Official - we are in administration already (1 Viewer)

[Sky Blues]

New tweet from Les Reid - same info about Golden Share, but different interpretation of what it means for the court case:
"BREAKING: I understand #acl think "golden share" with #CCFC Ltd, so whole club should be in administration @covtelegraph"

I think he's saying ACL believe it backs their case to include CCFC (Holdings) in admin.

 

---

[oldskyblue58]

New tweet from Les Reid - same info about Golden Share, but different interpretation of what it means for the court case:
"BREAKING: I understand #acl think "golden share" with #CCFC Ltd, so whole club should be in administration @covtelegraph"

I think he's saying ACL believe it backs their case to include CCFC (Holdings) in admin.

nice of him to catch up with the rest of us hey SB

 

[hutch1972]

New tweet from Les Reid - same info about Golden Share, but different interpretation of what it means for the court case:
"BREAKING: I understand #acl think "golden share" with #CCFC Ltd, so whole club should be in administration @covtelegraph"

I think he's saying ACL believe it backs their case to include CCFC (Holdings) in admin.

You see SB ACL" think" , no doubt in an hour or so we will be a bit more certain.

 

[grego_gee]

New tweet from Les Reid - same info about Golden Share, but different interpretation of what it means for the court case:
"BREAKING: I understand #acl think "golden share" with #CCFC Ltd, so whole club should be in administration @covtelegraph"

I think he's saying ACL believe it backs their case to include CCFC (Holdings) in admin.

So ACL want the whole club in administration? is that their design to Save the club?

Hhmmmm personally I think maybe we are better off sticking with someone that has financed the club for 5 years and seem to be willing to go on financing the club, rather than constantly slapping them in the face and hoping someone else is round the corner waiting to cough up some money.

imp:

 

[grego_gee]

commentary on here
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/2013/03/26/live-coventry-city-go-to-high-court-92746-33058077/

imp:

 

[Baginton]

I can come to no other logical conclussion but then why keep funding all season that is what befuddles me? Was it done on a hope of promotion while keeping exposure to a minimum...if so that is very very unscrupilous but were not in these peoples heads.

I guess if SISU agree to a long term funding of the club that will prove us all wrong, if they get out of their own will prove us right and if they are forced out we will never know.

why would anyone commit long term, when they could be booted out next week?

 

[Sky Blues]

So ACL want the whole club in administration? is that their design to Save the club?

Hhmmmm personally I think maybe we are better off sticking with someone that has financed the club for 5 years and seem to be willing to go on financing the club, rather than constantly slapping them in the face and hoping someone else is round the corner waiting to cough up some money.

imp:

But with the right to play league games in CCFC Ltd and the players in CCFC (Holdings) you could be opening a can of worms if you treat them separately. It would be more straight forward for clearing this whole mess up to let the adminstrator treat them as a combined entity.

 

[rupert_bear]

We are al forgetting one very important person in all this...the judge. She ( i believe it is a lady) has considerable discretional power based on the facts in front of her. This isn't a criminal case so no law has been broken she will consider alsorts including iffy practice, not sending in accounts, moving things like this golden share about and the reason behind sisu putting this ccfc ltd into adminisration and the word reasonable will come into play. She will also consider the offers made to come to an amicable agreement. I am not saying this gives ACL the edge but all sorts of bad practice seems to come from the sisu camp, that in my opinion will be considered. I believe if the case gets a full hearing ACL are favourites based on the things we know but then again there may be something else sisu have up their sleeves.
0

 

[bamalamafizzfazz]

BREAKING: Sources say #ACL may ask for application to be dismissed, & that club's administrator remains for now @covtelegraph

Can someone clarify what this means please?

 

[mattylad]

Lesreidpolitics @Les Reid
BREAKING: #ACL tells Mrs Justice Proudman it is applying to her to dismiss #ACL's admin order for #CCFC Ltd @covtelegraph

 

[fernandopartridge]

What happens now. Do ACL now move forward and say the club put themselves into administration not them?

 

[mattylad]

So ACL are admitting defeat in getting P&A to be the administrator which is as was stated on the radio this morning...its now up to SISU/ARVO and its appointed administrator to sort this mess out although not without ACL paying the costs of the dismissed action.

