Football League statement - Coventry City (1 Viewer)

[LB87ccfc]

Time for ACL to be clear and direct with the fans and make a statement of intent this afternoon.
Time for them to accept the FL hearing and open negotiations once monies have been deposited.
Time for a fair and competitive rental agreement with access to match day revenues like all 92 clubs require and need to remain competitive with their peers.
This stupid amount they have received over the years from not only SISU but previous owners which has had a crippling affect on the football club simply has to stop.
Time for the fans to stop bickering with one another and push for this together.

 

---

[lewys33]

I haven't read all of this thread word for word (can't keep up at the moment) but I think the ruling is fair. Aren't the "unforseen costs" part of the liquidation process so ACL would have lost these anyway? That is what I thought when I read it, but I don't know.

Pay up, and get talking.

 

[mrbluesky87]

It works both ways though:

Time for SISU to be clear and direct with the fans and make a statement of intent this afternoon about how they move forward and that they will drop JR appeal.

Time for SISU to accept the FL hearing and make payment today.

Time for a fair and competitive rental agreement with access to match day revenues like all 92 clubs require and need to remain competitive with their peers - Spot On.

This stupid amount they have received over the years from not only SISU but previous owners which has had a crippling affect on the football club simply has to stop - SISU signed up for it as did the previous owners, whose at fault exactly? One for charging it and the other for accepting it.

Time for the fans to stop bickering with one another and push for this together - Spot on

 

[Warwickhunt]

ACL have publically stated they will not talk until the outstanding amount is paid, now resolved, and SISU stop any further appeals or legal action. There has been no statement from ACL to say their stance has changed and there has been nothing from SISU to say they are dropping further legal action, in fact all their statements on the matter indicate the opposite, so judging on all the publically available evidence there is still little chance of talks taking place.

Of course that doesn't mean either side could have done something that we are not aware of and I'm sure everyone is holding out hope that a deal can be done ASAP but I think it would be a bad idea for people to assume a deal is just round the corner. That's just setting yourself up for another disappointment.

So why have'nt SISU appealed yet then? Cos its a bargaining chip thats why?

 

[Sky]

A spokesman for ACL said: “ACL welcomes the decision made yesterday by the Football League. However given that matters are not concluded at this time, we currently have nothing further to add.” -from CET live update

Seems pretty clear that ACL aren't going to do anything until both the money is paid and the JR appeal date is passed so nothing is going to happen until the 15th at the very least..

 

[Buster]

Time for ACL to be clear and direct with the fans and make a statement of intent this afternoon.
Time for them to accept the FL hearing and open negotiations once monies have been deposited.
Time for a fair and competitive rental agreement with access to match day revenues like all 92 clubs require and need to remain competitive with their peers.
This stupid amount they have received over the years from not only SISU but previous owners which has had a crippling affect on the football club simply has to stop.
Time for the fans to stop bickering with one another and push for this together.

Theve been clear and direct for some time
Pay up and stop trying to nick the stadium

 

[ashbyjan]

Sky Blue Trust Statement - One Down One To Go - Don't Let Us Down Again

http://www.skybluetrust.co.uk/

 

[Warwickhunt]

Time for ACL to be clear and direct with the fans and make a statement of intent this afternoon.
Time for them to accept the FL hearing and open negotiations once monies have been deposited.
Time for a fair and competitive rental agreement with access to match day revenues like all 92 clubs require and need to remain competitive with their peers.
This stupid amount they have received over the years from not only SISU but previous owners which has had a crippling affect on the football club simply has to stop.
Time for the fans to stop bickering with one another and push for this together.

Nothing stopping them agreeing a deal with a directive that all legal action will be dropped before the deal can be acyvated. The Point is they ACL are still not talking using the Legal action as an excuse not to talk, Its not rocket science to pre agre a deal in the event of no legal action taking place

 

[bezzer]

I note Timmy is now saying CCFC need to return to the Ricoh until they "own their own ground" - no longer mention of building one..............

Yes I thought that was interesting too....

 

[covcity4life]

Nothing stopping them agreeing a deal with a directive that all legal action will be dropped before the deal can be acyvated. The Point is they ACL are still not talking using the Legal action as an excuse not to talk, Its not rocket science to pre agre a deal in the event of no legal action taking place

Exactly. This is just like all the yimes previous owners have talked of 50% ownership and the council and acl release statements talking about veto power. They wanna hurt the club

Get a fukin deal in principle done. If it fails then we know its sisu fault

 

[Rob S]

Where are people saying they don't want a rental return to the Ricoh?

