ryb1983ccfc
New Member
so chief Dave please tell us wat acl have been "upto" im dying to know? What have they done? Burnt all the 87' memorabilia .......the swines!
Cwr (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Flying Fokker
- Start date
even if that is true and ACL are completely out for themselves(and I think really the truth is somewhere in the middle), it's still smarter to back administration over the threat of liquidation.
Whatever you think of ACL, I don't see how any right minded person can be backing SISU over them at this point. I can see it a few months ago, I cant see it now.
bigbeatpete
Member
I'm glad someone else is seeing the bigger picture rather than banging on about the component parts for which we do not have all of the information around and the he said, she said, pro SISU this anti ACL that bollocks that gets bandied around on here. This action will provoke a response from SISU - something that we have needed for a long time. It won't be good for everyone involved, it will be better for some more so than others, but the bottom line is - the club will still be here. Surely fans will be happy with that part?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
That point coming up again rather surprised me, maybe SISU made promises about developing the land before the buy out & renaged upon them? Was that the reason behind why Hoffman quit.
mattylad
Member
SISU have been mentioned in parliment many times..its no sweat off their backs
Sub
Well-Known Member
Coventry set for administration
- last updated Thu 14 Mar 2013
The Ricoh Arena isn't a great place to be at the moment. Photo: PA
Chief executive Tim Fisher admits Coventry have been prepared for the possible threat of an administration order and are working with their advisers to "minimise the damage to the club".
Fisher's statement this morning came after Arena Coventry Limited (ACL), the management company behind the Ricoh Arena, last night announced it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against the club.
The cash-strapped Sky Blues owe over £1.3million to ACL in unpaid rent stretching back a year, an ongoing row which has subsequently seen their bank accounts frozen, while earlier this month City were also placed under a transfer embargo having again failed to file their annual accounts on time.
Coventry's owners Sisu are disputing the terms of the lease but the npower League One club would face a 10-point deduction by the Football League if they are placed into administration.
Coventry are set to go to the High Court later this month, and responding to last night's development Fisher said: "Unfortunately, this is one eventuality we have had to prepare for since ACL formally ended negotiations.
"We are consulting with our professional advisers in order to find the best way forward to try to minimise the damage to the club and we will be keeping supporters informed of any developments.
"In terms of the day-to-day affairs, it is business as usual as we have to make sure we are all fully focused on Saturday's important game against Hartlepool United."
ACL, who manage the stadium on behalf of joint owners the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and Coventry City Council, announced a month ago that talks to resolve the ongoing rent issues had collapsed, although Coventry quickly stated that they remained committed to reaching an agreement.
ACL chairman Nicholas Carter last night said: "It is highly unfortunate that we have had to take this course of legal action. Had we not taken this action, then the alternative might have been catastrophic for CCFC.
"We are owed a considerable amount of money in rent arrears. While it is imperative that ACL takes action to recover these arrears and to stop the arrears growing, it is important for us to find a solution that can provide for the survival of the Sky Blues. Hopefully this action will ultimately put CCFC on a stable financial footing for the future.
"Following recent statements in the media from the CCFC's owners threatening the club with liquidation, we are keen to stop this from happening. Our action prevents Sisu simply closing CCFC and walking away from the situation.
"We are, of course, well aware that under the current Football League regulations, CCFC will face a points deduction and we will do everything we can to ensure that the case is heard by the High Court before the end of the current season. While this opens up the possibility of a 10-point deduction this season, the board believes this is better than leaving CCFC facing a much larger deduction at the start of next season."
The High Court will decide in the next few weeks whether the club is fit to continue trading.
If it decides it is not, it will be placed into administration and an administrator appointed to sell it.
- last updated Thu 14 Mar 2013
Chief executive Tim Fisher admits Coventry have been prepared for the possible threat of an administration order and are working with their advisers to "minimise the damage to the club".
Fisher's statement this morning came after Arena Coventry Limited (ACL), the management company behind the Ricoh Arena, last night announced it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against the club.
The cash-strapped Sky Blues owe over £1.3million to ACL in unpaid rent stretching back a year, an ongoing row which has subsequently seen their bank accounts frozen, while earlier this month City were also placed under a transfer embargo having again failed to file their annual accounts on time.
Coventry's owners Sisu are disputing the terms of the lease but the npower League One club would face a 10-point deduction by the Football League if they are placed into administration.
Coventry are set to go to the High Court later this month, and responding to last night's development Fisher said: "Unfortunately, this is one eventuality we have had to prepare for since ACL formally ended negotiations.
"We are consulting with our professional advisers in order to find the best way forward to try to minimise the damage to the club and we will be keeping supporters informed of any developments.
