Mean while back in court (1 Viewer)

dongonzalos · May 13, 2016

When you read the transcript
This is quite a significant blow for SISU as all the Judges who have looked at this. Don't actually think that SISU's first plan that they state the council turned their back wouldn't have actually worked.
So SISU were fuming by the council betrayal over this plan. Yet everyone whose looking at is saying it wouldn't have worked anyway.
If they went down that route ACL would have eventually folded.
So SISU's initial plan may have led to ACL folding according to the judges.
Now what would have happened if ACL folded...........

Grendel · May 13, 2016

Captain Dart said:
No one, Grenville isn't very good at logic & complicated stuff. Better at delivering sausages.

Logic is if you say someone isn't good at what they do then they wouldn't have accumulated significant personal wealth in that role.

Your statement was illogical. Anyway surely this verdict is a result of a legal technicality isn't it?

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
Logic is if you say someone isn't good at what they do then they wouldn't have accumulated significant personal wealth in that role.

Your statement was illogical. Anyway surely this verdict is a result of a legal technicality isn't it?

The technicality being SISU had no case.

Brylowes · May 13, 2016

I don't profess to know the ins and outs of everything that's gone on, but as I see it
you have two hedge funds who wanted the Ricoh.

Hedge Fund-A
Hedge Fund-B

Hedge fund A :had a great starting point as anchor tenants in the arena, they had the
chance to build a close working relationship with the owners .They knew the potential
of the place ,both as an international class sporting and leisure venue ,and as a vehicle
to drive up revenue from attached land ripe for development . Couple this with the fact
that the owners were keen and willing to sell, so the future should look very bright for
Hedge fund A and CCFC.

But they decide to try a different route to ownership, they launch a campaign of bullying
and underhand corporate tricks and brinkmanship, alienating everyone they came into
contact with including there own loyal fan base. They drag the clubs good name through
the mud, and then comit the ultimate betrayal of moving the club out of the city that
bears its name and has been it's home for 125 years.
And after all this they have accomplished what = Nothing.

Hedge Fund B : Identified an opportunity to take there club forward ,and at the same time
Take ownership of a world class sports and leisure venue. So they approached the owners ,
did there homework, agreed a fee, completed due diligence, came up with the money and
got the deal done minimal fuss.
And after all this they have accomplished what = ownership and future security.

And some people would rather be owned by Hedge fund A

Grendel · May 13, 2016

dongonzalos said:
When you read the transcript
This is quite a significant blow for SISU as all the Judges who have looked at this. Don't actually think that SISU's first plan that they state the council turned their back wouldn't have actually worked.
So SISU were fuming by the council betrayal over this plan. Yet everyone whose looking at is saying it wouldn't have worked anyway.
If they went down that route ACL would have eventually folded.
So SISU's initial plan may have led to ACL folding according to the judges.
Now what would have happened if ACL folded...........

They were unfortunate that the council had been negotiating with Richardson for years. As I've always said the Seppella could have learned a lot in terms of deceit, skulduggery and mid-direction from Lucas and co.

Some councils have given football clubs more money than the price of purchase for the Ricoh.

Why would you care if ACL folded if it ended up in the clubs hands? That would have been a perfect outcome surely.

Grendel · May 13, 2016

Brylowes said:
I don't profess to know the ins and outs of everything that's gone on, but as I see it
you have two hedge funds who wanted the Ricoh.

Hedge Fund-A
Hedge Fund-B

Hedge fund A :had a great starting point as anchor tenants in the arena, they had the
chance to build a close working relationship with the owners .They knew the potential
of the place ,both as an international class sporting and leisure venue ,and as a vehicle
to drive up revenue from attached land ripe for development . Couple this with the fact
that the owners were keen and willing to sell, so the future should look very bright for
Hedge fund A and CCFC.

But they decide to try a different route to ownership, they launch a campaign of bullying
and underhand corporate tricks and brinkmanship, alienating everyone they came into
contact with including there own loyal fan base. They drag the clubs good name through
the mud, and then comit the ultimate betrayal of moving the club out of the city that
bears its name and has been it's home for 125 years.
And after all this they have accomplished what = Nothing.

