torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I don't trust any of them and never have, whether they be Joy, Fisher, Lab, Lucas, PWKH, Reeves, etc. They'll all in it for themselves.
Council and Sky Blues in court tomorrow (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Did anyone else read that and immediately think of Donald Rumsfeld and his infamous speechMr Labovitch said:
"...there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know." Source http://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld
Sounds like the Higgs wanted to get the facts out.Mr Labovitch said:
Nick
Administrator
To be fair that meeting was a good earner.
I reckon one of the people even got a free beer!
I am not sure if anybody has been on a second date yet though.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Erm... I don't have any 'mates' at the council. I make my judgements based on evidence, and I try to explain myself. Sometimes you come across as a reasonable bloke, sometimes you come over as a complete tit. This is one of the latter.
Let's cut the bullshit here for one moment. Let's say that your company is facing a court case, you've been strongly advised by your company's lawyer not to make any comment on it, and you're aware that if you do you could find yourself having to appear in the case. Do you comment, or not?
Nick, you can answer the same question if you like. I can tell you now though that it's nothing to do with being "sh*t scared", that's the language of the playground.
Face it Nick, Torchy, you're buying Labovitch's spin here hook, line and sinker. He's all about putting pressure on the council/ACL and diverting attention away from their bullshit and screw ups; that seems to be exactly what you're doing too.
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
Yes, if my companies lawyer told me not to speak to somebody I wouldn't do it. The "shit scared" comment isn't about just speaking to somebody, it is about leaking stuff. If I was doing the dirty on my employers then surely I would be a bit worried about my job, paying my mortgage, my future etc? Especially when the CCC and SISU are playing games, would I want to put myself in the middle?
I admit I am not 100% on whistle blowing so I am not sure of the process so apologies if they are fully protected so don't need to be scared.
I am not diverting anything or falling for any spin, I just want to know what has happened. If that means SISU call for all this evidence and CCC have better evidence that say they have done nothing wrong then great
I just want as much as possible to come out in the wash.
Astute
Well-Known Member
The valuation is an old one. Things have moved on since. Or why do SISU keep asking for a new valuation?
How could the police charges be in the accounts if they never took up the rent free offer? Pushing it a bit far, even for you Nick
I shall try and make it a bit easier for you Nick. The rent free and 150k for two years came with charges for using the Ricoh. It included the policing charges amongst other things. SISU wouldn't have paid twice for it. But the SISU comment was that they counted it as extra charges to make up for the rent. A few on here loved that comment and kept using it. Plus they made out that SISU would still have had lots of expenses like policing, so the rent free and 150k offer was a lot more expensive than it was. And with CCC keeping quiet until after the JR, and SISU happy for people to think this a fair few think it is true. Which is why I would guess that ACL made the statement clarifying the true facts. But some either don't understand or don't like that the truth don't help SISU or thier own thoughts.
Do you understand now Nick?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Just so you know Nick: https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing
A really important law IMO, more people should be aware of their protections so more people can blow the whistle. Too many employers abusing their staff because staff don't know their rights.
/Here ends the party political broadcast for the Socialist Workers Party. I now return you to your scheduled programming.
A really important law IMO, more people should be aware of their protections so more people can blow the whistle. Too many employers abusing their staff because staff don't know their rights.
/Here ends the party political broadcast for the Socialist Workers Party. I now return you to your scheduled programming.
The Prefect
Active Member
May be not but they can dispute it if it's not the valuation that SISU want.
Something tells me this valuation is just a smoke screen. ACL is a privately owned company and its value is what the shareholders demand for it. By removing the club from the stadium SISU have downvalued ACL - we all know this. Their hope is for their investors (not the club) to acquire ACL (or the arena) on the cheap with no sitting tennant so they can grant a long lease to the club creating extra value for their investors.
The JR is about funding of a mortgage. If sold, a mortgage is worth what someone will pay for it and the remedy would seem to be to reverse the transaction if SISU win. I don't think there is debate that ACL is worth more than the mortgage and how much seems irrelevant to the JR. The question is state aid or not - I don't see that this really has anything to do with SISU / Otium or CCFC as they no longer have a relationship with ACL and didn't have an agreement with the bank to acquire the mortgage.
My only guess would be that if SISU are successful with the JR they will take some sort of legal action. Although questionable in merit it does fit in a threat to batter through litigation.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Why? Are they advertising it for sale?
duffer
Well-Known Member
Just so you know Nick: https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing
A really important law IMO, more people should be aware of their protections so more people can blow the whistle. Too many employers abusing their staff because staff don't know their rights.
/Here ends the party political broadcast for the Socialist Workers Party. I now return you to your scheduled programming.
It is an important law, agreed. In truth though, and in fairness to Nick, I'm not sure that I'd want to trust it if my job was on the line. Too many grey areas, imho. There are plenty of ways of leaking stuff out without endangering your job though, if you're clever.
Could it be possible that there really isn't anything that exciting to leak here?
Nick
Administrator
The valuation is an old one. Things have moved on since. Or why do SISU keep asking for a new valuation?
