CCFC, Otium & JR2 (2 Viewers)

[Deleted member 5849]

In what circumstances would this be preferable to administration or selling as a going concern OSB. I'm curious as to how this might play out pending the courts decision on the appeal.

It's not just when preferable in a ccfc context. We seriously underestimate the SISU perspective in a wider context. We're nothing to them and yet the boost to their negotiations elsewhere could see it desirable to wind us up. The best business decision can easily be the best, regardless of numbers wrt solely ccfc.

Seriously, we could sleepwalk into that position if not careful.

 

---

[Hobo]

They are one of the people who will use it as a pawn sadly.

Thinking about it, it's been used as a pawn from as far back as I remember

Yes Nick, just being used as a pawn for leverage against Wasps and CCC. Also Wasps are using us as a pawn for leverage against SISU.

 

[oldfiver]

Yes Nick, just being used as a pawn for leverage against Wasps and CCC. Also Wasps are using us as a pawn for leverage against SISU.

Shame WASPS and SISU cannot join and lever against CCC

 

[shmmeee]

Shame WASPS and SISU cannot join and lever against CCC

To what end?

 

[oldfiver]

To what end?

How long you got?

 

[oldskyblue58]

In what circumstances would this be preferable to administration or selling as a going concern OSB. I'm curious as to how this might play out pending the courts decision on the appeal.

to start with i am not convinced they would take such an action, however i do not rule it out

Depends if selling gains them more than say the crystallisation of tax losses from liquidation that they can utilise elsewhere for example. They say the losses they have made are over £70m which at basic corporation tax rate 19% could equate to 13m tax saving (just to be clear i do not know what the figures really are or how they could utilise the losses if available) it is just an example.

It might be cheaper to liquidate SBS&L and Otium than pay mounting legal costs is another example possibility

The value of CCFC without a place to play is very much less next summer than the most recent offers, that in itself could make drastic actions a choice and ccfc more vulnerable

I dont think they would do it out of spite as such, they are too hard nosed and calculating. It would be done on a basis of what is best for their investors overall interests and Otium is a small part of that total investment portfolio

The one action i am actually least convinced about is administration. It makes no sense for SISU to choose that route. Last time if cost over £1m but it was done for a specific purpose. In a new Administration then SISU as the largest creditor of Otium (via ARVO) would control it just as last time, effectively taking the hit on the fees. It would be more cost effective to simply sell the Otium assets (no one in their right mind would buy the actual company in my opinion).

 

[oldskyblue58]

How long you got?

Enough time to listen to a sensible idea. I am sure we would all like to know what that could achieve, how it could be done, and why it would be in the various parties interest to do so. So over to you, whats your idea and why?

 

[Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon]

to start with i am not convinced they would take such an action, however i do not rule it out

Depends if selling gains them more than say the crystallisation of tax losses from liquidation that they can utilise elsewhere for example. They say the losses they have made are over £70m which at basic corporation tax rate 19% could equate to 13m tax saving (just to be clear i do not know what the figures really are or how they could utilise the losses if available) it is just an example.

How does that work? The losses are assumedly cumulative over however long they have owned the club, can they then be offset against any tax bill at the point the asset ceases to exist? I remember someone at work surmising that one possible reason for SISU continuing to own the club was to use losses made by it to offset business elsewhere, I'd imagine he was talking in a similar vein to this.

 

[Captain Dart]

How does that work? The losses are assumedly cumulative over however long they have owned the club, can they then be offset against any tax bill at the point the asset ceases to exist? I remember someone at work surmising that one possible reason for SISU continuing to own the club was to use losses made by it to offset business elsewhere, I'd imagine he was talking in a similar vein to this.

It appears losses can be offset against corporation tax bills where there is shared ownership of companies, but its a bloody complicated set of rules and as SISU hide ownership relationships it is hard to tell whether any of the cases identified in this article apply. https://www.taxation.co.uk/Articles/2017/09/12/336929/groups-within-company-structures

 

[Paxman II]

There is a simplistic way outof all this. Someone comes along with an offer written on the back of a fag packet and Joy accepts leaving CCFC free to negotiate a long term future at the Ricoh Arena. If not she will clearly continue down every available avenue to her as she is perhaps duty bound to do until there are no avenue's left to go down. (rather like Theresia May) It's at that point I fear for CCFC. There is no real separation in the ultimate control of CCFC which does fall under the umbrella of SISU.
OSB makes some fair points but it comes down to whether WASP can see beyond the shenanigans of SISU and come to realise the future lies in CCFC being successful, and in time under new ownership which is inevitable be it after administartion or whatever. So keeping that entity with a place to play is vital if WASP want to hold on to the benefit. As I said the avenues for SISU ultimately will come to an end.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Depends if selling gains them more than say the crystallisation of tax losses from liquidation that they can utilise elsewhere for example

I really don't think it's just the costs either.

