J
Simon Gilbert @TheSimonGilbert 3 mins
Sisu boss Seppala threatened to withdraw CCFC funding following relegation, unless Ricoh deal could be agreed, Higgs' barrister claims.
Wonder what music they'll walk out to. Hopefully it'll be 'Satisfaction' which was the anthem of choice in the 04/05 season.
The Ricoh deal was not agreed. Yet the funding was not pulled?
Please don't tell me SISU do posture and make idle threats!!!!
Surely not.
Simon Gilbert @TheSimonGilbert 3 mins
Sisu boss Seppala threatened to withdraw CCFC funding following relegation, unless Ricoh deal could be agreed, Higgs' barrister claims.
The way things have been i thought they already had refused to fund us !:thinking about:
Just a thought why is this a Higgs verses Sisu case ?
Should it not be Higgs v Ccfc because was it not only Ccfc that had the option to purchase the Higgs shares ?
deal wasn't being done by CCFC using the option though ...... as I understand it as long as CCFC owed ACL money outside of the normal terms of business the option could not be activated. Rent not paid = no option activated.
I think the first thing that the judge will have to decide is who exactly were party to the deal. The action by the charity is against SISU not CCFC so clearly they believe there was no heads of terms agreed with CCFC. So begs the question who was to buy the 50% in ACL from the Charity doesn't it
Fisher admitted that CCFC wouldn't own the Ricoh and SISU and their shareholders would. So I can't see it as being CCFC that were going to purchase the Higgs share.
Quote: Higgs' barrister claims
Just a thought why is this a Higgs verses Sisu case ?
Should it not be Higgs v Ccfc because was it not only Ccfc that had the option to purchase the Higgs shares ?
Fisher admitted that CCFC wouldn't own the Ricoh and SISU and their shareholders would. So I can't see it as being CCFC that were going to purchase the Higgs share.
deal wasn't being done by CCFC using the option though ...... as I understand it as long as CCFC owed ACL money outside of the normal terms of business the option could not be activated. Rent not paid = no option activated.
I think the first thing that the judge will have to decide is who exactly were party to the deal. The action by the charity is against SISU not CCFC so clearly they believe there was no heads of terms agreed with CCFC. So begs the question who was to buy the 50% in ACL from the Charity doesn't it
Sub;67900 [LIST=1 said:[*]Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert
[*]]Report suggests council thought Sisu would liquidate club after council/Ricoh loan deal or could be persuaded to put CCFC on market.
[/LIST]
Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilberthttp://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/TheSimonGilbert/status/450960179656679424
Higgs charity claims Ricoh / council loan restructure took place after exclusivity agreement with Sisu over Ricoh negotiations had expired.
That could be a key point couldn't it? If SISU had a set timeframe to get things done and that had expired they can't really complain that another deal was done. Is this a back and forth or are we getting Higgs side first and then SISU?
- Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert
- Finance officer's report to council chief Martin Reeves suggests council knew Sisu would see council Ricoh loan refinance as a "hostile act"
Oh dear
SO when they say put CCFC on the market, does this mean to Haskell?
SO when they say put CCFC on the market, does this mean to Haskell?
SISU said they thought the early attempt by ACL to put the club into administration was ACL trying to prompt regime change
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?