shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
A supporter told me last week, his thinking was SISU got us relagated to distress ACL.
Does this even matter now? Why don't we try and get CCFC back to the Ricoh not dwell on how much the rent was even if it was based on a national stadium. Yes, it was too much but don't buy a football club if you can't afford the terms from day 1.Also what you are offering up here is spin and hearsay and not concrete? Why bother.
@TheSimonGilbert: Sisu QC claims Sisu was strung along while council negotiated secret deal for ACL bank debt. Similar argument was dismissed in Higgs case.
Joy Seppala had made it clear her continuing funding of the club was based on the prospect of gaining an interest in the Ricoh Arena. Sisu QC arguing the council were deceiving Sisu. He said: “The council played Sisu along so Sisu would fund the club even though the council were not committed.”
@TheSimonGilbert: Sisu QC claims Sisu was strung along while council negotiated secret deal for ACL bank debt. Similar argument was dismissed in Higgs case.
So, other than RobS showing his true colours, has anything actually come out so far?
I can never follow from tweets.
Unfortunately probably is. Just what is the sisu bottom line in all this nonsense is a mystery, they lose this JR so what ! they win it so what ! Meanwhile our football team is playing 35 miles away, selling the best players, buying no-one of any significance and for what ? What is Sepella's end game ?I'm not being funny; but is this it? I mean seriously; is this it? This was already declared and dismissed last time.
Whatever your feelings with regards culpability, even those who oppose the council's stance in this, must have expected more of a 'smoking gun' barrage of revelations given it's SISU QC who's opening, and giving it everything he can.
Is this really why we are playing football in Northampton?
The least I would have hoped for was something stupid from Mutton - which I wouldn't be surprised at. But this? It just makes me sad more than anything else...
Keith Perry on the CT live coverage:
Interesting one to digest for those who criticise the council and praise Sisu for keeping the club alive by funding it. Are Sisu suggesting they would have pulled the plug on CCFC a long time ago if it wasn't for the pesky council?!!
I'll take this in the Cyndi Lauper sense but unfortunately cannot reciprocate.
Wait, so Sisu are simultaneously arguing that the council strung them along to keep as owners when they would've left and also that the council plotted to remove them as owners?
Unfortunately probably is. Just what the sisu bottom line in all this nonsense is a mystery, they lose this JR so what! they win it so what! Meanwhile our football team is playing 35 miles away, selling the best players, buying no-one of any significance and for what ? What is Sepella's end game ?
It is more than 91%.91% then is it?! Just my opinion Nick. I don't post often but won't attend a match until SISU are gone. So many feel this way.
@TheSimonGilbert: Rent was five per cent of the club's turnover at the time of 2012 negotiations court hears from same memo.
As we are nearly 500 posts deep into a thread about the judicial review you're going to find a lot of dwelling on things pertaining to the whole history of the arena. If you want the brave new world of a resolution to this saga then you'll best be served in other threads on this forum.
I don't think the potential origin of the costs of the Ricoh is spin as such and I was quite clear to qualify that it was something I'd heard and will look to be backing up at a later date. It's purely offered for discussion – e.g. other people might have heard different or could corroborate.
If you're pissed off about people discussing arcane minutiae of this case then you're in the wrong place.
That doesn't make sense at all to go with their argument?
I'm not being funny; but is this it? I mean seriously; is this it? This was already declared and dismissed last time.
WRONG! Did not dismiss a similar argument. Judge dismissed the claim that Higgs was obliged (through agreed terms) not to negotiate with other parties and that the prospective deal had likely fallen apart by Aug 2012 for several reasons inc. council vetoing any deal on Higgs share of ACL.
I think the angle is that the council wanted Sisu to carry on funding the club until such time that the 'new ownership project' could be fully activated. Allegedly. Is anyone reporting any evidence being read into court?
I smell BS, that would make turnover £25m. Must have based that on the old PL days.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I smell BS, that would make turnover £25m. Must have based that on the old PL days.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
So what's the supposed point this new ownership project kicked off? And again, how could any of it go ahead without Sisus approval as owners?
It just doesn't stack up. Why was all the PR at the time about the rent rather than this devious plot to remove them? If you were tricked into not paying rent why not go public? If you did it willingly why not stop the admin process?
This all has to be answered as part of Sisu's case. I'm not giving their argument any support or credence, just explaining what I think it is. TBH, the only way to really find out is to be in the court and pore over the papers afterwards.
(Thankfully my suitcase has returned so I may yet get to do just that.)
So what's the supposed point this new ownership project kicked off? And again, how could any of it go ahead without Sisus approval as owners?
It just doesn't stack up. Why was all the PR at the time about the rent rather than this devious plot to remove them? If you were tricked into not paying rent why not go public? If you did it willingly why not stop the admin process?
That seemed funny to me. Why would Sisu downplay the level of rent? (This was a Sisu argument right?)
Rob has made several major mistakes since joining:
1. Criticising the council
2. Criticising OSB
Big no no's.
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?