Did someone Say SISU could bid (1 Viewer)

[dongonzalos]

If they did I don't get that.

Surely if you put your own company into admin you can't then buy it yourself?

Otherwise that would just be a way people could keep chopping off debts?

 

---

[covcity4life]

for once i can not find anything in your post to disagree with

 

[Big_Ben]

If they did I don't get that.

Surely if you put your own company into admin you can't then by it yourself?

Otherwise that would just be a way people could keep chopping off debts?

I think that normally, companies in administration owe money to others, i.e. HMRC, etc. In this case the bulk of the debt is owed to another company within the SISU group so that's maybe where the distinction lies. Presumably cancellation of some of the debt would amount to the equivalent of making a cash offer (not at all confident that this statement is true, but if it was, it might cause a few ripples! - Maybe someone far wiser than me could comment).

 

[dongonzalos]

for once i can not find anything in your post to disagree with

I will take that as a back hander.

We did have a common belief before that this squad was good enough to turn that start round and make the play off's.

I think we were right until Devine intervention hit.

 

[grego_gee]

Thats life!
Each company is a separate legal entity, I think SISU will probably form a new company to buy out the old one.
I think it is highly likely that they have things so well wrapped up that CCFC is less attractive to any outside competitor seeking to buy it.
One ray of light for the SISU outers is that with the emergence of ph4 they might see it as a serious oportunity to offload - for the right price! So I wouldn't be surprised if they twist and turn a little over the next weeks.

imp:

 

[skyblueman]

If they did I don't get that.

Surely if you put your own company into admin you can't then buy it yourself?

Otherwise that would just be a way people could keep chopping off debts?

Absolutely they can put a bid in to buy it just like anyone else - nothing to stop them at all - standard practice

 

[covcity4life]

I will take that as a back hander.

We did have a common belief before that this squad was good enough to turn that start round and make the play off's.

I think we were right until Devine intervention hit.

yes we were

of course the nagtive guys will say they were right now as we finish 14th lol

 

[dongonzalos]

Absolutely they can put a bid in to buy it just like anyone else - nothing to stop them at all - standard practice

Wow

So if you build up debts, why do most companies not put themselves into admin then buy themselves back for half the debt?

 

[skybluegod]

I might be wrong but I think sisu can only bid if the two parts of the company are different but if they are one then they can't. I think that's it.

 

[skybluegod]

Don't really know if I helped with that answer haha

 

[dongonzalos]

I really hope that is wrong.
Crazy loophole

 

[skybluegod]

I really hope that is wrong.
Crazy loophole

I agree but when you think about it the administrator should do his job and go for other interested parties rather than the owner who put the business in that mess.

 

[dongonzalos]

I agree but when you think about it the administrator should do his job and go for other interested parties rather than the owner who put the business in that mess.

Unless the administrator has a lot of future business at stake with the current owners.

If he does have to go with someone else. Thad fact they can bid will just disrupt the process. In attempts to up the price.

 

[skybluegod]

Unless the administrator has a lot of future business at stake with the current owners.

If he does have to go with someone else. Thad fact they can bid will just disrupt the process. In attempts to up the price.

True all though hopefully am administrator won't think like that

 

[skyblueman]

Wow

So if you build up debts, why do most companies not put themselves into admin then buy themselves back for half the debt?

Well for one once you go down the admin route you completely lose control over the company at least for a while - the outcome is not certain although there are what's called 'pre-packed administrations' where the work is all done before hand and the administrator effectively sells it to the previous owners on the same day as the admin is done - bit of a minefield tho but you retain control and generally keep any other interested party away

Obviously you have to be mindful the authorities will be looking closely at what happened prior to the admin to make sure the directors didn't do anything obviously dodgy like ordering lots of stock and deliberately over trading

One of the key reasons tho is that usually companies in admin still have to operate in the same market as before and critically with the same suppliers - the very same people who have lost out - it's harder for them to deal with the same people that shafted them in the first place

 

[coundonskyblue]

Isn't this basically what Ken Bates did at Leeds?

I think what needs to be looked at is why Sisu would want to stay at the club? They will never get their money back so I can't understand what their plan is.