Hedge Fund B : Identified an opportunity to take there club forward ,and at the same time
Take ownership of a world class sports and leisure venue. So they approached the owners ,
did there homework, agreed a fee, completed due diligence, came up with the money and
got the deal done minimal fuss.
And after all this they have accomplished what = ownership and future security.

And some people would rather be owned by Hedge fund A

What a load of bollocks

DazzleTommyDazzle · May 13, 2016

It would be fair to presume that JS and SISU were (at the very least) pretty good at what I understand they used to do, which I believe did not primarily involve running trading companies.

The issue that's relevant to us is how good they have been/will be in running our football club.

I think it would be fair to say that if this had been their core business, they probably wouldn't have "accumulated significant personal wealth" from it.

My main concern is that they seem to struggle to build relationships - or perhaps to understand the importance of building relationships - with other organisations that are important to the long term running of the club.

The ACL/CCC fall out has been well debated but the danger is that it seems probable that we're now going down the route of legal action with Wasps. The problem with that is that in the absence of the stadium that Mr Fisher promised us almost three years ago, we need them more than they need us.

Brylowes · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
What a load of bollocks

Cheers!

albatross · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
They were unfortunate that the council had been negotiating with Richardson for years. As I've always said the Seppella could have learned a lot in terms of deceit, skulduggery and mid-direction from Lucas and co.

Some councils have given football clubs more money than the price of purchase for the Ricoh.

Why would you care if ACL folded if it ended up in the clubs hands? That would have been a perfect outcome surely.

Nothing "unfortunate" about it. Total incompetence and arrogance on SISU's part.

dongonzalos · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
They were unfortunate that the council had been negotiating with Richardson for years. As I've always said the Seppella could have learned a lot in terms of deceit, skulduggery and mid-direction from Lucas and co.

Some councils have given football clubs more money than the price of purchase for the Ricoh.

Why would you care if ACL folded if it ended up in the clubs hands? That would have been a perfect outcome surely.

This way the charity got half their money back.
For me perfect, would have been the club getting all of ACL and the charity getting every penny back.

Grendel · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Come on. You can't tell me you wouldn't have been pleased if SISU had have won?

Considering that, you've took it well and posted with dignity. You've accepted the judgements and clearly stated it's time to call it a day on the legal BS. Jees, what do you have to do to pay a complement around here

Why would anyone care if sisu won?

chiefdave · May 13, 2016

oldskyblue58 said:
From what I can see legal opinion is that the public tendering etc applies to land and property (ie not shares) and that councils are able to dispose in any manner they see fit

This is the area we're in really isn't it. The court cases aren't saying who is right or wrong but looking at the details to see if any laws have been broken on a technicality.

If the court believes that CCC deliberately conducted the sale to Wasps in a manner which circumvented the rules (for example giving them the 200 years lease, which we all know is essentially the freehold, rather than selling the freehold itself) is there scope for them saying the rules should still apply? Imagine that is the kind of tactic SISU will employ for JR2.

Nick said:
That's the thing, even when SISU go the council will still in some way have things to do with the club.

It would have been nice, now there is a new leader, if rather than just saying SISU should stop legal action there was an invitation for everyone to get round the table and see if there is a way forward.

For me the damage SISU have done can be reversed by any new owner. The damage CCC have done will take decades to recover from.

Deleted member 2477 · May 13, 2016

Looks a good explination to me grendel unless you cant see the wood for the trees in sisu enchanted wood

westcountry_skyblue · May 13, 2016

They wanted the Ricoh for nothing originally,And have fell on their sword.And are now looking for scraps to hold on to.
Just go SISU let us fans buy the club !!!

albatross · May 13, 2016

westcountry_skyblue said:
They wanted the Ricoh for nothing originally,And have fell on their sword.And are now looking for scraps to hold on to.
Just go SISU let us fans buy the club !!!

Falling on you sword usually implies taking responsibility for your actions and some sort of self sacrifice to atone...... don't see that here

stupot07 · May 13, 2016

Not the "they wanted it for free line", what bollocks.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Nick · May 13, 2016

westcountry_skyblue said:
They wanted the Ricoh for nothing originally,And have fell on their sword.And are now looking for scraps to hold on to.
Just go SISU let us fans buy the club !!!

How will the fans buy the club?

torchomatic · May 13, 2016

chiefdave said:
This is the area we're in really isn't it. The court cases aren't saying who is right or wrong but looking at the details to see if any laws have been broken on a technicality.