10:47 AM
Lesreidpolitics @Les Reid
... Court adjourned till 2pm so lawyers can discuss costs. See earlier tweets for now regarding location of football shares @covtelegraph

 

[Baginton]

We are al forgetting one very important person in all this...the judge. She ( i believe it is a lady) has considerable discretional power based on the facts in front of her. This isn't a criminal case so no law has been broken she will consider alsorts including iffy practice, not sending in accounts, moving things like this golden share about and the reason behind sisu putting this ccfc ltd into adminisration and the word reasonable will come into play. She will also consider the offers made to come to an amicable agreement. I am not saying this gives ACL the edge but all sorts of bad practice seems to come from the sisu camp, that in my opinion will be considered. I believe if the case gets a full hearing ACL are favourites based on the things we know but then again there may be something else sisu have up their sleeves.
0

the share wasnt moved, it was claimed it was, but it wasnt, so we are in administration.

 

[mattylad]

We are al forgetting one very important person in all this...the judge. She ( i believe it is a lady) has considerable discretional power based on the facts in front of her. This isn't a criminal case so no law has been broken she will consider alsorts including iffy practice, not sending in accounts, moving things like this golden share about and the reason behind sisu putting this ccfc ltd into adminisration and the word reasonable will come into play. She will also consider the offers made to come to an amicable agreement. I am not saying this gives ACL the edge but all sorts of bad practice seems to come from the sisu camp, that in my opinion will be considered. I believe if the case gets a full hearing ACL are favourites based on the things we know but then again there may be something else sisu have up their sleeves.
0

ACL were never favourites once ARVO came in to play, even they admitted that last week and were just hoping that special allowance might be made. Clearly over the weekend they decided they had no grounds.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Just a thought but what is the size of the ACL claim now ?

is it the outstanding rent £1.4m

or

is it the 42 years remaining at £1.3m

 

[mattylad]

Out of interest two days court costs plus all other legal and litigation fee's I would put at around £3000k - £4000k if barristers were instructed. If they were not then costs would be considerably less at about the £1000k mark. Any additional costs for the solicitors time etc you can't put a cost on as that is so variable.

 

[hutch1972]

the share wasnt moved, it was claimed it was, but it wasnt, so we are in administration.

But were still talking about 2nd hand info , sources say etc, i'm waiting for the FL to come to the party !
Not looking good though !

 

[bamalamafizzfazz]

Out of interest two days court costs plus all other legal and litigation fee's I would put at around £3000k - £4000k if barristers were instructed. If they were not then costs would be considerably less at about the £1000k mark. Any additional costs for the solicitors time etc you can't put a cost on as that is so variable.

WOW!!!! £3-4M costs just to get back £1M?? Doesn't seem worth it

 

[mattylad]

Just a thought but what is the size of the ACL claim ?

is it the outstanding rent £1.4m or is it the 42 years remaining at £1.3m

I am no rental lease expert but I believe it would just be the back rent. Can you imagine the anger from CCFC fans if ACL tried to take the club for £54.6m in costs it has not yet accrued?

What I would say is claims on any debt post the day of administration unless agreed in whole by the administrator I find are virtually impossible to recover.

 

[mattylad]

WOW!!!! £3-4M costs just to get back £1M?? Doesn't seem worth it

Im in the wrong job :facepalm:

 

[grego_gee]

Just a thought but what is the size of the ACL claim ?

is it the outstanding rent £1.4m

or

is it the 42 years remaining at £1.3m

interesting point

42x1.3 is £54.6m and would presumably be more than the AVRo debt so give ACL the driving seat.
Since that didn't happen maybe they only claimed £1.3.
but since the rent agreement is now already ceased it looks as though they have now missed the chance to put the claim in for future amounts .


I'd say its round one to SISU at least

imp:

 

[hutch1972]

ACL lawyer says the FL have confirmed the GS is with ccfc ltd. -10 today i should think unless there is another cunning plan afoot.

 

[oldskyblue58]

was just thinking that ACL could put in a claim for £54.6m plus £1.4m back rent to establish its position in the creditors pecking order...... wasnt suggesting that they seek settlement at that ..... infact in their own minds i reckon they have written off ever receiving it. If the ARVO charge could then be challenged to make it unsecured then ACL might get control of voting in CVA. Just a thought really no more than that

Administrator has to gather all claims from potential creditors, so contract damages could still be included (ie the licence/lease)

 

[grego_gee]

ACL lawyer says the FL have confirmed the GS is with ccfc ltd. -10 today i should think unless there is another cunning plan afoot.

In reality I don't think it matters much, we would have to virtually go unbeaten from now to get into the playoffs,
and we have significant injuries building up!

imp:

 

[grego_gee]

was just thinking that ACL could put in a claim for £54.6m plus £1.4m back rent to establish its position in the creditors pecking order...... wasnt suggesting that they seek settlement at that ..... infact in their own minds i reckon they have written off ever receiving it. If the ARVO charge could then be challenged to make it unsecured then ACL might get control of voting in CVA. Just a thought really no more than that

Administrator has to gather all claims from potential creditors, so contract damages could still be included (ie the licence/lease)

What are the options for SISU with the Administrator?
I would see them possibly buying CCFC back themselves maybe through a different entity....
or can they just demonstate funding and rescue CCFC?

imp:

 

[hutch1972]

In reality I don't think it matters much, we would have to virtually go unbeaten from now to get into the playoffs,
and we have significant injuries building up!

imp:

Agree with you totally.But would rather take it now than take the risk of making the top 6 and then being dropped down.

