Rob S
Well-Known Member
Indeed. The idea that expensive lawyers can walk all over cowering judges is so wide of the mark. This guy knows what he's doing and isn't going to let either side get away with anything.
I expect the judge to be just as harsh to CCC when appropriate, don't read anything into that.
Did YB know about Sisu's intention to liquidate?
If you're looking at the decision made at the time, wouldn't it be reasonable to suggest that the council were planning for the worst case scenario of no CCFC and YB weren't?
(genuine question, I've not been following what YB were privy to)
Gilbert's Tweet this morning: Had a peek at Sisu's skeleton argument. Main thrust is terms of council/ACL loan were "wholly uncommercial" contrary to EU state aid law
How can it be uncommercial, if YB made an 'almost equivalent' offer?
Gilbert's Tweet this morning: Had a peek at Sisu's skeleton argument. Main thrust is terms of council/ACL loan were "wholly uncommercial" contrary to EU state aid law
How can it be uncommercial, if YB made an 'almost equivalent' offer?
'Sisu QC says ACL continued to string club along on rent negotiations in Dec 12 after knowing debt was to be sold to council'
Again, I can't understand this. In what way is the landlord's negotiations with it's fund provider in any way linked with the landlord's negotiation with it's tenant? I simply cannot understand on what basis this is drawn.
But decisions made were not about CCFC but about ACL surely?
Surely the whole reason for the bail out was to save a community asset from going under.
If other options were available there was no need for the council to step in
And one option that would of left ACL debt free
Sorry, I'm not following. CCFC's status effects ACL's business. Quite significantly, as you pointed out yourself earlier.
I'm just reading through the Telegraph page (didn't see that yesterday!) and it makes a bit more sense now. But seems to me that the offer from YB came with conditions of cost cutting. If that's the case then the loan from CCC would be more attractive if there was a regeneration strategy around boosting ACL's business, that wouldn't fit with an austerity program surely? It wasn't oranges and oranges as your first post suggested.
Sisu QC tells court PriceWaterhouseCoopers report found that profitably of ACL was “overstated” and the cash flows required for repaying debt “were significantly” lower.
Accounts skewed by £1.3m payment from Isle of Capri casino which were spread out over more than one year for accounting reasons but in fact all the money was banked in the first year and no more of the cash would be coming so should be “stripped out of the accounts”.
PWC said ACL only able to service £4m to £5m of debt.
What drove the need to refinance the loan?
But the other options weren't identical, they came with strings attached. Strings that may not have been compatible with the council's stated aims for Coventry.
Where have I heard that phrase in relation to a Sisu owned company before?
Sorry, but Sisu complaining about creative accounting?
LOL
As I see it -
If sisu were told all deals were off before the council took over the loan there was a real threat that sisu would put the club in administration/liquidation immediately. That would make it impossible for the council to provide the loan and also have YB to pull out completely. ACL would be totally bankrupt.
Can we not talk in riddles? It's early and I'm ill.
Edit: are we back to the "We Want SISU Out" conspiracy?
ACL are a private company? Are you saying there is a conflict of interest?
Why did ACL need to refinance the loan?
Gilbert's Tweet this morning: Had a peek at Sisu's skeleton argument. Main thrust is terms of council/ACL loan were "wholly uncommercial" contrary to EU state aid law
How can it be uncommercial, if YB made an 'almost equivalent' offer?
That'd be a no then. Sorry mate, you're going to have to explain like I'm 5 today.
5 min break. Seems to be a bit of a mess re: accounts. Sisu QC, Deering & JS in very animated discussion during break.
Surely the whole reason for the bail out was to save a community asset from going under.
If other options were available there was no need for the council to step in
And one option that would of left ACL debt free
5 min break. Seems to be a bit of a mess re: accounts. Sisu QC, Deering & JS in very animated discussion during break.
No, it appears you are though.
Are you saying CCC can't take politics into account when making decisions regarding ACL? Because it seems the judge doesn't agree.
They didn't - the interest rate would be considerably higher.
When public money is used in commercial ways it MUST be with the intend of making a profit equal to any comparable private enterprises. The ccc loan should have been on normal interests to follow EU legislation.
Beside that - when a bank had offered to provide the loan then ccc had no grounds for providing the loan itself. That's upsetting the fair and free market using public means - something the whole regulating of state aid is set up to avoid.
Anyway. Fuck arguing about it. What's done is done.
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?