Grendel
Well-Known Member
This is something you frequently bring up. The lease extension was part of a sisu offer to purchase the Higgs share for £5.5 million wasn't it?
The formula price was the maximum the club would have to pay, the club's owners agreed a lower than formula price with Higgs. As part of the same deal the Council were willing to extend the lease to 125 years for free. Sounds like a good deal to me, but alas 'mad' Joy changed her mind.
You like questions. Did SISU offer more than you or they thought it was worth solely because ACL was a charity? Did events prove you and Joy/ SISU both wrong?
He likes asking questions but not answering them.
One of the offers they pulled out of after getting accepted.This is something you frequently bring up. The lease extension was part of a sisu offer to purchase the Higgs share for £5.5 million wasn't it?
And withdrew the offer when it got accepted. So your point is?To my knowledge they offered over £5 million for the Higgs share didn't they?
Was it Lucas or Fisher that started the term unencumbered?No I answered. So £1m or £2m which was it?
Was it Lucas or Fisher that started the term unencumbered?
One of the offers they pulled out of after getting accepted.
Just about everyone accepts that CCC shouldn't have let Wasps have the arena. Why can't you accept that SISU were at fault for it happening?
Was it Lucas or Fisher that started the term unencumbered?
My recollection is that unencumbered was first mentioned by Seppala as the only basis they would come back from sixfields. Reported in CT And repeated by fisher and labovitch
That then turned to considering long lease when the strategy began to crumble
Lucas was consistent in saying an unencumbered option was not available meaning that ACL would remain in place
At least that is my understanding
Higgs rejected the deal
AEHC asked for security for the deal offered which was not provided in the exclusivity period, when that period ended they properly told Sisu that they would be open to other offers. Seppala offered 2m because they were a charity which was flatly rejected. Sisu then continued to try distress ACL whilst talking with CCC on a deal that depended on acquiring the AEHC shares that was not available any longer.
Their only strategy was to force a distressed sale...... The negotiations were extended to increase the ACL distress. The deals and negotiations actually make no sense because they couldn't be completed if the AEHC shares could not be acquired so can only have been part of increasing the financial pressure on ACL to acquire an unencumbered site
I thought the 125 lease discussion was first as I thought that the offer for that was made when the club were still at the Ricoh.
2m and only because ACL was a charity?
That deal was discussed with CCC in the December after the AEHC deal had failed I think.
But it proves there was an extended lease available doesn't it. If the discussions were in good faith on both sides...... which would not seem to be the case
Think you will find that's pretty much what Laura deering said in court
2m and only because ACL was a charity?
I admit I was wrong. Iy was a 2m donation because Higgs are a charity and not a 1m donation.Surely it's £1m
But you and I know it's a meaningless comment. A charity donation and a purchase of shares of. Business are not related. It's a sneer but I hardly think a hedge find would over pay Higgs.
More like saying that the Higgs share and the CCC share were both worthless.But you and I know it's a meaningless comment. A charity donation and a purchase of shares of. Business are not related. It's a sneer but I hardly think a hedge find would over pay Higgs.
Higgs rejected the deal
My recollection is that unencumbered was first mentioned by Seppala as the only basis they would come back from sixfields. Reported in CT And repeated by fisher and labovitch
That then turned to considering long lease when the strategy began to crumble
Lucas was consistent in saying an unencumbered option was not available meaning that ACL would remain in place
At least that is my understanding
I admit I was wrong. Iy was a 2m donation because Higgs are a charity and not a 1m donation.
Are you going to admit that you was wrong on everything else?
Well it proved that the club would consider a long lease as opposed to a freehold.
But you and I know it's a meaningless comment. A charity donation and a purchase of shares of. Business are not related. It's a sneer but I hardly think a hedge find would over pay Higgs.
Donations don't purchase shares so wrong again
Martcov liking a lot of posts. He's admitted on here he wouldn't care if CCFC moved 90 miles away.
Martcov liking a lot of posts. He's admitted on here he wouldn't care if CCFC moved 90 miles away.
Donations don't purchase shares so wrong again
The point is that in the days when SISU's more sensible people were prepared to negotiate the Council were willing to give the football club the benefit of an extended lease for free, or as Les Reid would have probably reported it, 'a massively extended lease not offered to anyone else'. I bring it up in instances where you conveniently forget it, so yes, frequently.This is something you frequently bring up. The lease extension was part of a sisu offer to purchase the Higgs share for £5.5 million wasn't it?
No he hasn't- your losing and getting desperate..
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?