James Smith
Well-Known Member
Yes and Angry and Homeless.
its liquidation (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter skybluesam66
- Start date
Yes and Angry and Homeless.
Sky Blue Sheepy
New Member
Ricoh Arena/ACL says it rejected CVA in best interests of #CCFC & fans against owners who brought "catastrophic insolvency"
I don't see what benefit there is? We start on -15 at best, the share will be handed to SISU and we still play in Northampton so we're a league 2 club with the same owners + still no ground. Where's the benefit?!
I don't see what benefit there is? We start on -15 at best, the share will be handed to SISU and we still play in Northampton so we're a league 2 club with the same owners + still no ground. Where's the benefit?!
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Says the person (and I use that term lightly) who said and I quote:
(my bolding & colouring)
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...nership-!?p=501924&highlight=chill#post501924
:facepalm:
Last edited:
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
It was the administrator
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Why when Tim and Bottom come up do I wish he'd disappear up his own one.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Were we fuck only one set of rats responsible for this and thats SISU
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
So.... predictions for Crawley away tomorrow?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
By sanctioning the groundshare they are adding legitimacy to the idiotic notion that the Ricoh isn't available for use. They went to some lengths to refuse any other bidder for Portsmouth except the fans trust and broke their own rules on the dates for points deductions during a league season.
They are as complicit as anybody.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Maybe we won't get -15 or any deduction?
It wasn't the club that rejected the CVA, it was the wicked landlord!
I don't see why we should get penalised for something outside our control?
imp:
The figure quoted applies for those leaving admin without a CVA. Holdings never has been in that situation and as the actual footballing entity shouldn't be hit further.
T
true sky blue
Guest
still think we will be to be honest. there still posturing like babies at the mo give it some time
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Sanctioning the groundshare was certainly helpful to SISU, but was in no way helpful to the club.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Government interest now....The plot thickens.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Actually I just thought this, Ltd had the option to buy the Higgs share that has now ceased I think, I'll try and find the relevant info later. But if so then they're free to sell to whoever, and that could be PH4 for example. So he could quite happily buy that share and the council would probably be happier to sell to him.
When SISU get bored of having no fans at Sixfields watching lower league football at what was once our club and actually don't do any work on the White Elephant stadium what are they going to do? Unless the reason SISU din't take that last offer was to distress ACL then I don't understand why they didn't take it. Financially we would have been far better off under FFP at the Ricoh the F&B was still on the table as well wasn't it? I think someone said it was maybe OSB58.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Curiouser and Curiouser.
The Reverend Skyblue
Well-Known Member
Have you proved this claim yet !!! or will you keep changing the subject
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
Maybe we won't get -15 or any deduction?
It wasn't the club that rejected the CVA, it was the wicked landlord!
I don't see why we should get penalised for something outside our control?
Let us know when you're returned from cloud cuckoo land, yeah?
Can you imagine the outcry from Rotherham, Leeds et al if we got away with this? It would make even more of a mockery of the Football League than has already been made of them by themselves.
Also, I really don't think it matters who rejected the CVA.
Agree with your last line though. Well, insofar as it applies to us, the supporters, who are being shafted once again.
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
Was that not suggested by many on here last year when we were given our initial points penalty? Didn't seem to matter. The FL apparently view all related companies as linked, it seems.
In truth what has changed today? A non-trading shell company will be liquidated. There was no indication even if the CVA had been signed that SISU were intent on returning to the Ricoh. At least now there can be a proper investigation into how the club has been 'managed' or mismanaged. The vast majority of the fans have no intention of going to Northampton, so the 15 point reduction although hurting the club, must also hurt SISU.
CCFC have effectively already left Coventry, today just confirms that.
CCFC have effectively already left Coventry, today just confirms that.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Back then which business was the actual club was under major dispute. If it (the GS) is now awarded back to Holdings then there is no doubt.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It should also be emphasised to the League that this is not a classic case of a club running out of money and defaulting-this is careful manipulation by the club's owners aimed at targeting ACL.
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
Good point.
If we don't get penalised then I shall unreservedly apologise to grego_gee, and move to cloud cuckoo land with him :wave:
stupot07
Well-Known Member
we've only not run out of money because the owners have continued to cover losses (like 99% clubs)
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Yes but the League has never cared about that.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Bwaaaark!
Delboycov
Active Member
"They want it all their own way...they're not going to move 1% this way 1% the other...if they can't play ball then get out SISU. It breaks my heart...it breaks all the football fans hearts in this city and enough is enough SISU! Get out of my town... get out of my city! I'VE HAD ENOUGH"
Nigel Warren
Amused by his rant at the time but I know exactly how he feels now!
Nigel Warren
Amused by his rant at the time but I know exactly how he feels now!
Nick
Administrator
Delboycov
Active Member
Yep! That's the one ;-)
Stupot Grendal CCFC 4 life Paxman Etal answer me this question if you would be so kind? Do you think that Sisu's decision not to accept ACL's latest offer was a deliberate attempt to distress ACL. If it is do you think that this is justifiable and to be condoned. If it's not, why do you think that they didn't accept it?.
skyblueexile
Well-Known Member
Been talking to a friend - an Insolvency Practitioner
Insolvency means out of league!
he would recommend a new CVA - sadly SISU as main creditor MUST consent
Revenue reject every CVA as matter of course
Insolvency means out of league!
he would recommend a new CVA - sadly SISU as main creditor MUST consent
Revenue reject every CVA as matter of course
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Les Reid @Lesreidpolitics 30m @cllr_kevinmaton I have tweted it Kevin. Appleton said ACL amendments would be unlawful so moved to vote on his CVA proposal @covtelegraph Expand Cllr. Kevin Maton @Cllr_KevinMaton 14m @Lesreidpolitics So were creditors expected to sign CVA without anything else - no agreement on where CCFC would play, rent, JR actions etc?..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................I say. I totally agree with Cllr Maton on this. Nothing said about SISU telling ACL "To sign CVA before they withdraw JS though was there?"
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No, I think they refused the offer because as ACL were refusing to sign the CVA.
ACL have told us they can survive without the club, they offered £150k rent, they should be able to recoup £150k easily through 3-4 smallish events, so I can't see how they can distress ACL.