In terms of a negotiating strategy, liquidating CCFC could bring more financial benefit elsewhere. Forget the numbers on the page, it's the intagibles too. A business like SISU works on psychology as much as pure numbers, on occasion.

 

[Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon]

It appears losses can be offset against corporation tax bills where there is shared ownership of companies, but its a bloody complicated set of rules and as SISU hide ownership relationships it is hard to tell whether any of the cases identified in this article apply. https://www.taxation.co.uk/Articles/2017/09/12/336929/groups-within-company-structures

Tax, complicated? Surely not! I definitely see this whole saga rumbling through into Spring/early Summer, some serious brinkmanship going on right to the wire. Quite what the outcome is going to be I don't think I can guess.

 

[thekidfromstrettoncamp]

I think Wasps will stick to their guns this time the longer J R 2 goes on the more it will cost them in legal fee's money our owners will have no intension of paying they will just do a liquidation . I also cannot see why although their not talking we could not make a realistic offer to try and put pressure on Wasps .There again I suppose Sisu wouldn't let them.

 

[Astute]

If you were a citizen of Coventry and not a city fan would you not be concerned about the loss of the millions in economic benefits having a professional football club brings to the city each year? Or the loss of all the work Sky Blues in the Community does?

Most people don't consider that sort of thing. They consider what has an effect on themselves. Increased traffic. Possible rowdy behaviour. Parking restrictions when they want to visit family/friends.

 

[oldfiver]

Enough time to listen to a sensible idea. I am sure we would all like to know what that could achieve, how it could be done, and why it would be in the various parties interest to do so. So over to you, whats your idea and why?

I was not just referring to the football club but the City of Coventry in general
This Council has sat almost unchallenged for 30+ years and so feels it does not have to listen to anyone and is unanswerable to anyone

 

[Magwitch]

But who are you referring to when talking council, the tories and labour have both presided over the Ricoh from its start right through to today, those councillors at the beginning most are likely to be dead and buried now. Councillors are accountable at election time, as the Government is who I’d like out today but will likely have to wait until 2022, that’s how it works.

 

[Calista]

I really don't think it's just the costs either.

In terms of a negotiating strategy, liquidating CCFC could bring more financial benefit elsewhere. Forget the numbers on the page, it's the intagibles too. A business like SISU works on psychology as much as pure numbers, on occasion.

Possibly the darkest post I've ever seen on here, and I only wish it wasn't so convincing

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I was not just referring to the football club but the City of Coventry in general
This Council has sat almost unchallenged for 30+ years and so feels it does not have to listen to anyone and is unanswerable to anyone

The Conservative councillors agree with it all as well.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Most people don't consider that sort of thing. They consider what has an effect on themselves. Increased traffic. Possible rowdy behaviour. Parking restrictions when they want to visit family/friends.

It's about novelty sized flags, craft ale and steak ciabattas

 

[Old Warwickshire lad]

We are where we are mainly because of the football clubs owners ( won’t say SISU cos really don’t want the same old argument).
Yes the council acted like kin kids when they did such a deal with wasps, but most non city fans would say we deserved it.
Wasps? Who the f*** are they, just cuckoo’s who took advantage of a situation
Since the beginning I have said if our owners can’t get the stadium and surrounding land for a song,they will sell everything they possibly can and the go for liquidation and write off imaginary debt they have accumulated.
This now looks to unfortunately becoming true,and I am as gutted as anyone.
So what do we do? The people of Coventry will do nothing to save CCFC,the CCC look like doing nothing.
So unless we can find a mug with potts of cash,we are sunk.
Answers on a postcard.....................................................

 

[shmmeee]

How long you got?

Genuine question. What action can CCC take to force Wasps hand? Do the leasehold terms allow it? I’d assume just like my tenancy, Wasps have certain rights to do what they please as long as they don’t breach the terms of the lease. Do we know if there’s anything in there that can force their hand?

 

[oldskyblue58]

I was not just referring to the football club but the City of Coventry in general
This Council has sat almost unchallenged for 30+ years and so feels it does not have to listen to anyone and is unanswerable to anyone

But you specifically said sisu and wasps joining together to take on CCC .

So you really have not answered the question.

How does changing the council over a number of years help CCFC now or even the next year. Could two private companies even do that ?

And can you really see wasps who have what they want joining up with sisu ? Not sure I can

 

[letsallsingtogether]

But you specifically said sisu and wasps joining together to take on CCC .

So you really have not answered the question.

How does changing the council over a number of years help CCFC now or even the next year. Could two private companies even do that ?

And can you really see wasps who have what they want joining up with sisu ? Not sure I can

TBF why would they. Could they seriously work together after all the bad blood between them, wouldnt be long before they are stabbing each other in the back.