MMMmmm (2 Viewers)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
would have accepting the CVA helped ACL?

Well they would have received a payment they are not getting. What's been gained by not signing it?
 

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
did rejecting the CVA help anyone?

That one may still be running.

If ACL were intending to accept the situation, it would have made sense to accept the CVA as they'd then get more money.

So, it seems probable that they're not accepting the situation. I guess that rejecting the CVA leaves them the option of taking an action against the relevant companies (CCFC Ltd, CCFH Hldgs and presumably now Otium) on the grounds that they should be treated as a single entity because of the unusual movement of assets, discrepancies in the published accounts etc etc.

Time will tell.
 

Snozz_is_god

New Member
That one may still be running.

If ACL were intending to accept the situation, it would have made sense to accept the CVA as they'd then get more money.

So, it seems probable that they're not accepting the situation. I guess that rejecting the CVA leaves them the option of taking an action against the relevant companies (CCFC Ltd, CCFH Hldgs and presumably now Otium) on the grounds that they should be treated as a single entity because of the unusual movement of assets, discrepancies in the published accounts etc etc.

Time will tell.

CCFCLtd are still in administration. why? think about it.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
The cva was based on false information. Would you sign something without knowing all the facts?
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Think he's got a point or two!!!!!

Wow you've got that right

tim fisher said:
"Sadly because there are so many different versions of events it's quite understandable that supporters don't know what to believe.
Quite right, is it what Tim said about Ltd being a non trading subsidiary with no assets, or the fact that there were assets in Ltd it had/has a VAT number, had the Golden Share, was carrying out the business of being a football club etc. the correct version of events?

tim fisher said:
"I know many feel that they have to stay away on principle because they don't want to give money to the owners. Let me assure everyone, whether there are 1,000 or 7,000 supporters inside Sixfields each week, it is going to be at a huge cost to SISU for the next three years.
I'm not surprised it's going to be a huge cost to SISU (shame it won't be a massive cost) but you have only yourselves to blame, you moved us to Sixfields.
 
fisher states the obvious truth and people get angry?

things that make you go hummmmmmmmmm

"Fisher states the obvious truth".......................if you believe that cabbage to be the truth, I am Santa Clause and Batman, Superman and Snow White are joining me for a little drinky at the Sickfield Supporters club later, I'll buy you a beer.
 

davebart

Active Member
Well they would have received a payment they are not getting. What's been gained by not signing it?

They would have got f*ck all. Ltd is £60m in debt with no assets.

If anyone had a gun to their head it was ACL. Accept what we offer or we liquidate the club.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
They would have got f*ck all. Ltd is £60m in debt with no assets.

If anyone had a gun to their head it was ACL. Accept what we offer or we liquidate the club.

They were offered from memory £568,000. The liquidation occurred to the them rejecting the CVA. What are you talking about?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Top