dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
There you go again!!!
What are you on about? 1) That wasn't even today it was nearly 2 weeks ago (30/05/2013, http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/45443-Rent-Money-owed-to-ACL-rumour/page29) and that was only because I was responding to someone else who had mentioned it first, and 2) the £400k was mentioned today because it's relevant to the JR, which is what this thread is about. 3) We didn't know that is was a 3 year only deal. 4) the subsequent rent offers have no relation to the decision of the council to bail out ACL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Sorry, you lost me from here!As was pointed out to me by one of the more logical posters on this site
Sorry, you lost me from here!
Either way OSB is by a country mile the most skilful poster on this forum and I have huge admiration.
That is not sarcastic by the way.
As was pointed out to me by one of the more logical posters on this site, some of the details of the fabled rent offer (unlawfully) made by ACL during administration seemed to only have been made public (perhaps inadvertently) by our lord and saviour OSB. Now, I agree with Grendel and many others that OSB is an excellent and obviously intelligent chap but none of us are without bias. Even me. For Rob to request disclosure of any interests is not unreasonable.
No it was a Quote from the SISU QC, not the court judge. It could be untrue.Where? Was that not a quote from Court then?
That, to me, destroys the SISU case. It's a good business decision on CCCs behalf to invest money with a good return for taxpayers.
It's a fucking awful deal and on a company valued at less than half the loan,
How cynical. I'm sure the taxpayers will all be seeing massive improvements in public services. Solihull eat your heart out - Coventry is the place to be.
The real issue is where does the club go from here. The council will never satisfy new owners goals regarding the Ricoh let alone the present ones.
Lets hope they are dumb enough to build a new ground - otherwise we are dead.
You kept telling us they were clever and the council were dumb. Where is this so called smokeing gun.
As was pointed out to me by one of the more logical posters on this site, some of the details of the fabled rent offer (unlawfully) made by ACL during administration seemed to only have been made public (perhaps inadvertently) by our lord and saviour OSB. Now, I agree with Grendel and many others that OSB is an excellent and obviously intelligent chap but none of us are without bias. Even me. For Rob to request disclosure of any interests is not unreasonable.
Have you been to Solihull, blue lights in morrisons toilets to stop drop outs shooting up.
Has anything come out yet about a rent offer made via the football league ?
Just trying to clarify if one was ever made or not.
Would the deal offered by Sisu(whatever it was) have been better for the Council and Higgs than this extended loan?
You are right. Whatever it was. And did they keep to it?
If you are on about the road map they didn't keep to it. They wouldn't pay Higgs as agreed. They wanted extended payments with no guarantee of funding. And we all know how much they like paying their debts.
I am sure that if they had made a decent offer and been turned down without it collapsing for a reason that was their fault they would have let us know. We also know that they tried to make out that the offer through the FL wasn't made. We also know that each time an offer was made to them that they said they wanted that would have resolved the matter they turned it down and asked for more. The SISU idea of negotiation......
What about the rest of the points?
Just don't think such a good deal for ACL and CCC as their QC made it out to be yesterday, and without knowing(as far as I'm aware) the interest rate that is paid by CCC for the loan of monies now loaned to ACL unable to know for sure at all.
I personally think the council should fully disclose the details of both its own prudential borrowing terms and those given to ACL. One of the strange things is that the £19m interest earner they talk of they may have earned some of as a dividend.
Simon Gilbert @TheSimonGilbert · 17s Council QC says Sisu were dealing with the bank behind the council's back too. Sisu QC says there's no evidence for that.
And before you say that it was bad for CCFC I will disagree. Negotiations and low rent plus F&B could have been agreed. If SISU would have paid the 5.5m as agreed for the road map they would have had a 50% stake in the arena lease which could have been extended. But instead of paying the 5.5m they tried to get it for less. Or take it over 10 years without proof of funds. Since not doing as agreed they lost our club at least 2m income last season and have lost a lot of money in legal fees. Most probably lost a lot of supporters at the same time. And the debt owed by CCFC continues to go up drastically whilst we stay in Northampton. To make this money back Joy will need even more than a 50% stake in the lease.
Not good news for us at all.
I personally think the council should fully disclose the details of both its own prudential borrowing terms and those given to ACL. One of the strange things is that the £19m interest earner they talk of they may have earned some of as a dividend.
All public finances should be 100% transparent, though I also wish that politics would be allowed to be more than accounting as well. There are other benefits than monetary ones and the council has other roles than just to balance the books. It's not as simple as "best rate wins".
I wasn't in court yesterday and I haven't seen a transcript, so I'm not certain on the context and I'll have to go on what is written here, but didn't Sisu's barrister in Higgs v Sisu tacitly accept Sisu had approached Yorkshire Bank directly before August 2012?
There was mention made of such an approach on pages 27 and 30 of the court transcripts from the Higgs vs SISU case. Not sure any document proving the approach was produced to the court but I don't think at the time the claim of the approach was rebutted in court either
I think Sisu's barrister engaged with the argument (at around p106 of the transcript from Day 1 of that case IIRC), but as you say that's not producing a document.
Yes he does but he doesn't say it didn't happen ....... his argument could be equally applied to engaging with two or more potential lenders or solutions at the same time couldn't it. Such situations happen frequently in business there is no law to say you cant even if the ethics of it are not great...... pot and kettle?
What it really points to is that there was a poor a deteriorating business relationship even in March 2012
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?