"In terms of the day-to-day affairs, it is business as usual as we have to make sure we are all fully focused on Saturday's important game against Hartlepool United."
ACL, who manage the stadium on behalf of joint owners the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and Coventry City Council, announced a month ago that talks to resolve the ongoing rent issues had collapsed, although Coventry quickly stated that they remained committed to reaching an agreement.
ACL chairman Nicholas Carter last night said: "It is highly unfortunate that we have had to take this course of legal action. Had we not taken this action, then the alternative might have been catastrophic for CCFC.
"We are owed a considerable amount of money in rent arrears. While it is imperative that ACL takes action to recover these arrears and to stop the arrears growing, it is important for us to find a solution that can provide for the survival of the Sky Blues. Hopefully this action will ultimately put CCFC on a stable financial footing for the future.
"Following recent statements in the media from the CCFC's owners threatening the club with liquidation, we are keen to stop this from happening. Our action prevents Sisu simply closing CCFC and walking away from the situation.
"We are, of course, well aware that under the current Football League regulations, CCFC will face a points deduction and we will do everything we can to ensure that the case is heard by the High Court before the end of the current season. While this opens up the possibility of a 10-point deduction this season, the board believes this is better than leaving CCFC facing a much larger deduction at the start of next season."
The High Court will decide in the next few weeks whether the club is fit to continue trading.
If it decides it is not, it will be placed into administration and an administrator appointed to sell it.
bigbeatpete
Member
One that mirrors my own view, the ACL move is shrewd on a number of fronts and it's a shame a lot of people can't/won't see why it's being done.
mattylad
Member
or they could pay the back rent and then liquidate which is the option ACL cannot stop.
bigbeatpete
Member
Genuine question - Does this assume that ACL are the only creditor?
mattylad
Member
No it assumes that we know the biggest creditor is SISU and the 1.3m is only a drop in the ocean compared to what CcFC owe them.
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
Yes it can be stopped, they can't just liquidate on a whim, there is a time period, 28 days i think, i know you will be disappointed at that
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
will have to wait and see an administrators reports but depending how the books are being kept there has to be a good change SISU are the largest / majority creditor and would therefore be able to block any proposed CVA so we could potentially have -15 next season for coming out of admin without a CVA on top of the -10 which could be deducted this season or next.
Would starting on -25 put off any potential buyer, would mean a very high chance of relegation to L2, even lower income and a much longer road to turning the business of CCFC around.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
with the bank accounts frozen and SISU allegedly making direct payments to staff and players what happens if they just stop paying? sure it wouldn't be liquidation but what would be the actual outcome? at what point are the players contracts breached and they can just walk away? whilst they can't liquidate if we get to the point at which we can't play and lose our golden share we're done. No one is going to buy a club with no players, ground or golden share!
mattylad
Member
No it will be becuase we owe SISU millions and have no viable way of paying them back.
Voluntary liquidation is very possible and although it can be challenged in court this is only where debt is owed to another party and they wish to force a compulsory liquidation. As I said in my post the other creditor would be paid off leaving SISU as the only creditor and so able to enter a winding up order on a failing part of the business.
It cannot be challenged if there is only one creditor.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Why should the football club invest in the land around the stadium? Surely this should be the responsibility of the council?
Diehard Si
New Member
I would be interested to see how much of the debt we owe Sisu is due to their management charges the club pays them.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
They've just mentioned this on the CWR news report that ACL what a new owner who will invest in the city as well as the football club. This has always bemused me why on earth would any potential owner have to invest in the city. If these proposed investments are so great why aren't other private companies lining up to do them, or even ACL / the council themselves, independently of the football club?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Just listened to PKWH on radio, he didn't mention surrounding land, only buy out of Higgs share in reasonable manner.. where is all that coming from, more misdirection?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Just a thought or two but ............
The action by ACL is against CCFC Ltd who owes the money to CCFCH (per the last accounts), who in turn owe the money to SBS&L who in turn owe the money to SISU & ARVO. As far as I am aware no action has been taken against any other company other than CCFC Ltd.
Yes the action impacts on the other companies in the group but it isnt against the other companies. Puts SISU in the position that if they see CCFC in administration then sold that they have to wind up SBS&L and be the ones that lose their investors money
Secondly, SISU through TF and others have recently been saying that the debt in CCFC Ltd has been written off (even equitised)............. if that is the case then SISU wouldnt be the biggest single creditor would it?. You could argue ARVO are instead but then if you look at the arrears claim plus compensation on the lease could ACL eclipse that ? Certainly if SISU are still classed as the biggest creditor of CCFC then that debt structure has been changed, and at least one of the details put forward by TF proven to be false
The action by ACL is against CCFC Ltd who owes the money to CCFCH (per the last accounts), who in turn owe the money to SBS&L who in turn owe the money to SISU & ARVO. As far as I am aware no action has been taken against any other company other than CCFC Ltd.