 

[fernandopartridge]

was just thinking that ACL could put in a claim for £54.6m plus £1.4m back rent to establish its position in the creditors pecking order...... wasnt suggesting that they seek settlement at that ..... infact in their own minds i reckon they have written off ever receiving it. If the ARVO charge could then be challenged to make it unsecured then ACL might get control of voting in CVA. Just a thought really no more than that

Administrator has to gather all claims from potential creditors, so contract damages could still be included (ie the licence/lease)

How is a long term rental agreement looked at? I thought it would be counted as debt accrued to date rather than one agreement. Does the existing agreement include any escalaltors?

 

[mattylad]

JP (ACL laywer) adds:"They (arvo/SISU) as debenture holder with a qualifying floating charge are able to appoint an administrator @covtelegraph

 

[grego_gee]

I am no rental lease expert but I believe it would just be the back rent. Can you imagine the anger from CCFC fans if ACL tried to take the club for £54.6m in costs it has not yet accrued?

What I would say is claims on any debt post the day of administration unless agreed in whole by the administrator I find are virtually impossible to recover.

I would think that too!, but there seems to be a majority on here who sympathize with ACL/CCC at the expense of CCFC.
In any case surely a claim for future rent would be difficult to press since ACL are free to find another tenant, and have themselves made the case that they are NOT dependent upon the CCFC rent.

imp:

 

[theferret]

In a roundabout way, ACL seem to have achieved their stated aim; that being the club in administration and a points deduction this season. It also opens things up for a possible takeover. By luck or good judgement, they appear to have engineered the situation they wanted.

It remains to be seen what follows. SISU may try to buy the club back, the interested parties may back away. Who knows, but I think the end game is near.

 

[hill83]

Let's just hope it doesn't end with no offer from ACL's mates and Sisu saying fuck the lot of you then.

 

[fernandopartridge]

In a roundabout way, ACL seem to have achieved their stated aim; that being the club in administration and a points deduction this season. It also opens things up for a possible takeover. By luck or good judgement, they appear to have engineered the situation they wanted.

It remains to be seen what follows. SISU may try to buy the club back, the interested parties may back away. Who knows, but I think the end game is near.

The way ACL wanted but at potential significant cost to them. I feel like they may have been slightly wrong footed by SISU although to nobody's real benefit.

 

[covcity4life]

Let's just hope it doesn't end with no offer from ACL's mates and Sisu saying fuck the lot of you then.

yeh i think alot of people are ignoring this possible scenario

 

[mattylad]

ACL lawyer James Powell,

We had a letter from Football League confirming share is with #CCFC Ltd." "The FA also confirmed the FA share is with #CCFC Ltd. That co is in admin, with administrator appointed by Joy Sepalla

ACL to focus on #CCFCs administrator "undertaking their duties", with a view to a takeover adds "They (arvo/SISU) as debenture holder with a qualifying floating charge are able to appoint an administrator

We held off our application for a few days to get to the bottom of key issues inc FL shares. We're grateful to FL. There were inconsistencies in statements from the club. It's clear to us the whole club is in admin." CCFC Ltd is not a non-operating subsidiary as club claims. Club exists where FL & FA shares rest, with CCFC Ltd" The administrator came back with a report which, from #ACL's view, has a number of inaccuracies& inconsistencies" "it's outdated. My understanding is players' registrants should be where the co with the share rests, #CCFC Ltd we'll keep keen eye on administrator appointed by arvo, which is SISU & Joy Sepalla. Our focus shifts onto this administrator doing good job.

Admin gives best opportunity to a prospective purchaser to buy club" "That could bring financial stability & future success for Coventry City." END of James Powell

ACL lawyer Powell wouldn't be drawn on if #SISU now had whip hand as #CCFC main creditor with its chosen administrator

 

[Delboycov]

I would think that too!, but there seems to be a majority on here who sympathize with ACL/CCC at the expense of CCFC.
In any case surely a claim for future rent would be difficult to press since ACL are free to find another tenant, and have themselves made the case that they are NOT dependent upon the CCFC rent.

imp:

No I think there's a majority on here who can distinguish between CCFC and SISU and know that the actions and objectives of the latter aren't necessarily in the best interests of the former.