In at least some of the offers made by ACL prior to SISU moving the club away the dropping of legal action was a requirement for any deal to be completed so nothing has really changed on that front has it? To me its very simple. ACL have been very clear and if SISU are serious about coming back to the Ricoh on any sort of deal they should drop the legals and then things can move forward. Its unrealistic to expect ACL to do a deal with someone who is still actively trying to put them out of business.

Prior to the JR hearing in court there were many people and campaigns based around the club coming back to the Ricoh on a rental basis. The high court hearing was pending, there were 'legals' taking place but Ann Lucas was very clear about welcoming the club back on a rental basis. She confirmed her 'open door' policy immediately after the JR verdict. However, as soon as TImmy made noises about climbing down and accepting a rental deal, ACL came out and put more conditions down.

I need someone to explain to me and anyone else watching, what the difference is.

JR date set, high court proceedings coming up = come back and rent
JR date passed, Sisu lose, possible appeal = drop legals and come back and rent

CCFC back at the Ricoh is my top priority in all of this. Absolute, number one, untouchable. New stadiums, legal bollocks, Sisu out, yadda yadda is all below that. For some it seems that we have to allow one or other (or both) side(s) to dictate ways to delay a return.

 

[Noggin]

Nothing stopping them agreeing a deal with a directive that all legal action will be dropped before the deal can be acyvated. The Point is they ACL are still not talking using the Legal action as an excuse not to talk, Its not rocket science to pre agre a deal in the event of no legal action taking place

nothing stopping them except for the fact this deal is going to take a very significant period of time to complete as there are still massive sticking points, football club want revenues for free, acl can't give them due to contracts (honestly ones that can probably not be overcome without a massive come down from one side), during this long discussion significant legal costs will continue to mount toward the JR, and if during this long period suddenly the court of appeal looks like it might go sisus way then the deal would be off wouldn't it. It's completely sensible and reasonable to insist the dropping of the JR (and the standing down of trying to destroy ACL) before talks take place, none of us would do differently in acl's place so it would be completely unreasonable for us to insist they act in a way we wouldn't do ourselves.

 

[will am i]

Surely they saved 100k?

Depends how you look at it. If they had paid the original amount and dropped the JR nonsense they might be kicking off at the Ricoh on Wednesday and maybe would have made more than the £100k they have 'saved'

 

[chiefdave]

They haven't appealed though have they? No reason not to talk once this is paid. (unless they do of course appeal)

True but Fisher has stated they have no choice and will have to appeal which doesn't sound to me like we've heard the last of the JR.

If they weren't planning to appeal you would have thought it would be a wise move to mention it in this press release. Something along the lines of the money will be paid immediately and as we are not pursuing any further legal action we are looking to opening talks with ACL as soon as possible. That would put the ball firmly in ACLs court.

So why have'nt SISU appealed yet then? Cos its a bargaining chip thats why?

To date they've left everything to the last minute. Fisher has stated, think it was to the LSC, that they will be appealing and there have been no statements from SISU to say they won't so I imagine if you were in ACLs position you would expect the worst until any information indicating otherwise becomes available.

 

[Noggin]

They haven't appealed though have they? No reason not to talk once this is paid. (unless they do of course appeal)

They are going to though arn't they, it's not far off a certainty from the way Fisher has been talking. So as usual they are deliberately dragging it out, they are clearly continuing the plan to distress acl and they need to stop that plan if they want acl to come to the table.

not that there is any chance of the talks achieving anything as it stands anyway, they've already had these talks for months and got nowhere and the main sticking point hasn't changed.

 

[stupot07]

Well as we are going down that line, if only SISU hadnt stopped paying rent, we could have all watched CCFC both last season and this season at the Ricoh???

No not really the same line is it?!

 

[sky blue john]

All the delays have worked in Sisu's favour for another succesfull season at sixfields !!

 

[chiefdave]

JR date set, high court proceedings coming up = come back and rent
JR date passed, Sisu lose, possible appeal = drop legals and come back and rent

I think you're arguing semantics. Prior the JR I certainly didn't expect any deal to be agreed, rental or other wise, that allowed the continuation of legal action against ACL, CCC or Higgs. I think it was generally accepted that one of the conditions ACL placed on any deal was the JR being dropped. The only difference is that ACL have made a clear statement, in light of rumours of talks taking place, of what needs to happen for the club to return. Personally I welcome clarity from any side as it gives a clear path to resolution.