 

[Big_Ben]

True all though hopefully am administrator won't think like that

I think the administrator's role is to get the best financial outcome. What others may think about as the morally or ethically right way to go doesn't really come into it.

 

[rupert_bear]

But if they (sisu) buy ccfc ltd back with the Golden Share are they essentially new owners of a football club currently in the Football League all be it perhaps with a different name. Will they have to pass the "fit and proper" persons test to own/run a football club in this country ?

 

[Jack Griffin]

But if they (sisu) buy ccfc ltd back with the Golden Share are they essentially new owners of a football club currently in the Football League all be it perhaps with a different name. Will they have to pass the "fit and proper" persons test to own/run a football club in this country ?

That isn't exactly difficult is is.

This is the test if anyone wants to peruse it..
http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/appendix-4_2293633_2128219

 

[mattylad]

I am not convinced SISU know what they have got themselves into at the minute as this was a forced administration all be it they took the initiative in the last few days to stop it being ACL's appointed one. They may well not understand the position they are now in and are still scrambling to gets heads above water.

SISU as we know have been unsuccesful in securing furter investment they may well have genuinely thought that they were the only show in town and would just be able to start again as the only offer on the table. Its not like SISU and the CCFC directors don't have a history of making mistakes now is it. If this were not the case I would have thought we would have had a response from them regards the american being at the game on Sat.

SISU's question is not do we put an offer in, its more how much do we want to spend to keep hold of what were owed and common sense would say its not much otherwise they could have just paid the rent.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

That isn't exactly difficult is is.

This is the test if anyone wants to peruse it..
http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/appendix-4_2293633_2128219

Has anybody ever failed that?

 

[CCFCSteve]

I am not convinced SISU know what they have got themselves into at the minute as this was a forced administration all be it they took the initiative in the last few days to stop it being ACL's appointed one. They may well not understand the position they are now in and are still scrambling to gets heads above water.

SISU as we know have been unsuccesful in securing furter investment they may well have genuinely thought that they were the only show in town and would just be able to start again as the only offer on the table. Its not like SISU and the CCFC directors don't have a history of making mistakes now is it. If this were not the case I would have thought we would have had a response from them regards the american being at the game on Sat.

SISU's question is not do we put an offer in, its more how much do we want to spend to keep hold of what were owed and common sense would say its not much otherwise they could have just paid the rent.

Agree Matt. How much have they got left in the pot ? If they get a fair slice of what Haskell is offering is that enough for them to walk away ?

It sounds (or has been suggested) as if they tried to keep control for nothing by attempting to shift assets. If that hasn't worked I'm not sure what they're willing or able to keep chucking at what is currently a failed venture !

Only time will tell !

 

[Stevec189]

I am not an accountant so I may have this wrong but this is how it was explained to me by my brother in law who is an accountant. CCFC Ltd have at least two creditors, ACL and AVRO. 18 or so months ago the AVRO debt was made preferential which Fisher said at the time is common accounting practise. There is no reason why another SISU company cannot offer to take The AVRO credit in full and offer only a limited amount for the ACL credit e.g 1p in the £ (football debts have been paid lower than this!) thereby removing the ACL (and any other creditors) debt and simply transferring the SISU debt internally.

Happy to be told I am wrong but hat is my limited understanding!

PUSB

 

[skybluegod]

I think the administrator's role is to get the best financial outcome. What others may think about as the morally or ethically right way to go doesn't really come into it.

That's what I'm saying he should look at say sisu have done badly and it's there fault for this in the first place so he should consider other options first

 

[Big_Ben]

That's what I'm saying he should look at say sisu have done badly and it's there fault for this in the first place so he should consider other options first

Won't happen - his job is to make the most of what he's got to deal with, pure and simple. What went on in the past is outside his brief.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Has anybody ever failed that?

Yeah a bloke who defrauded £500K VAT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/nov/18/chester-city-fit-proper-person-test

But Carson Yeung, Thaksin Shinawatra & Alexandre Gaydemak were adjuged OK, till events unfolded to expose their true natures. :facepalm:

In truth Joy Sepalla & Tim Fisher are as clean as a whistle compared to these guys.

