But that's just it - the players were since 1995 or thereabout registered to Holdings according to FL archives, but until 2012 registered in Limited according to clubs accounts. So the indication is that Fisher is cleaning up the administrative mess (while at the same time isolating the lease and get in a position to break it).
I can't see any grounds for starting the process over.
Nothing that have come to public knowledge show any illegal actions.
But it will be interesting to hear Appeltons final statement.
But that's just it - the players were since 1995 or thereabout registered to Holdings according to FL archives, but until 2012 registered in Limited according to clubs accounts. So the indication is that Fisher is cleaning up the administrative mess (while at the same time isolating the lease and get in a position to break it).
The leak is most likely a former director ... Elliott? Hoffman? Clarke? Who knows - and I wish he will keep them coming!
On the contrary, there appears to be quite a lot of evidence that suggests undervalue or zero value transfers from one company to another, presumably as you've said with the intention of CCFC Ltd being able to break the lease with ACL.
Other than Fisher's assertions (which seem to be steadily unravelling) there's precious little evidence of anything else, at least in the public domain.
I think Appleton may yet find his decisions challenged in court if he doesn't come up with an adequate explanation. I guess we'll see.
I can't see any grounds for starting the process over.
Nothing that have come to public knowledge show any illegal actions.
But it will be interesting to hear Appeltons final statement.
What? Source?
Really, I had missed that, when did the Football League state that? Even then surely if that's been done by mistake as soon as the mistake came to light the correct / easiest option would have been to ask the League to change the registrations to Ltd as that's where they should have been. Not to move everything else into holdings. It's a bit like the DVLA getting your address wrong and instead of telling them and asking them to change it you move house!!!
But that's just it - the players were since 1995 or thereabout registered to Holdings according to FL archives, but until 2012 registered in Limited according to clubs accounts. So the indication is that Fisher is cleaning up the administrative mess (while at the same time isolating the lease and get in a position to break it/
Or he says was a mess to cover his arse in case the truth came out. Well the truth is out now. Fisher said no players were in CCFC LTD. It is now proved that players were in LTD. Was the decision to put LTD made before the rent wasn't paid? As in the time the players were moved?
If judges can see through SISU when they try a judicial review or even a case that happened at about this time but in another so called investment and the judge said Joy was being very uneconomical with the truth (being more polite than the judge) that she lost, how can anyone say that this evidence won't make any difference? If we can see holes in their defence then what could a judge see with more evidence? We have had only a small fraction.
This could get very messy and very expensive for whoever loses. And to me SISU would be the outsiders to win.
I guess they have drawn on their legal expertise to make sure it happened inside the law.
so we are to believe that the finance director Mr Brannigan and Mr Ranson didnt have a clue which company they were signing for :thinking about:and that well respected clubs didnt have a clue which company they were dealing with :thinking aboutr solicitors checking the documents were not sure who appointed them :thinking about:.......... all because they didnt have the company number quoted but very specifically stated the company name Coventry City Football Club Limited ................... really?
clearly I'm wrong.
And everyone will be shocked about this.......won't they?..................
We live in hope...True but it became very relevant when TF announced that Ltd was not, as everyone - in particular ACL - has believed, a trading company but was in fact a non-trading property owning subsidiary.
This despite the fact that he himself had signed Ltd's accounts only 9 (?) months previously showing that it was very much a trading company and not noting any change to this fact in the Directors' Report.
I have to say that if a creditor of mine had done the same, my first call would have been to the most aggressive lawyers I could find, with instructions to take action against the company and the Directors.
I have wondered if the reason that ACL rejected the CVA might be to keep the option of such action open. I guess that time will tell.
im not sure the business was in a mess.. that was his original line of bull but it turns out the lease was in LTD, the players were in LTD, the golden share was in LTD, the corporate was in LTD, LTD was registered as a 'football club' at companies house and it held the turnover for the football club.... errr whats messy about that ...LTD was obviously the club, with all the assets.. until it suited SISU to pretend otherwise.. only a blind & deaf man would not be able to see that now, surely
all that side.. it appears more and more laughable that the "club" were able to go bust, owing people millions of pounds, ripping away the club from its home city.. and then buy the assets of any worth back again themselves, for peanuts, leaving the creditors with nothing.. and excuse it all by saying " oh sorry it was all in a bit of a mess.. "
oh really was it.. never mind then.. have a better try next time .. total piss take!
im not sure the business was in a mess.. that was his original line of bull but it turns out the lease was in LTD, the players were in LTD, the golden share was in LTD, the corporate was in LTD, LTD was registered as a 'football club' at companies house and it held the turnover for the football club.... errr whats messy about that ...LTD was obviously the club, with all the assets.. until it suited SISU to pretend otherwise.. only a blind & deaf man would not be able to see that now, surely
all that side.. it appears more and more laughable that the "club" were able to go bust, owing people millions of pounds, ripping away the club from its home city.. and then buy the assets of any worth back again themselves, for peanuts, leaving the creditors with nothing.. and excuse it all by saying " oh sorry it was all in a bit of a mess.. "
oh really was it.. never mind then.. have a better try next time .. total piss take!
Well I won't be wrong - this is a storm in a teacup and nothing will change as a consequence.
A storm in a tea cup? Really? A Director of a football club tells blatant lies in or order to further his Company's agenda and you call it a storm in a tea cup. Your morality needle needs looking at big time.Well I won't be wrong - this is a storm in a teacup and nothing will change as a consequence.
im not sure the business was in a mess.. that was his original line of bull but it turns out the lease was in LTD, the players were in LTD, the golden share was in LTD, the corporate was in LTD, LTD was registered as a 'football club' at companies house and it held the turnover for the football club.... errr whats messy about that ...LTD was obviously the club, with all the assets.. until it suited SISU to pretend otherwise.. only a blind & deaf man would not be able to see that now, surely
all that side.. it appears more and more laughable that the "club" were able to go bust, owing people millions of pounds, ripping away the club from its home city.. and then buy the assets of any worth back again themselves, for peanuts, leaving the creditors with nothing.. and excuse it all by saying " oh sorry it was all in a bit of a mess.. "
oh really was it.. never mind then.. have a better try next time .. total piss take!
Even if sisu walk away selling the club and everything to Hoffman for £1, the club will at some point in the near future own all income streams from the stadium it plays in.
We all know and agree with this.
The thing is that most of us don't trust SISU enough to own the Ricoh. They would own it for them and not our club. ACL will know more than us about what is going on. Otherwise they would have accepted the CVA. Where is the slightest proof that ACL wouldn't sell the Ricoh to a more trusted owner? Hearsay don't count.
The leaked documents were all pre-Fisher I think.
The leaked documents were all pre-Fisher I think.
The players were still registered with ltd in 2011.
the club will at some point in the near future own all income streams from the stadium it plays in.
Agreed. I wonder when the players started being registered in holdings ?!. Once again it just comes across that at some stage assets were being moved out of the entity that had the large unsecured creditor ie acl (moving assets beyond reach of creditors is illegal and for what it's worth the administrator or liquidator can pursue various actions) Doesn't look pretty but doubt anything will happen. The FL haven't got the balls and everything else has been swept under the carpet.
Outrageous but nothing a majority of people didnt know/believe weeks and months ago. It was only the FL and poor old PA that were confused...bless 'em. They are either complicit or completely incompetent ! One of each I reckon !
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?