Nick
Administrator
A meeting to express sympathy with them like the council? Will be pleasantly surprised and happy to be wrong if there's anything more aimed at wasps from the Trust.
LAST seemed to say there was a protest planned against Wasps but... it seems nobody wants to tell us what it is!
Of course but Sisu don't care about us. They only care about their return and any court case will be made much stronger when an asset with ~£80m loaded on to it is forced out of business.
And why the efforts of fan groups should go beyond "fuck off timmy"It's actually a very worrying proposition that in theory CCFC going out of business could work far more in their favour with regards to their court case obsession. Especially when we all know full well how ruthless they can be.
It's actually a very worrying proposition that in theory CCFC going out of business could work far more in their favour with regards to their court case obsession. Especially when we all know full well how ruthless they can be.
It's also worrying that some of our fans would see that as a positive because "SISU would be gone".
The Albany one? There doesn't seem to be a minute of that online, only a press release which doesn't mention accounts.No, it was raised at the trust meeting and then expanded upon by OSB.
I think we are all in danger of seeing conspiracies in every corner. There’s no criticism of the potential scenario being painted here, but I doubt there is anything in it. . I just think Wasps are emboldened by the windfall cash they’re receiving & are pissed off with our owners. So think they are okay in the short term without CCFCBy no means fact and just an observation, I will point that out first. It's not based on anything other than taking a step back and looking at things playing out.
Last time we saw ACL / Council / Haskell try to force a change of ownership and it backfired.
People have acknowledged that Wasps know full well the difficulty that they can put CCFC under and the latest thing is pointing out the accounts need to be filed so it is getting more and more obvious that it's the approach being taken. The silence towards Wasps about it is also deafening.
Have they / the council lined somebody up they want to take over and think it can be forced?
If obviously it works and we live happily ever after then great, if it doesn't and backfires again what could the potential outcome be?
At the minute the worst case is no more club.
*This isn't me saying I don't want new owners, this is me pointing out the risks and how it may backfire like it did last time.
Shame he had no money!Such a shame about Haskell not taking over the club. Seemed he was really into investing and making us great again
What could of been ey!
I think we are all in danger of seeing conspiracies in every corner. There’s no criticism of the potential scenario being painted here, but I doubt there is anything in it. . I just think Wasps are emboldened by the windfall cash they’re receiving & are pissed off with our owners. So think they are okay in the short term without CCFC
Fook me, why is @christonabike on the left in that pic!!Which is great if a new owner comes in and it all pays off.
It's also worrying that some of our fans would see that as a positive because "SISU would be gone".
If someone will pay up for it, doubt she'd just hand it over.Talking of the reset button... from what we know of Joy, do you think she’d sell the name, badge rights and effectively the clubs soul back to the fans?
I some how doubt it based on how vindictive she is. She’d keep all them locked up in a vault so nobody else makes a success
But decisions will have had to have be made by then and who says Wilson will move on, I thought he would move in this window which I call the panic window, the summer one is different not so much rush and panic.Don't see them going anywhere, The potential windfall of £5M plus from sale of Wilson will see them through the end summer transfer Window.
I guess in the past we had a ground.Don't we always have this clamour when the accounts are due/overdue ?
I didn't say it was the trust looking at it.A meeting to express sympathy with them like the council? Will be pleasantly surprised and happy to be wrong if there's anything more aimed at wasps from the Trust.
Actually it was they other way around. I raised it before Xmas. But no one picked up on it. Including the trustNo, it was raised at the trust meeting and then expanded upon by OSB.
Yes they brought back the club history from the administrator.Newport County fans bought theirs paid around £8000 I believe, not sure who you buy it off though if liquidated I’d assume it would be the administrator.
So your to blame thenActually it was they other way around. I raised it before Xmas. But no one picked up on it. Including the trust
Fair enough if that's the case, I stand corrected on the origin. The point still stands though that there wasn't a peep about it until the Trust meeting and since then it's been everywhere. Still looks suspicious.Actually it was they other way around. I raised it before Xmas. But no one picked up on it. Including the trust
What could be just as worrying is that the tax relief on the losses of "loans" say 45m in the two companies and the preference shares of 63m which could be worth more to them than selling on. All depends on what's available and how things are set up of course.It's actually a very worrying proposition that in theory CCFC going out of business could work far more in their favour with regards to their court case obsession. Especially when we all know full well how ruthless they can be.
Question. What exactly was the mechanism by which Haskell and co were going to force regime change? Ccfc has always been on the basis of a private limited company which means all the owner has to say and has said is no.
They couldn't force insolvency and the last administration served a particular purpose which benefited only one party at the time. Sisu were in control of the lead up and the administration
The current situation could force a change but it could just as well force liquidation if my previous post holds true. That's high risk
Everyone wants new owners if it benefits ccfc
Last time around it's fair to say a number of parties were remarkably... naive.Question. What exactly was the mechanism by which Haskell and co were going to force regime change? Ccfc has always been on the basis of a private limited company which means all the owner has to say and has said is no.
They couldn't force insolvency and the last administration served a particular purpose which benefited only one party at the time. Sisu were in control of the lead up and the administration
The current situation could force a change but it could just as well force liquidation if my previous post holds true. That's high risk
Everyone wants new owners if it benefits ccfc
So ACL werent showing people round and they didn't have Haskell lined up?I know what was said by the CT... never a reliable source..... but the facts are the only entity that could control administration was sisu. So the bottom line is there might have been a desire to achieve it, there might have been plenty of empty talk.... but it wasn't going to happen unless sisu wanted it to ..... and having set things up to break the lease and distress ACL it just wasn't going to happen.
Btw just to be clear I actually think the sisu plan was very clever and very nearly worked.
Darlington had to change their name but after 3 years applied to the league and got their original name backYes they brought back the club history from the administrator.
Don't think you can buy the original name though.( what I have been told)
The badge could be changed slightly so as not the same I would have thought.
So ACL werent showing people round and they didn't have Haskell lined up?
Maybe they were just incorrect in thinking it would work that easily or didn't expect sisu to have done the whole golden share trick.
It's definitely how it was put across at the time.
You have to stand back and look at it. Should be and is easier in hindsight. It also helped sisu to portray as under threat but my memory of it is that regime change first came in comments from Fisher. It was never going to happen and sisu had already ensured that by planning the insolvency to break the lease and protecting their position with massive losses plus the mysterious error as to which company owned what.
Or are we saying that sisu are doing the same trick again.... because that's deeply worrying. Put otium in to administration now and arvo as the biggest creditor control the process ... ie sisu do.
Thats my point, in hindsight sisu had already out thought ACL. ACL seemed to think they could force a change.But the point is it doesn't matter what ACL were saying or showing around. It doesn't matter what they thought or encouraged. The one party that mattered knew there was no possibility of it happening and had been working on their plan for well over a year
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?