CCFC back at the Ricoh is my top priority in all of this. Absolute, number one, untouchable. New stadiums, legal bollocks, Sisu out, yadda yadda is all below that. For some it seems that we have to allow one or other (or both) side(s) to dictate ways to delay a return.

In that case is the best course of action not to speak with SISU and request that release a statement ASAP concerning the status of the appeal. There's only two options here isn't there?

1) They aren't proceeding with the appeal, In that scenario making it public knowledge puts pressure on SISU and removes the last barrier to talks (assuming payment is made of course)
2) They are proceeding with the appeal. In that scenario any talks between ACL and SISU aren't going to happen as ACL have clearly stated their terms and SISU aren't prepared to meet them.

 

[skybluetony176]

Prior to the JR hearing in court there were many people and campaigns based around the club coming back to the Ricoh on a rental basis. The high court hearing was pending, there were 'legals' taking place but Ann Lucas was very clear about welcoming the club back on a rental basis. She confirmed her 'open door' policy immediately after the JR verdict. However, as soon as TImmy made noises about climbing down and accepting a rental deal, ACL came out and put more conditions down.

I need someone to explain to me and anyone else watching, what the difference is.

JR date set, high court proceedings coming up = come back and rent
JR date passed, Sisu lose, possible appeal = drop legals and come back and rent

CCFC back at the Ricoh is my top priority in all of this. Absolute, number one, untouchable. New stadiums, legal bollocks, Sisu out, yadda yadda is all below that. For some it seems that we have to allow one or other (or both) side(s) to dictate ways to delay a return.

The TF & JS open letter came after ACL's statement.

You could argue that ACL have actually given SISU an option out of the JR and save face at the same time. SISU can say they've dropped it for the benefit of the club and claim to be the good guys. Hell, even the judge advised them to forget an appeal.

 

[Kingokings204]

The 2 dates are interesting,

1. The 471k must be paid by the 14th.

2. The appeal end date is the 15th.

Hmmmmmm

 

[Grendel]

All the delays have worked in Sisu's favour for another succesfull season at sixfields !!

A typically helpful and thought provoking contribution.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

If only ACL hadn't refused to speak to the club before them paying the money, they could have already agreed a deal in principle ready for signing this morning and season tickets on sale this afternoon!

That's like saying you should book a wedding venue when you haven't met your intended yet. Again, you point the finger of blame at ACL.

Here's another view, how about SISU pay the full value owed, pending clarification of any sum from the FL; with a view to redress back from ACL should the FL rule on a sum lower than the full value? That could equally have moved the whole debate a few weeks back. But they didn't.

To expect SISU to have done that - which would cost them a value less than vexatious legal claims - would be seen as to stretch expectation, just as is to expect ACL to start negotiations based on a promise - especially with a party who's seemingly reneged on agreements with alarming regularity

 

[sky blue john]

Why would Acl sit down and negotiate with Sisu a return when Sisu will just use whatever information gathered at the next JR court case ?

 

[skybluetony176]

A typically helpful and thought provoking contribution.

Are you expecting a deal to be done before the Cardiff game or do you think we'll start next season at suxfields.

 

[James Smith]

Well it depends if you think Sisu and CCFC are one and the same thing - I don't. Any other owner could have negotiated a better rent, but Sisu didn't want to play nicely did they?

The previous owners tried that approach and it failed.

Actually according to Sisu other owners couldn't negotiate a better rent because of the loan. This is what the Sisu barrister and the judge said about the the reasons for the high rent. The Sisu barrister blamed the loan as the reason why ACL were "forced to charge" the rent they did.

16 MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM: I'm still not yet absolutely
17 convinced how important this will be to the issues 18 I have to determine. But commercially, ACL were in 19 a commercial mess. 20 MR THOMPSON: Yes.
21 MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM: They were in a commercial mess
22 because the football club were not paying the licence
23 fees and rents that legally they ought to have been 24 paying.
25 MR THOMPSON: There were two reasons, my Lord. The reason
1 why the rent was set so high was because ACL had paid
2 off the entirety of the lease by paying £21 million
3 in June 2006 with a back-to-back deal with the bank, so
4 they had a debt of £22 million.
5 MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM: Yes. I understand that.
6 MR THOMPSON: That was why they were forced to charge
7 what was, by any comparative standards, an extortionate
8 rent.
9 MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM: I understand that. I understand
10 why the rent and the licence fees were so high. But
11 those were the contractual rent and licence fees --
12 MR THOMPSON: Yes.
13 MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM: -- which the club were bound
14 legally to pay, subject to renegotiation, but they were
15 legally bound to pay them.
16 MR THOMPSON: Yes.

