He looked to have a good career ahead of him....
It will be interesting, in a car crash kind of way, to see how this all pans out. It's been questioned a few times on here in the past why people like Reid, Garlick etc have 'sided' with SISU after meeting with them, could it be we're starting to see why?
Well ! I've read, and re-read the Observer article. The Observer keep stating "Evidence" but do not show this "Evidence" If a letter was sent to Ann Lucas, it becomes her property because her name is on the Letter/Envelope/E-Mail and would think anything to show her to be a liar publicly would NOT come into the public domain. Then to cap it all....I read the reporter is non other than Mr LES REID. The man who went to great lengths to "Big himself up" as being the one and only to get a exclusive 2+ hours meeting with JS. The one and only reporter on Twitter to delete anyone following him if they so much as raised a question in opposition to that which he reported.............and Samo asks me why I'm accusing "The Observer" to which I will once again state...I'm not accusing anyone, just putting out a question that has two possible answers to which posters can make up their own minds about, nothing more, nothing less.
It shouldn't take too long to find out if Lucas was fed false information by council officers working for ACL. That would be a very serious matter so I expect in the next day or two we will be seeing reports that they have been suspended pending disciplinary action. If they have done as she says they may also be looking at legal action.
Fuck knows! But I can tell you that Seppala sent AL a letter saying that leasehold was acceptable and AL has been less than honest about that, but... SBK doesn't believe the letter is real and has had a huge hissy fit about it. He got all sweary and threatened to go to bed.
Keep voting tory and give the wealth to the super rich and you just be grateful for that zero hours contract you have. Just a different perspective.
As I've said elsewhere CD those ACL officers would have expected the FL enforced compo of circa £600K to hit the books while making those claims SISU delayed them by around six monthsIt shouldn't take too long to find out if Lucas was fed false information by council officers working for ACL. That would be a very serious matter so I expect in the next day or two we will be seeing reports that they have been suspended pending disciplinary action. If they have done as she says they may also be looking at legal action.
You really need to let it go. They were bluffing Sisu who were bluffing them.
Are you still hoping that CCC and ACL fall over and Sisu can start the play for the Ricoh freehold again ?
So what you're saying is I should be let go that a public body has told numerous lies to the people it is responsible to and not have any desire to see action taken against people who have at best behaved reprehensibly, at worst potentially illegally
PRESSURE is mounting on Coventry City Council and its leader Ann Lucas as she claimed she had believed information from senior officers when misleading the public with false claims about the Ricoh Arena amid its sale to London rugby club Wasps.
The Observer can also exclusively reveal evidence to show Coun Lucas last week made further false claims, wrongly alleging the Sky Blues had only been interested in buying back the stadium, built by and for the football club, on a FREEHOLD basis.
The evidence, revealed for the first time, comes from a letter written by Joy Seppala, head of Sky Blues' parent company Sisu, to Coun Lucas in November 2013, days after they met to discuss a possible stadium deal.
Coun Lucas made the further false claims in a BBC interview on Friday following a Coventry Observer story which referred to her previous misleading claims that the Arena Coventry Limited firm was profitable before the Wasps deal, when newly published accounts revealed it was not.
Critics have today called for an inquiry, and said the revelations cast major doubts over the entire Wasps deal and use of taxpayers' money.
The revelations raise questions over whether councillors had acted on false information from senior council executives last October when they voted in private to sell the council’s Ricoh Arena shares to the then High Wycombe-based rugby club on a long leasehold - which the Sky Blues HAD also sought.
Coun Lucas told BBC Coventry and Warwickshire she had taken advice on face value from the council’s “advisers and ACL shareholders” - which included council executives - when she claimed ACL had been “very profitable” without the football club in 2013/14. The accounts revealed losses of nearly £400,000.
She also accepted she had taken information to be correct, without any request for further evidence, when asked why she had stated the day after the council’s Wasps deal that ACL was “washing its face” - making a small profit.
Last Thursday, in an article on the Coventry Observer website, the council leader admitted the Ricoh firm had not been “washing its face”. She said on Friday that all councillors had acted on the same information, prompting further questions about how much they knew about the finances behind the Wasps deal.