If the court believes that CCC deliberately conducted the sale to Wasps in a manner which circumvented the rules (for example giving them the 200 years lease, which we all know is essentially the freehold, rather than selling the freehold itself) is there scope for them saying the rules should still apply? Imagine that is the kind of tactic SISU will employ for JR2.

It would have been nice, now there is a new leader, if rather than just saying SISU should stop legal action there was an invitation for everyone to get round the table and see if there is a way forward.

For me the damage SISU have done can be reversed by any new owner. The damage CCC have done will take decades to recover from.

Absolutely, which is why it is so frustrating that CCC gave such a ridiculously long lease to Wasps. Sisu won't be here forever and the Wasps sale will still be damaging the club well after SISU are gone and forgotten.

The new leader could have made a mark in the sand here.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
Why would anyone care if sisu won?

You tell me. You're the one with a bee in their bonnet.

You're not having a good time of late are you? What, with todays news of the back of our highest ever points tally and best finish in league one since coming down meaning you can't call for TM's head it's been a tough time for you. Try calling 02476 678678. Someone there will always listen to you.

torchomatic · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
To be fair to Nick, Torch and FP (not that I lump them in with SISU in the first place myself) they've all took it on the chin with a great deal of dignity.

They clearly accept SISU are flogging a dead horse and have questioned their logic in carrying on while not making excuses for them. Can't say fairer than that.

Took it on the chin? Not sure what to make of that. Not bothered who wins or loses, just want stability for my footy team. Not going to get that regardless of the result.

However i do want CCC to be held to account as they damaged CCFC just as much as SISU.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Nick · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
You tell me. You're the one with a bee in their bonnet.

You're not having a good time of late are you? What, with todays news of the back of our highest ever points tally and best finish in league one since coming down meaning you can't call for TM's head it's been a tough time for you. Try calling 02476 678678. Someone there will always listen to you.

I got fed up ringing that, they would never tell me what they were wearing.

Grendel · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
You tell me. You're the one with a bee in their bonnet.

You're not having a good time of late are you? What, with todays news of the back of our highest ever points tally and best finish in league one since coming down meaning you can't call for TM's head it's been a tough time for you. Try calling 02476 678678. Someone there will always listen to you.

What are you on about? We failed this season from the position we were in. No argument there.

I said the cracks were showing in December and action was needed. I was right you with your silly post after the Bury game were wrong.

I have always said the case was unwinnable so do not see your point.

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

torchomatic said:
Took it on the chin? Not sure what to make of that. Not bothered who wins or loses, just want stability for my footy team. Not going to get that regardless of the result.

However i do want CCC to be held to account as they damaged CCFC just as much as SISU.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Fair enough.

Out of interest who do you want to hold SISU to account?

torchomatic · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Fair enough.

Out of interest who do you want to hold SISU to account?

The courts have already done that. Ultimately i hope their investors start wanting their cash back.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

Grendel said:
What are you on about? We failed this season from the position we were in. No argument there.

I said the cracks were showing in December and action was needed. I was right you with your silly post after the Bury game were wrong.

I have always said the case was unwinnable so do not see your point.

You also might find this link helpful http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/stress-anxiety-depression/Pages/controlling-anger.aspx

clint van damme · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Fair enough.

Out of interest who do you want to hold SISU to account?

Maybe SISUs investors will want to hold them to account, I'm not one.

I am a council tax payer though, and I think they should be accountable for their part in this mess.

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

torchomatic said:
The courts have already done that. Ultimately i hope their investors start wanting their cash back.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Can't argue with that.

skybluetony176 · May 13, 2016

clint van damme said:
Maybe SISUs investors will want to hold them to account, I'm not one.

I am a council tax payer though, and I think they should be accountable for their part in this mess.

SISU's investors holding them to account won't be on a morals basis though. It will be more like what the fuck have you been spanking my money on and how am I going to get it back with interest basis. I can't imagine that JS is having a comfortable nights sleep tonight.

