How would that benefit the club in reality? [as in get rid of SISU]
Potentially getting rid of Sisu not a good enough benefit for you?
New owners who may invest in the squad? I understand that is not guaranteed for sure but I can't see it getting better with SISU at the helm. Think they've had enough chances now to sort this mess, losing Mark Robins last season was it for me.
How would SISU still as our owners benefit the club?
I think if anything, you 4 need investigating for signs of sanity and for any ounce of genuine feeling for CCFC. Not one of you feels emotion, just constant appeasement to these awful owners.
They don't fight sisu's corner they're just not blinded by a hatred of them and they don't have a misguided love of everything ACL, unfortunately that puts the said posters in a minority.Paxo, Norman, Grendel, Stupot, you and a few others really are a mealy mouthed bunch. While the club suffers under this awful rotten Sisu regime you put up a constant stream of 'Why nots.' At every turn. Delay, deliberation, discuss.
There is nothing to discuss on this anymore. Us fans have had enough. Still you fight their corner. Sisu are rotten to the core. What part of CCFC in Coventry don't you understand. Don't answer, a rhetorical statement.
I think if anything, you 4 need investigating for signs of sanity and for any ounce of genuine feeling for CCFC. Not one of you feels emotion, just constant appeasement to these awful owners.
Genuine question, but if ACL or whoever have cause to believe something illegal has happened, and evidence to that effect... surely an investigation could be enacted regardless?
Banned from running the club or any football club for that matter.Exactly.
In anycase - what became of Craig Whyte who took over Rangers? There were some very dodgy practices there yet I've not heard of any prosecutions arising from the investigation into the liquidation.....
Paxo, Norman, Grendel, Stupot, you and a few others really are a mealy mouthed bunch. While the club suffers under this awful rotten Sisu regime you put up a constant stream of 'Why nots.' At every turn. Delay, deliberation, discuss.
There is nothing to discuss on this anymore. Us fans have had enough. Still you fight their corner. Sisu are rotten to the core. What part of CCFC in Coventry don't you understand. Don't answer, a rhetorical statement.
I think if anything, you 4 need investigating for signs of sanity and for any ounce of genuine feeling for CCFC. Not one of you feels emotion, just constant appeasement to these awful owners.
New owners of who? What?
Do you have proof that the council has taken profits or a dividend then?
I try to see a way forward not backwards.
Banned from running the club or any football club for that matter.
Still believes he's owed money.
If signing the CVA means that the murky finances of Ltd are not investigated then Don't Sign It ACL. We can't go on with current owners and the finances remaining un-researched.
Banned from running the club or any football club for that matter.
Still believes he's owed money.
Good. And to that end what would be best for club right now, AND in the medium term?
cant see sisu agreeing to that.It is clear that ACL wont just sign the CVA without conditions!!!
So what might the conditions be:
1. Guaranteed rental term of the Ricoh for N years (basically re-establishing a lease)
2. Conditional publishing and review of the CCFC accounts (including OK by Football League insolvency team) , as currently Ltd are in criminal breach
3. Removal of Tim Fisher
Ideas???
When it comes to non payment of rent ---- some people side with SISU
When it comes to taking on the council-----some people side with SISU
When it comes to trying to buy the Ricoh for peanuts ------some people side with sisu
When it comes to traveling 35 miles to a home game-------some people side with sisu
When it comes to signing a cva-------------------- ?
tbf if they have done anything illegal it would be nice to know (as indeed it would with any other previous board members who might, hypothetically, have done something).
I just don't understand why refusal of the CVA is the only way to get to that. Surely that risks ACL getting no money and, if nothing is turned up on an investigation, risks them open to counter-claims also, for wilfully distressing a business, and not taking the offer that was most financially appropriate for them?
Hoping one of the accounting genii around here can pop along and explain what alternatives, if any, are open in such a scenario, where there was sufficient suspicion and/or proof to warrant an investigation
cant see sisu agreeing to that.
Sisu will have to negotiate on conditions if they want the CVA signing....
Yes they will, and ACL will also have to concede concessions if they want Ccfc at the Ricoh. This is a Mexican standoff.
tbf if they have done anything illegal it would be nice to know (as indeed it would with any other previous board members who might, hypothetically, have done something).
I just don't understand why refusal of the CVA is the only way to get to that. Surely that risks ACL getting no money and, if nothing is turned up on an investigation, risks them open to counter-claims also, for wilfully distressing a business, and not taking the offer that was most financially appropriate for them?
Hoping one of the accounting genii around here can pop along and explain what alternatives, if any, are open in such a scenario, where there was sufficient suspicion and/or proof to warrant an investigation
cant see sisu agreeing to that.
Well outside my area of expertise, but my thoughts for what they're worth.
I'm quite sure that the ACL Board will have taken legal advice on their options in this matter and I'd be very surprised if they acted outside that advice.
As I understand it, the terms of the CVA include a "full and final settlement" agreement for the stadium lease, including the outstanding term. I've obviously no idea on how this is worded, but I'd have thought that there'd be a good chance that it would preclude any further action on the matter.
So if ACL thought that there were possible grounds for action against the various CCFC's on the grounds of mysteriously disappearing trade and assets, they may wish to withhold their agreement.
Spot on. The council use the term 'hedge fund' as if it's illegal.
It's like a legal battle between the Morning Star newspaper and Fox news.
Ms Sinclaire said: “I am fully aware of the complicated, multi-faceted nature of this story. However, in the case of the CVA meeting tomorrow, I must look at this from a purely political perspective.
"In times of cut backs to local public services, can the council really afford to throw away taxpayers' money by blocking the CVA agreement?
"The deal on the table will see ACL, obviously half owned by the council, receive around £590,000. Rebuffing the CVA will mean that the council receives nothing”.
Why is this a political thing now ?
The council, aside from rates, takes nothing from ACL so the local taxpayer as it stands has a capital not revenue asset.
Most that the council interest could lose is the decrease in the value of the shares it owns in North Coventry Holdings Ltd which owns 50% of ACL. It certainly does not lose £590K directly so neither can the taxpayer even in these times of austerity. In any case if it did lose the CVA money directly it would accrue only 50% of that loss (but that isnt the actual situation in any case )
What does the £590k actually represent current or future income?
clearly not as fully aware as it might seem Nicki
Would be interested to see what people think ACL have potentially lost by the rent not being paid (leaving aside legal fees)
Talking of £14m you've never answered the question about council loans (both Swansea and ours) that I asked you in this thread #143 ? Just like Swansea all parties agreed to the loans (SMC and council for Swansea) ACL and council.i think she means the 14 million pounds the council used of tax payers money to prop up their own business. ACL will have to sign the agreement if they want to retrieve some of that money. without the club the stadium is going to run at a bigger loss, a loss it has proven it can not stand up to. The mortgage can not be kept up by taxes, meaning eventually the coucil will lose its grip on the ricoh. maybe the 3 year plan is actually how long the sisu accountants have given ACL to go bust! just a thought
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?