The deal with Wasps firm London Wasps Holdings Limited meant £14million of city taxpayers’ money remained tied up in a loss making company, amid unprecedented cuts to council jobs and services.
Coventry council’s Labour leaders have repeatedly stated they would only loan to viable and sustainable companies. Wasps, now 100 per cent owners of the Ricoh firm ACL, were also reported to be a loss making company.
London Wasps Holdings Limited reported losses of £3.2million the previous year in the last available accounts. In a statement to its fans about moving to the Ricoh in a bid to save the business, Wasps admitted: “We run a high risk of going bust”.
The council acccepted to the Coventry Observer last week that the Wasps' business plan is based on the Sky Blues remaining as tenants for at least four years. But the loss-making football club continues to insist it too needs commerical revenue from owning a stadium.
It claims to still be seeking land just outside Coventry's boundary to build a new stadium.
The Coventry Observer last Wednesday raised questions with Coun Lucas over whether she had misled Coventry voters, taxpayers and Coventry City fans after the newly published ACL’s accounts for the year up to May last year revealed the net losses of nearly £400,000.
As I've said elsewhere CD those ACL officers would have expected the FL enforced compo of circa £600K to hit the books while making those claims SISU delayed them by around six months
But at what time was this letter sent? Presumably after the Average League One rent stance; but before the unfettered freehold stance?
The 'unfettered freehold' line is confirmed in the CET article Simon Gilbert has linked to; and also - I'm sure - confirmed to posters on here by Labovitch when people met him: Deleted member 5849: can you confirm (was it you who posted he said it to you?)
Who was bluffing? Not Lucas as she's saying she's just relayed what she was told. Were the council officers bluffing, what did they have to bluff about. It could well be if they have then it is illegal, it certainly is if its a stock exchange listed company, you're simply not allowed to release false information as it distorts the market and the value of your company.
So what you're saying is I should be let go that a public body has told numerous lies to the people it is responsible to and not have any desire to see action taken against people who have at best behaved reprehensibly, at worst potentially illegally.
What I'm hoping for is the truth. Many others on here claimed to want the same until it turned out CCC might be to blame when it suddenly became 'it's in the past' and 'need to move on'. I would like to see the loan repaid by Wasps, either voluntarily or being ordered by the courts, so that the taxpayer isn't exposed to any risk. In an absolutely ideal world I would like to see this leading to CCFC taking a 50% stake in the stadium.
What 'numerous lies'?
Your starting to sound like a Sisu lawyer.
Wingy above has a point in respect that the money owed by Sisu to ACL was in that accounting period.
That at the time would have been £200k profit.
Few off the top of my head:
Money for the loan to ACL has not come from CCC funds
ACL is making a profit without CCFC -
CCFC only account for 10% of ACLs business
Lucas claiming SISU had shown no interest in a lease
Lucas stating they were hoping to rebuild the relationship with SISU following CCFC's return
Sure if you go back through the councils statements you will find more.
I can't help but think the the whole "State Aid" question may resurface in line with the Wasps and ACL deal.
The recent Council "we may allow planning in Holbrooks" statement was far more telling than it seems on the surface.
This ain't over yet folks!
But at what time was this letter sent? Presumably after the Average League One rent stance; but before the unfettered freehold stance?
The 'unfettered freehold' line is confirmed in the CET article Simon Gilbert has linked to; and also - I'm sure - confirmed to posters on here by Labovitch when people met him: Deleted member 5849: can you confirm (was it you who posted he said it to you?)
I can't help but think the the whole "State Aid" question may resurface in line with the Wasps and ACL deal.
Have to laugh at that considering the number of posts made on here in the past having a pop at more for being so defensive of the council! All I'm doing, as I have done all along, is looking at the currently available evidence and making a judgement based on that. Some people on here seem so blinded by their hatred of SISU they can't consider the possibility that CCC may not be whiter than white in this.
So what you're saying is if in the accounting period in question CCFC had made a large payment to ACL then ACL would have made profit. I'm not really seeing how that proves that ACL at the time was profitable without receiving income from CCFC, to me it seems to prove the opposite.