How could the police charges be in the accounts if they never took up the rent free offer? Pushing it a bit far, even for you Nick
I shall try and make it a bit easier for you Nick. The rent free and 150k for two years came with charges for using the Ricoh. It included the policing charges amongst other things. SISU wouldn't have paid twice for it. But the SISU comment was that they counted it as extra charges to make up for the rent. A few on here loved that comment and kept using it. Plus they made out that SISU would still have had lots of expenses like policing, so the rent free and 150k offer was a lot more expensive than it was. And with CCC keeping quiet until after the JR, and SISU happy for people to think this a fair few think it is true. Which is why I would guess that ACL made the statement clarifying the true facts. But some either don't understand or don't like that the truth don't help SISU or thier own thoughts.
Do you understand now Nick?
The police charges were in the past that shows CCFC always paid for them?
Yes but my point is why would CCFC suddenly want to start paying ACL for police charges as an example when it has always been the case they do it themselves? ACL's comment in the Q and A said that
Why would they suddenly build this into a rental offer? Surely FREE rent is only paying matchday costs which are:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
:facepalm: You are kidding aren't you..
Nick
Administrator
Exactly, it could well be there is nothing to tell which is why there is no hero.
Hobo
Well-Known Member
You are all trying to make this court hearing today like some Hollywood drama. It is all just standard legal stuff. People asking for stuff people dragging there heels, people trying it on yawn. It is not unusual for people to disagree on what is relevant as both sides are trying to make different cases, they are not always aware of what angles the other is going to play on.
With disclosure there are none sensitive and sensitive documents. Sensitive documents just means it will have unrelated sensitive material on it. It could be a third parties name and address. Or a data protection issue.
All that happens is a sanitised version of the document is released. Sometimes documents have already been released. Large law firms loose things, don't always realise they have them, they can be as inefficient as government bodies. It is all standard stuff.
With disclosure there are none sensitive and sensitive documents. Sensitive documents just means it will have unrelated sensitive material on it. It could be a third parties name and address. Or a data protection issue.
All that happens is a sanitised version of the document is released. Sometimes documents have already been released. Large law firms loose things, don't always realise they have them, they can be as inefficient as government bodies. It is all standard stuff.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I know, I know! I was messin'. I'm sure you have as many mates in the council as I apparently have mates at SISU.
I'm not buying anything from Labovitch or anyone else.
I'm not buying anything from Labovitch or anyone else.
Nick
Administrator
It is a Hollywood drama!!!!!!!!
If I could be bothered I'd open up photoshop and use pictures, but I can't.
Astute
Well-Known Member
As you know at the time of the offer Appleton was in charge of our club. And what a good job he did on behalf of SISU, although he couldn't even find the golden share. We were in admin. Could this be why they decided to show all total costs to the club and show how much our club would have been better off?
Yes, that’s the problem on here, mostly with people that say they “only support the club”. They seem to be very interested in the minutiae of the workings of a stadium management company and their finances, but never ask any hard questions of the owners.
Here’s an idea – why not put pressure on SISU to have the club valued and then say they are willing to listen to offers based on that valuation? Do it quickly, and we just may get owners who are more interested in spending the close season building a promotion winning squad rather than spending it in court.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
*adopts deep gravely voice*
SHE was a chain-smoking political firebrand. HE was a tax dodging spin doctor. THEY were the lifelong fans caught in the middle. JUDICIAL REVIEW Coming Summer 2014. This time it's legal!
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Excellent idea. Seems completely reasonable to me. I mean we have someone who wants to buy, but for far less than the owners want to sell, that's what happens in these situations right guys? The only fair thing is the seller does a valuation then agrees to sell at that price?
Would someone like to explain why that isn't the case?
duffer
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
Sounds good to me. We hear that ACL is a private company. SISU is a private company. So the ones that keep going on about ACL being valued should keep going on about our club being valued. That is unless double standards are allowed.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
No, just common sense.
Whats wrong. Are you short of a nipple?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Where are these buyers going to appear from?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
Just where they always seem to appear from. But that would mean that our club would be valued for what it is worth and not for the debt. Not much chance of that is there.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify - you made the wrong assumption regarding police charges. The item quoted was purely to the administrator as technically while in administration the offer covered the costs. Police charged the club always.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
You valued ACL based on its debt earlier
Astute
Well-Known Member
Debt, assets, profits and future profits is what ACL has. Debt and fook all else is the outlook for CCFC whilst them jokers are in charge of our club. Massive difference Fern, but you know this.
Astute
Well-Known Member
You are just acting thick. How unusual.
So if the ACL statement was false about the police costs being included in the match day costs on the free rent and 150k offer why didn't SISU say anything when they even made threats when someone added a link to a newspaper article? Why didn't they threaten ACL with litigation for it?
Nick
Administrator
So your proof of it being correct is that they didn't sue?
Astute
Well-Known Member
So your proof of it being false is what? Absolutely none at all. But you and a couple of others put so much effort into making it sound false. I wonder why.
Or are you saying that SISU don't use litigation when they think it has the slightest chance of working? Are you saying they don't put statements on the offal if they want word out?