then we must rely on Tim Fisher and Labovitch and they have both worked wonders so far... I still stand by that Sisu would not return to a tenancy agreement.

 

[shmmeee]

Like I said if there was a genuine fault with the process that Appleton made during the Admin I am sure ACL would have acted by now as any issue would have been a black hole.

I think that's fairly trusting of all involved. I'd still like to know what specifically changed ACL's mind.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

I think that's fairly trusting of all involved. I'd still like to know what specifically changed ACL's mind.

Maybe the Trust could ask them.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

I'll take that as a no then. So are you still saying SISU's moral stand on state aid only applies when it is in Coventry?

I think this talk of it having anything to do with Sisu is ridiculous frankly.

 

[The Gentleman]

It's all good quoting what Tim Fisher says Gent, but as I asked Duffer if they were going to back track on the rent deal why not do it already once they knew things weren't going as they hoped, it's not like they're accustom to rent.

What ? It was you quoting a Fisher statement and then I just put that in to remind that everything that man says has to be taken with a pinch of salt. Do check before posting next time. Besides, were you not saying just last week after the last stadium forum about Sisu lies? and now you come quoting Fisher like it is gospel, I just find it odd.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Well then we must rely on Tim Fisher and Labovitch and they have both worked wonders so far... I still stand by that Sisu would not return to a tenancy agreement.

A bit odd that they are happy to be tenants in Northampton, but couldn't possibly be in Coventry.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Well firstly because the initial plan is to distress ACL and secondly because at first that offer wasn't on the table IIRC (not sure of exactly when you'd say Sixfields was obviously not a goer).

It doesn't mean that if Plan A doesn't work they won't fall back on Plan B (or C or D). Ultimately the club is still healthier in that situation and therefore easier to sell than left to rot in Northampton.

Is it really though shmmeee? Because that won't work even if that was the case according to Ann Lucas?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

A bit odd that they are happy to be tenants in Northampton, but couldn't possibly be in Coventry.

They don't want to be tenants under ACL, they've stated it's the trust issue they have which may hinder it.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

I think this talk of it having anything to do with Sisu is ridiculous frankly.

I agree it's crazy, I wonder why they are so bothered.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

It's all good quoting what Tim Fisher says Gent, but as I asked Duffer if they were going to back track on the rent deal why not do it already once they knew things weren't going as they hoped, it's not like they're accustom to rent.

What ? It was you quoting a Fisher statement and then I just put that in to remind that everything that man says has to be taken with a pinch of salt. Do check before posting next time. Besides, were you not saying just last week after the last stadium forum about Sisu lies? and now you come quoting Fisher like it is gospel, I just find it odd.

Yes I did, but your quote wasn't really part of the argument, it was more to suggest that many things have been said and not done.. I did say Sisu didn't have to clarity to support their argument on the new stadium, I never said "Woohoo all the rubbish they've come out with is bollocks I can prove it"

 

[Rusty Trombone]

They don't want to be tenants under ACL, they've stated it's the trust issue they have which may hinder it.

And you believe that? You think they're unable to overcome their trust issues even though it costs them millions per year? It's not like they wouldn't have a contract, that if broken, they could sue over.

I find it more incredible that ACL are willing to trust a company like SISU, who do you trust more?