Yes the action impacts on the other companies in the group but it isnt against the other companies. Puts SISU in the position that if they see CCFC in administration then sold that they have to wind up SBS&L and be the ones that lose their investors money
Secondly, SISU through TF and others have recently been saying that the debt in CCFC Ltd has been written off (even equitised)............. if that is the case then SISU wouldnt be the biggest single creditor would it?. You could argue ARVO are instead but then if you look at the arrears claim plus compensation on the lease could ACL eclipse that ? Certainly if SISU are still classed as the biggest creditor of CCFC then that debt structure has been changed, and at least one of the details put forward by TF proven to be false
Last edited:
mattylad
Member
I listened to it live at 8.10 this morning and trust me he mentioned it twice
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Has always been the case that the council want to see joint investors that can drive the development of the area. It doesnt mean that those investors do the development, more that they facilitate and invest in the process - like it or nor that requires substantial funding but it gives rewards at the end of it that the clubs owners can take as a one off (on the sale) and on an ongoing basis from increased revenue from the site by greater usage.
The Charity are not in a position to provide that funding nor did they ever want to, the council want to but do not have the expertise or the additional funds. The key and carrot now is the potential for investors to buy the Charity out and "seed" the development with funds that will increase the sites value and income thereby releasing some funds to the club on a sustainable basis. Thats the plan i think is envisaged any way
The Charity are not in a position to provide that funding nor did they ever want to, the council want to but do not have the expertise or the additional funds. The key and carrot now is the potential for investors to buy the Charity out and "seed" the development with funds that will increase the sites value and income thereby releasing some funds to the club on a sustainable basis. Thats the plan i think is envisaged any way
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Its not really about ACL anymore. Its Mayfair Hedge Fund vs. City Of Coventry.
I'm a Cov supporter.
Gonna be interesting when the books are opened up for scrutiny. I' m sure there's no skeletons .. Yeah right.
Gonna get interesting real soon.
I'm a Cov supporter.
Gonna be interesting when the books are opened up for scrutiny. I' m sure there's no skeletons .. Yeah right.
Gonna get interesting real soon.
mattylad
Member
And therein lies what I really dislike about SISU and why I would genuinely like shot of them (in a stable manner and not via admin for the club as I have previously stated)
Who are SISU, who owns which part of the puzzle and who owns the debt to them? This could there biggest downfall in court as a judge might look at the tangle and just say I am not shifting through that lot here is a ruling against SISU now deal with it.
But then you could get one who looks at every piece of the puzzle and decides that SISU has enough sway in its arrangement to be rightly deemed the sole beneficiary...back to which side of the bed did they get out of before putting robes on that morning.
People think law is all about case history and legal precedent but that is the job of solicitors to prove for or against and a judge to rule which party has made a better case, it is not the judges role to know or apply it to a particular instance.
Bluegloucester
New Member
This is so hard to understand because it is factually incorrect. They could not wind up the part of the business holding the lease without winding up the football club.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
MMM what worries me is that SISU still have the option to hand over a cheque for the arrears and screw the whole play up!
mattylad
Member
Agreed it is smoke and mirrors and that why I only ever saw it as more PR bullcrap rather than a serious threat, clearly ACL could not make the same link or have more information than is in the public domian.
Bluegloucester
New Member
It would not be in Sisu's interest to reject a CVA. It is their only chance of getting something out of this.
mattylad
Member
And whose to say that it will not be SISU that put the best CVA offer on the table and that the admin team advise all creditors to accept it but that ACL refuse and so we start on -15/25 points ...can you see ACL accepting any CVA if SISU remain in charge even if the refusal to accept it hurts CCFC?
Given the number of unexpected twists and turns so far, that's a pretty bold statement to make!!
Bluegloucester
New Member
I cannot see Sisu wanting to hang around after crystallising a massive debt. I hope I am right.
The more I look at it, the more I'm thinking that there's no way that SISU is going to take the big financial hit and just walk away, leaving the path clear for someone else to come in and take the whole shooting match over for a knockdown price from the administrator. I reckon their attitude is more likely to be on the lines of ' If we're going down, we're going to make sure we'll be taking others with us'.
Although I also believe that they're still playing 'who's going to blink first'.
Although I also believe that they're still playing 'who's going to blink first'.
Last edited:
BurbageSkyBlues
New Member
Is it allowed that those who are responsible for the financial failings of a business are then able to buy it from the administrator??!?
Nick
Administrator
Didn't that happen at Pompey?