Astute
Well-Known Member
And if the 5.5m and 2m offers were from two different situations why did they offer 1.5m cash and the rest over 10 years and then 2m cash when Higgs only wanted a cash payment?
They two figures of £5.5m and £2m are from two completely different situations.
I found the emails very interesting, but would of liked to have seen them in their entirety. They do paint a different picture than I expected.
As I have said though why did SISU try to get the Higgs share for only 2m? Had they got a yes from YB that was for 8m? If so did they only have 10m for the whole deal? They offered the 5.5m but only 1.5m down. Was it down to a lack of obtainable funds at the time? So many things that could have been to try and make out why. This is why I am not laying the blame at their feet yet. Would just like to know why if they were so close to getting what they wanted they decided to fight over just 3.5m when we lose more than that in a season. Hope it wasn't just hardball tactics that cost them and our club so dearly.
And if the 5.5m and 2m offers were from two different situations why did they offer 1.5m cash and the rest over 10 years and then 2m cash when Higgs only wanted a cash payment?
I have no answer to why they wanted to pay over 10 years. You suggest it could be because of the cash available for the whole deal - it may be the reason, I don't know. But that is not what capsized the whole plan, so to me this is a minor detail that turns the attention away from the real problem: CCC deciding to buy out the mortgage and run from the agreement with sisu. That is what created this whole sorry mess and the actual reason why we are not playing at the Ricoh.
See you haven't read or understood the transcripts.
The deal at one stage was £1.5M up front and £4M in instalments (over a very long period), but there was never any agreement about how to secure the £4M (with an annuity or some such financial instrument), so it was never concluded. The charity did not wish to be vulnerable to the company paying the balance being liquidated and quite right too!
Subsequent discussion showed that the price was much lower (possibly £2M) if there was to be immediate payment in full.
It seems that all the fannying around killed the deal.
I only know what people have told me through correspondence and verbally and to be fair most of it has been pretty accurate. Let's be honest if the documents released had not shown any of the subterfuge I would be doing an MMM now and taking a break -- or a Sky Blue John and starting silly meaningless threads.
It's a Sisu account of things.
Where is the Higgs account?
Hilarious...
"SCL considered that the football sector was one to which
it could add value by instilling greater business discipline in the running of a football club. "
Hilarious...
"SCL considered that the football sector was one to which
it could add value by instilling greater business discipline in the running of a football club. "
By appointing Ken "give them all 4 year deals" Delieu and Ray "I know a great manager" Ranson
Hilarious...
"SCL considered that the football sector was one to which
it could add value by instilling greater business discipline in the running of a football club. "
By appointing Ken "give them all 4 year deals" Delieu and Ray "I know a great manager" Ranson
I think you will find that sisu accepted a greater business discipline was necessary BECAUSE of Ranson and Dulieu.
I think AFC and Jacks strategy can be summed up as the Plan D approach;
Lets panic, find something totally irrelevant and post it as everything that is relevant is proving very counter productive to our stance.
If they had not been so greedy and wanted 10 fold what Higgs wanted he would have probably found in favour. However the Judge worked on the principle why the counter claim was so big and decided that SISU were trying to frighten Higgs off thus he threw SISU counter claim out first before he deliberated on the real reason the review was being done.Just finished reading the whole thing. Thought it was what the judge had said. Was about to join in with the ACL bashers and wondered what Higgs had been up to. Then got to the end and saw who had put it together :facepalm:
Points of interest? Many. But no idea what the truth is. If the judge believed half of it he would have awarded them 290k.
I think you will find that sisu accepted a greater business discipline was necessary BECAUSE of Ranson and Dulieu.
Yes SISU were marvels in the running of our club. Can you not admit that both sides have obviously fucked up?
I've been saying that for months and months and used to be called all sorts for it. Welcome to the club.
I've been saying that for months and months and used to be called all sorts for it. Welcome to the club.
I think you will find that sisu accepted a greater business discipline was necessary BECAUSE of Ranson and Dulieu.
A fair few people have been saying all sides have their part to play, they were usually asked to calculate an algorithm to work out exactly what % each were to blame though and ignored.
A fair few people have been saying all sides have their part to play, they were usually asked to calculate an algorithm to work out exactly what % each were to blame though and ignored.
If anything different than 90% Sisu and 10% ACL/CCC then you would be burned as a heretic.
shown up for the council WUM you are.
Still think they are trying to prove a conspiracy Fernando?
No, they're trying to prove that the council provided illegal state aid
State aid is not illegal.
But, it can be in certain circumstances.
State aid is not illegal. But, it can be in certain circumstances. I think it is important people understand that. The legislation apparently is broad and detailed, so expect a complicated JR.
State aid is given in many forms on a daily basis including lottery funding.
Yeah ,unlawful never illegal.
Yeah ,unlawful never illegal.
I know there are exemptions, even where there are exemptions there is a de minimus level.
In any case, the excerpts from council emails suggest that ACL was never in the financial difficulty due to the rent strike that was made out, the argument for 'protecting the investment' could be blown out of the water. The admittance that SISU had agreed to pay over the market rate for Higgs' share is important too.
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?