 

[Stevec189]

Won't happen - his job is to make the most of what he's got to deal with, pure and simple. What went on in the past is outside his brief.

Correct. His job is to get the best result for the creditors particularly the preferential ones! PUSB

 

[Skybluedar]

SISU COULD bud for the club, but where is the Revenue coming from for next season, how is the threat of going into admin any less than it was when TF stated it was inevitable?

 

[covboy1987]

Isn't this basically what Ken Bates did at Leeds?

I think what needs to be looked at is why Sisu would want to stay at the club? They will never get their money back so I can't understand what their plan is.

I am wondering the same thing, why would they want to stay at the club when the fans have in the main turned against them and certainly the present suppliers? They must have something up there sleeve which at a guess some type of sale to who and what is anyone's guess but cannot see them staying in any capacity as even the normal sensible Higgs trust have washed their hands

 

[CCFCSteve]

I am not an accountant so I may have this wrong but this is how it was explained to me by my brother in law who is an accountant. CCFC Ltd have at least two creditors, ACL and AVRO. 18 or so months ago the AVRO debt was made preferential which Fisher said at the time is common accounting practise. There is no reason why another SISU company cannot offer to take The AVRO credit in full and offer only a limited amount for the ACL credit e.g 1p in the £ (football debts have been paid lower than this!) thereby removing the ACL (and any other creditors) debt and simply transferring the SISU debt internally.

Happy to be told I am wrong but hat is my limited understanding!

PUSB

It depends what the end process is. In a normal insolvency any payment to a secured creditor would also require a carve out for unsecured creditors called a prescribed part (approx 20%). But then agian not many Admins exit via a CVA. Football is a different beast though as there appears to be the necessity to exit Admin via a CVA which makes the whole situation a bigger mess. If this is the case the size of the unsecured claims will be important, SISU/Arvo (if they have any unsecured debt in CCFC Ltd) could potentially veto/reject a proposal to sell to Haskell or a.n. other, whilst ACL could most probably do the same to a SISU offer (you need 75% voting value to vote in favour of a CVA proposal including at least 50% of unconnected parties).

As I say, without one sides agreement this mess could well continue !

 

[Tank Top]

Lets just assume!
that Sisu were successful in a bid to buy the club out of Admin, the question that stands out to me, is where will they play their Home games,I hardly think it will be at the Ricoh, even if they payed the Back rent, I would imagine that ACL, have had enough of them, long since.
This raises the question of moving the Show out of Coventry and Re branding, Would this be worth while, would they be allowed to do it, would they get the backing of the fans, I personally cant see it getting the support, to make it viable,
Getting Back to the "Golden share" it can only have been in one of two places, it's hardly like looking for a needle in a hay stack, whats the hold up, is the administrator trying to buy time for Sisu, to pull another rabbit out of a very well used Hat.

 

[BrisbaneBronco]

Lets just assume!
that Sisu were successful in a bid to buy the club out of Admin, the question that stands out to me, is where will they play their Home games,I hardly think it will be at the Ricoh, even if they payed the Back rent, I would imagine that ACL, have had enough of them, long since.
This raises the question of moving the Show out of Coventry and Re branding, Would this be worth while, would they be allowed to do it, would they get the backing of the fans, I personally cant see it getting the support, to make it viable,
Getting Back to the "Golden share" it can only have been in one of two places, it's hardly like looking for a needle in a hay stack, whats the hold up, is the administrator trying to buy time for Sisu, to pull another rabbit out of a very well used Hat.

Very good points Tankie. I do not trust the SISU appointed administrator one iota. He will be biased towards SISU for sure.
SISU will move the whole show out of town if they can. They will not give a shit about fans. However many they lose, they will gain in new supporters from the area of relocation.
As for whether the league will allow such a move, I reckon they will. SISU will make the point very strongly that their trade is being compromised by the fact that the owners of the stadium are not allowing CCFC Holdings to benefit from stadium related income streams which will affect how much is in the budget under FFP.
IMHO there are only 2 options.

Remain at Ricoh with new owners.
Relocate with SISU as owners