Italia, simple question, do you want to get to the bottom of this and find out the truth about what has been done to our club? If not why don't you feel that should be done? We've had months if not years of people saying they want the truth, as soon as there's anything said against CCC that suddenly changes.
As I've said elsewhere CD those ACL officers would have expected the FL enforced compo of circa £600K to hit the books while making those claims SISU delayed them by around six months
A technicality maybe but I don't think lies
Not withstanding they were still unprofitable without Incomes from the club and not the success claimed
It was one bloke, not a council statement.
Stop fighting Sisu battles and tell them to move on.
If I've read it right MMM, the 'unfettered freehold' comment by Lucas was in Jan 2014:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-council-leader-says-6600224
The letter staing 'long leasehold' might be acceptable was sent in November 2013, according to the Reid article:
http://www.coventryobserver.co.uk/2...s-over-controversial-stadium-deal-125024.html
Regardless, the fact is that SISU made an offer for the same kind of deal as Wasps when they were allowed to. JG is quite right in saying that SISU attached conditions to it which seemingly made it unacceptable to Higgs (disregarding perhaps the fact that it seems no one genuinely wanted to sell to SISU), but clearly there was potential for some sort of deal had the council and Higgs not sold secretly to Wasps. So on the evidence it's not correct to suggest that no deal was possible because SISU wanted unfettered freehold - that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
If the council had done what they said that they were going to do when the club returned to the Ricoh, that is leave some time to rebuild trust between the parties before talking about an ownership deal, then who know how things might have panned out in a year or two. By that point it would have been clear that ACL could not survive without the club, and also that the club did not have a feasible plan to build elsewhere. A deal between the two parties would surely have been the most obvious solution.
Instead though, the council rushed through the sale to Wasps, justifying it by saying that a business they had claimed was profitable when it needed bailing out by the taxpayer was actually unprofitable. In doing so they shut the door on the club forever, regardless of who will subsequently own it.
No one is fighting Sisu's battles you clown. People want to know what has happened in the destruction of our club. You obviously aren't bothered because it seems the council may have had more of a hand in it than you thought. Now toddle off back to the wasps forum.
Mature.
Do you think CCC should've taken the offer from Sisu despite it beuing worth less? Wouldn't that be illegal state aid?
shmmeee;849361 You know the questions said:The hivemind? Think it's the other way on that front.
Mature.
Do you think CCC should've taken the offer from Sisu despite it beuing worth less? Wouldn't that be illegal state aid?
Evidence for any of that being a "lie" as opposed to being badly informed (ACL's profit status) or he said/she said (the last two)?
What do you want to happen? Another court case? Wasps kicked out? CCFC handed the Ricoh for free? Can you seriously argue that giving the Ricoh to CCFC would have been better for the City of Coventry than the Wasps deal?
You know the questions, you asked them enough before you joined the hivemind on here. How about some answers?
Long and short is still that CCFC decided they didn't want to play at the Ricoh any more. Everything else is noise (on both sides).
Evidence for any of that being a "lie" as opposed to being badly informed (ACL's profit status) or he said/she said (the last two)?
What do you want to happen? Another court case? Wasps kicked out? CCFC handed the Ricoh for free? Can you seriously argue that giving the Ricoh to CCFC would have been better for the City of Coventry than the Wasps deal?
Mature.
Do you think CCC should've taken the offer from Sisu despite it beuing worth less? Wouldn't that be illegal state aid?
But at what time was this letter sent? Presumably after the Average League One rent stance; but before the unfettered freehold stance?
The 'unfettered freehold' line is confirmed in the CET article Simon Gilbert has linked to; and also - I'm sure - confirmed to posters on here by Labovitch when people met him: Deleted member 5849: can you confirm (was it you who posted he said it to you?)
The council was talknig to Sisu for three years about the Ricoh, two full years before entering into discussion with Wasps. Sisu were given the chance to bid on even terms, their bid wasn't as good a deal for the charity or the people of Coventry. Sisu repeatedly (even while bidding) claimed they didn't want the Ricoh long term.
Labovitz said they would accept a very long lease as long as all revenues were in place to me.
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?