No not at all but might be a little easier to take than someone who doesn't like football and a Sheffield Wednesday fan, who have proven they can't run a football club. (So far)
No not at all but might be a little easier to take than someone who doesn't like football and a Sheffield Wednesday fan, who have proven they can't run a football club. (So far)
Elliot has a great track record doesn't he?
Elliot has a great track record doesn't he?
Wasn't the lease extension agreed at the same council meeting as the sale of ACL? Therefore they were effectively sold ACL with the 250 year lease for £6.5m then very shortly afterwards valued it at £45m.
Suspect that will be the subject of JR with SISU arguing that the 250 year lease, and it being agreed with the sale, makes it no different to selling the freehold and that therefore the disposal of asset regulations should apply.
I'm far from a legal expert but on the face of it JR2 seems to give SISU a better chance of victory than JR1.
And that will be SISU's arguement. That CCC & Wasps were aware of what they were doing and the timeline was a deliberate ploy to avoid having to confirm to certain regulations.I am pretty sure given the contentious nature of this that CCC & wasps will have been very careful to map the whole thing out.
OSB whilst you are around liquidation getting the odd mention.
I know under the old situation it seemed unlikely.
Any idea now the goal posts have moved could it be a likely possibility
You're missing the point. If SISU argue, and the judge agrees, that the deal has been deliberately done in a way that circumvents regulations he may then rule it be considered in a different manner.what are the regulations for disposal of shares? Which is the deal done in 2014
What are the regulations for extending the lease of an existing lessor?
Don't worry, italia's spoken with Wasps and its all part of a plan for them to buy the name and reform us in non league with 20K turning up to the Ricoh every week.From a CCFC point of view it would be a complete disaster - extinction. It is not a way to restructure the club or even start again
Apart from the Sheff Wed bit that could apply to quite a few CCFC DirectorsNo not at all but might be a little easier to take than someone who doesn't like football and a Sheffield Wednesday fan, who have proven they can't run a football club. (So far)
Don't worry, italia's spoken with Wasps and its all part of a plan for them to buy the name and reform us in non league with 20K turning up to the Ricoh every week.
Apart from the Sheff Wed bit that could apply to quite a few CCFC Directors
And TF is an avid football fan
Its not like we're saying Wasps purchased shares in ACL and then down the line negotiated a lease extension. The council minutes clearly show this was all agreed at the same time.
Yes. I think they would.just curious ....... if the Trust had or indeed did come out against Wasps would those criticising the Trust currently then give general support to their current statements?
Its a bullshit excuse that people are buying, it has nothing to do with the legal noise, and everything to do with distressing the club and delaying negotiations in order to leave the club no choice but to agree a sustantially mlre expensive deal with worse conditions IMO, and which has been backed up by a member of the trust who said wasps tried to get is to agree a 20 year agreement but we only want another 2+2 deal.Do you know of any other legal challenges that Wasps, Higgs and CCC would be referring to when requiring SISU to drop them?
From a SISU point of view I would think it would create a large amount of reputational damage
How many long established professional football clubs have been completely liquidated? It would be a disaster for their reputation (I'm not talking in the football world).I'd argue quite the opposite...
How many long established professional football clubs have been completely liquidated? It would be a disaster for their reputation (I'm not talking in the football world).
I'm not talking in the football world either.
Their reputation is playing hardball, not giving in, and being prepared to go high stakes for high risk.
Liquidation shows you take them seriously if they negotiate with you, with something you care about. Shuffling us on for low cost shows that ultimately you shouldn't listen to their demands, as they'll give in in the end.
They, and others like them, care little about liquidating businesses that fail. That's the collateral damage.
The problem with outfits like SISU us they would return to investment under a new name. Whilst the name SISU would be mud they would still be trading elsewhere with little damageThe lease extension could still only be offered to ACL
Can see that side of things NW certainly. On the other side their stewardship can be portrayed as amateurish, lacking direction, ill considered and their principle allowed investment in the first place on a poorly researched and reasoned assessment. A liquidation of a reasonably high profile team in the UK would damage their home financial reputation and put them in the spotlight. Would mean handling the brief media glare not something they come across as good at. But then again how big a name globally is CCFC in investment circles, I suspect that most of their investors are far from these shores and collateral damage wont bother them at all.
The lease extension could still only be offered to ACL
Can see that side of things NW certainly. On the other side their stewardship can be portrayed as amateurish, lacking direction, ill considered and their principle allowed investment in the first place on a poorly researched and reasoned assessment.
Sounds very much like CCC agreeing to a lease with a Football Club that was £60m in debt and predicated on the receipts from the decent sale of a player ( of which they had none )
It didn't do Higgs much of a favour either!
On the other side their stewardship can be portrayed as amateurish, lacking direction, ill considered and their principle allowed investment in the first place on a poorly researched and reasoned assessment.
Its a bullshit excuse that people are buying, it has nothing to do with the legal noise, and everything to do with distressing the club and delaying negotiations in order to leave the club no choice but to agree a sustantially mlre expensive deal with worse conditions IMO, and which has been backed up by a member of the trust who said wasps tried to get is to agree a 20 year agreement but we only want another 2+2 deal.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
It is a bullshit excuse but lets not pretend that most people are buying it. Most people had come to the conclusion that SISU should drop the pointless legals because they're not only pointless but also hindering the club long before wasps come up with the "idea".
If anything wasps have picked up on general opinion and used it to put pressure on our owners. Nobody has brought anything wasps have said because the general opinion was already there.
So no one on here has said "drop the legals and wasps will talk"?
So no one on here has said "drop the legals and wasps will talk"?
CT said:Are you saying it’s a prerequisite of Ricoh Arena talks that Sisu drop the legal action?
“We weren’t as firm as that. What we are saying is it’s difficult to shake hands on a long-term relationship while there’s an awful lot of noise in the background.
“So let’s not kill it off, let’s not fall out, let’s just stop for now and see what happens in the weeks and months ahead.
“We were never as dogmatic as to say ‘drop your legal action’. In a way, it’s none of our business if they want to have a legal action with the council.
"We felt it was creating too much attention and noise and we didn’t feel it was the right time to conclude that deal. But just to be clear, we weren’t as firm as saying drop the JRs. It’s not our business we can’t do that.”
So no one on here has said "drop the legals and wasps will talk"?
And everybody is saying it is bullshit and Wasps should talk?
There's two different things here isn't there? Most people think the legals are a waste of time and think SISU should give up but that is different from saying they are not entitled to make full use of the legal process and that they must cease any legal action before anyone will talk to the football club.They didn't convince me that SISU should drop the legals. I was already of that opinion as were the vast majority of our fan base.
There's two different things here isn't there? Most people think the legals are a waste of time and think SISU should give up but that is different from saying they are not entitled to make full use of the legal process and that they must cease any legal action before anyone will talk to the football club.
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?