SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
Very good news, hopefully they fuck off asap and we’re back at the Ricoh within weeks
Ha ha no it wasn't that type of conversationDid he also fill your head with statistics and probabilites too? Total academic with no business acumen!
Ha ha no it wasn't that type of conversation
Tbh he did strike me as a bit of a fish out of water in football though
Got zero knowledge of financials but could sisu possibly buy up the debt for large chunk of the stake in ACL (i.e 100%) and rent it back to them. Would this even be beneficial for ccfc (except the obvious of having a ground back)?
No lose scenario if someone has £17.5m to burn?I’ve got a bit of knowledge of it. Their £35m of debt could be bought for less than half price at the moment (£17.5m) which means that when it has to be paid back in 2022 Wasps have to give you the whole £35m, if they can’t it’s personally guaranteed (by Richardson I think) so he’ll have to put his hand in his pocket for the difference. If he has to do that there will be a deal to be done.
He’s gonna end up broke at that rateI’ve got a bit of knowledge of it. Their £35m of debt could be bought for less than half price at the moment (£17.5m) which means that when it has to be paid back in 2022 Wasps have to give you the whole £35m, if they can’t it’s personally guaranteed (by Richardson I think) so he’ll have to put his hand in his pocket for the difference. If he has to do that there will be a deal to be done.
Looks like wasps are in DEEP SHIT not surprised they can’t pay the bonds I think we all knew they would struggle
Sit tight stay at St Andrews let them burn.
No lose scenario if someone has £17.5m to burn?
They also have to chuck in and extra £2m in interest too between now and when it has to be repaid.Would be worth a punt if you had a few quid!!
Interesting idea...i wonder if there are any legal eagles out there with some knowledge...or maybe OSB from an accountancy background ?Think Wasps Holdings Limited and Arena Coventry Limited are the guarantors. But ACL is a subsidiary of Wasps Holdings anyway. I would assume if the bonds aren't repaid its because they don't have the money, you're not therefore going to get far going to Wasps or ACL.
At that point don't the bond holders get the security so they'd get the lease and control of ACL? Guess in theory if SISU purchase all the bonds for £17.5m and then Wasps defaulted they'd have themselves a stadium. Or the more likely scenario that they don't own the bonds but the bondholder will need to sell the lease to get back as much as they can, potentially a chance to pick it up on the cheap depending how many other interested parties there are.
Cant get this to work
Think Wasps Holdings Limited and Arena Coventry Limited are the guarantors. But ACL is a subsidiary of Wasps Holdings anyway. I would assume if the bonds aren't repaid its because they don't have the money, you're not therefore going to get far going to Wasps or ACL.
At that point don't the bond holders get the security so they'd get the lease and control of ACL? Guess in theory if SISU purchase all the bonds for £17.5m and then Wasps defaulted they'd have themselves a stadium. Or the more likely scenario that they don't own the bonds but the bondholder will need to sell the lease to get back as much as they can, potentially a chance to pick it up on the cheap depending how many other interested parties there are.
Think Wasps Holdings Limited and Arena Coventry Limited are the guarantors. But ACL is a subsidiary of Wasps Holdings anyway. I would assume if the bonds aren't repaid its because they don't have the money, you're not therefore going to get far going to Wasps or ACL.
At that point don't the bond holders get the security so they'd get the lease and control of ACL? Guess in theory if SISU purchase all the bonds for £17.5m and then Wasps defaulted they'd have themselves a stadium. Or the more likely scenario that they don't own the bonds but the bondholder will need to sell the lease to get back as much as they can, potentially a chance to pick it up on the cheap depending how many other interested parties there are.
The Bonds are only secured on the lease that does not mean it reverts to them in a default. The Trustee will call on the guarantors to pay the outstanding liability which will probably trigger an Insolvency Act. The Receiver will then attempt to recover the bond monies by way of selling the lease or through the other Guanrantors
Look at : https://www.wasps.co.uk/media/3071/wasps-information-booklet-final.pdf for a brief summary
Didn't the lease revert back to CCC if Wasps went bang?
It has a potential right to do so yes but it’s not quite as clear cut as that. Their are caveats and some rights for tenants
The wording states 38 years and I assume that is what it would revert back to
The sub tenant bit is the interesting bit and it’s not even cut and dried as it seems to afford the ultimate owner which I assume is Moonstone some rights
No chance then.....However, the purchaser will have to be accepted by the Freeholder as a suitable substitute
Yeah that's first layer lease isn't itIt has a potential right to do so yes but it’s not quite as clear cut as that. Their are caveats and some rights for tenants
The wording states 38 years and I assume that is what it would revert back to
I did have a glance through his book.
It did make me wonder on a few stuff when he stated to exchange the slowest players for the fastest in substitutions.
I don't believe this to be correct.
In 1749, Philidor wrote the following in 'Analyse du jeu des Échecs';
"My main purpose is to gain recognition for myself by means of a new idea of which no one has conceived, or perhaps has been unable to practice; that is, good play of the pawns; they are the soul of chess: it is they alone that determine the attack and the defence, and the winning or losing of the game depends entirely on their good or bad arrangement."
In 1925, Lasker expanded on this in his 'Manual of Chess' book pages 179-181
http://www.simardartizanfarm.ca/pdf/-_Lasker_s_Manual_of_Chess.pdf
The key point being, well you lot can work it out for yourselves
Taking a stab in the dark I reckon there may be similarities within the games.
These books, whilst showing their age now, are still excellent in parts showing the development of chess theory.
It is also written in the books, what applies to Chess may also apply to other sports.
I think it was Mowbray he approached after a game with a load of statistics that came to a conclusion CCFC should have won based on corners, shots etc
The response he got was "we lost because they ******** scored more goals than us "
MM
You are a bundle of fun HDW
Well, ultimately it’s down to whether SISU are willing to continue plugging the gap. If so it’s all good.We just spent 1.3 million pounds on a player, if we were a year from going bust I don’t think the club would be stupid enough to do that
Nice to see you posting again, OSB. I hope that you and yours are keeping well.The guarantors of the Bond issue are
ACL 2006
ACL
Wasps Finance
Wasps Holdings
There is nothing in the prospectus or the registered charge that says Moonstone or Richardson have guaranteed the bond. (Source Companies House and the prospectus document)
Richardson is exposed to risk with wasps of course....... the risk that he loses the money he has put in through his own funds or Canmango (subsidiary of Moonstone). He has what amounts to a second charge over all the assets of Wasps Holdings that secures the money he is owed. Unless there is a guarantee issued then Richardson & Moonstone would not be responsible for a default on the Bond
Nice to see you posting again, OSB. I hope that you and yours are keeping well.
Well, ultimately it’s down to whether SISU are willing to continue plugging the gap. If so it’s all good.
stay there until they go bump. But it’s a lot to trust sisu with
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?