Judicial Review transcript day 1 pages 229-231 with my boldening

 

[lewys33]

Are you expecting a deal to be done before the Cardiff game or do you think we'll start next season at suxfields.

I don't think there is any question about that. Plus I would argue that the FL did not help by discussing this on 7th August rather than when the issue arose.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Why would Acl sit down and negotiate with Sisu a return when Sisu will just use whatever information gathered at the next JR court case ?

I don't think they can produce 'new evidence'; then can only now 'win' as I understand it, if they can prove the case was handled incorrectly on a point of law. Not evidence.

It's all to do with atmosphere, in my view. If you want to negotiate, candidly and honestly with another party, it's hard to do so with an adversarial atmosphere colouring events. Anyone who thinks that negotiations can take place with such a backdrop, isn't used to negotiating. Yes, there are always notable, yet rare exceptions; but the exception doesn't prove the rule.

SISU's lawful pursuit is farcical. It should just be dropped, leaving no excuses now for either party

 

[tuousis]

The really sad thing here is that SISU have had to hand over nearly £750,000 over the last two weeks (Court cost and now this) With what they pissed away last year in revenue, they could have paid for the share in ACL, had the inside track on getting total ownership of the arena, had the total support of the fans and in all likelihood have been playing in a higher league.

Just demonstrates what a complete bunch of fuckwits they are.

Agree with you Cheshire and Fisher spoils his statement by saying, when we build our new stadium." looks like a long term deal at the Ricoh."

 

[Grendel]

Actually according to Sisu other owners couldn't negotiate a better rent because of the loan. This is what the Sisu barrister and the judge said about the the reasons for the high rent. The Sisu barrister blamed the loan as the reason why ACL were "forced to charge" the rent they did.

Judicial Review transcript day 1 pages 229-231 with my boldening

So what? What relevance does that have to the club.

According to PWKH they based rent on the penultimate year of the "rent" at high field road. Wasn't that the case?

 

[sky blue john]

Prior to the JR hearing in court there were many people and campaigns based around the club coming back to the Ricoh on a rental basis. The high court hearing was pending, there were 'legals' taking place but Ann Lucas was very clear about welcoming the club back on a rental basis. She confirmed her 'open door' policy immediately after the JR verdict. However, as soon as TImmy made noises about climbing down and accepting a rental deal, ACL came out and put more conditions down.

I need someone to explain to me and anyone else watching, what the difference is.

JR date set, high court proceedings coming up = come back and rent
JR date passed, Sisu lose, possible appeal = drop legals and come back and rent

CCFC back at the Ricoh is my top priority in all of this. Absolute, number one, untouchable. New stadiums, legal bollocks, Sisu out, yadda yadda is all below that. For some it seems that we have to allow one or other (or both) side(s) to dictate ways to delay a return.

Maybe they have just had enough and seen the full extent of Sisu's spots in court and not prepared to let them piss them about any more. I know i've had enough of Sisu's bullshit and games so I don't blame them !

 

[Hobo]

Are you expecting a deal to be done before the Cardiff game or do you think we'll start next season at suxfields.

You are asking the wrong person in Grendel, let's face it he proclaimed the FL would not be making a statement on it yesterday, it would be left to the individual parties. RFC is the one with the inside informant, who prevents him speaking about what is actually happening due to confidentiality. ;-)
HELP....two of our most dedicated and loyal fans.

 

[Grendel]

You are asking the wrong person in Grendel, let's face it he proclaimed the FL would not be making a statement on it yesterday, it would be left to the individual parties. RFC is the one with the inside informant, who prevents him speaking about what is actually happening due to confidentiality. ;-)
HELP....two of our most dedicated and loyal fans.

A typically petulant and child like observation from you.
The answer clearly is we will not be playing Cardiff at the Ricoh unless a deal has already been agreed.

 

[ArchieLittle]

Agree with you Cheshire and Fisher spoils his statement by saying, when we build our new stadium." looks like a long term deal at the Ricoh."

I noticed the club statement said nothing about building a stadium, it said "We can today put this obstacle behind us and get down to the business of negotiating a return to Ricoh Arena until we can own our own stadium"

 

[Sky Blue Dal]

Surely they saved 100k?

That will help to pay off a little bit of the clubs debt. Great business mavericks they are? :facepalm:

 

[chiefdave]

Does anyone know at what point SISU have to provide evidence to the FL that they are actually building this new ground and what progress has been made. Surely with the season starting at the weekend they must have checked up on that by now.