Chipfat · May 13, 2016

I'm not sure on the pitch was a failure, asked at the start of the season would you take top 10, most would of snapped the hand off that offer. My feeling is of disappointment not failure with the final position, we ended up being only 2 wins away from play offs, not trying to fight off relegation on the last day, that has to count for something. We have to now build again and try to push on and be a bit more consistent throughout the season, TM will have picked up a lot from this season, hope for a more settled back 4 and try not to make the same mistakes.

This season was and will be recorded for lots pf positives on the field and should give a platform to go and bring in the right players of the right age and experience to gain at least a play off place. No excuses for TM then.

ccfcway · May 13, 2016

Brylowes said:
I don't profess to know the ins and outs of everything that's gone on, but as I see it
you have two hedge funds who wanted the Ricoh.

Hedge Fund-A
Hedge Fund-B

Hedge fund A :had a great starting point as anchor tenants in the arena, they had the
chance to build a close working relationship with the owners .They knew the potential
of the place ,both as an international class sporting and leisure venue ,and as a vehicle
to drive up revenue from attached land ripe for development . Couple this with the fact
that the owners were keen and willing to sell, so the future should look very bright for
Hedge fund A and CCFC.

But they decide to try a different route to ownership, they launch a campaign of bullying
and underhand corporate tricks and brinkmanship, alienating everyone they came into
contact with including there own loyal fan base. They drag the clubs good name through
the mud, and then comit the ultimate betrayal of moving the club out of the city that
bears its name and has been it's home for 125 years.
And after all this they have accomplished what = Nothing.

Hedge Fund B : Identified an opportunity to take there club forward ,and at the same time
Take ownership of a world class sports and leisure venue. So they approached the owners ,
did there homework, agreed a fee, completed due diligence, came up with the money and
got the deal done minimal fuss.
And after all this they have accomplished what = ownership and future security.

And some people would rather be owned by Hedge fund A

how come Hedgefund A "comit the ultimate betrayal of moving the club out of the city" and yet Hedgefund B, who did the same "Identified an opportunity to take there club forward"

both are as bad as each other !

SkyblueBazza · May 13, 2016

ccfcway said:
how come Hedgefund A "comit the ultimate betrayal of moving the club out of the city" and yet Hedgefund B, who did the same "Identified an opportunity to take there club forward"

both are as bad as each other !

Not strictly true...Hedgefund 2 went on to bigger & better things & better deals. Hedgefund 1 went to Sickfields and back again, succeeding only in pissing off an awful lot of people along the way.

...onwards & upwards PUSB

torchomatic · May 13, 2016

SkyblueBazza said:
Not strictly true...Hedgefund 2 went on to bigger & better things & better deals. Hedgefund 1 went to Sickfields and back again, succeeding only in pissing off an awful lot of people along the way.

...onwards & upwards PUSB

What rubbish.

So if we'd moved to sixfields and it had been a roaring success then youd have been happy then?

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

clint van damme · May 13, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
SISU's investors holding them to account won't be on a morals basis though. It will be more like what the fuck have you been spanking my money on and how am I going to get it back with interest basis. I can't imagine that JS is having a comfortable nights sleep tonight.

There's no doubt about that.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 13, 2016

SkyblueBazza said:
Not strictly true...Hedgefund 2 went on to bigger & better things & better deals. Hedgefund 1 went to Sickfields and back again, succeeding only in pissing off an awful lot of people along the way.

...onwards & upwards PUSB

So if we moved 80 miles away because we saw an opportunity to be successful and better the club, you would be ok with that? it's attitudes like that which are part of the problem.

dongonzalos · May 13, 2016

chiefdave said:
This is the area we're in really isn't it. The court cases aren't saying who is right or wrong but looking at the details to see if any laws have been broken on a technicality.

If the court believes that CCC deliberately conducted the sale to Wasps in a manner which circumvented the rules (for example giving them the 200 years lease, which we all know is essentially the freehold, rather than selling the freehold itself) is there scope for them saying the rules should still apply? Imagine that is the kind of tactic SISU will employ for JR2.

It would have been nice, now there is a new leader, if rather than just saying SISU should stop legal action there was an invitation for everyone to get round the table and see if there is a way forward.

For me the damage SISU have done can be reversed by any new owner. The damage CCC have done will take decades to recover from.

The new leader is just saying what everyone thinks. The legal action is a waste of money that could be put to good use on the team

Mean while back in court (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 2477

Guest

westcountry_skyblue

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency