CovInEssex
Well-Known Member
Possible to make a freedom of information request to the council asking a simple yes/no if they are the 3rd party?
Request to waive NDA - email to Wasps, CCFC & Sisu (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter mark82
- Start date
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Not like its a difficult questions. Just needs a simple yes or no. And one of those answers would indicate there is something to hide.
CovInEssex
Well-Known Member
Also that the sale was all done behind closed doors with CCFC given no chance to bid
win9nut
Well-Known Member
or understand what they were bidding for, or time to complete due diligence, or understand that a 250 year deal was shortly going to follow...
Stitched up...
Sky_Blue_Ste
Active Member
Wasps aren’t going to waive the NDA
Too many parties involved to waive it apparently
But they definitely didn’t need an indemnity apparently
Too many parties involved to waive it apparently
But they definitely didn’t need an indemnity apparently
mr_monkey
Well-Known Member
Where have you heard that?
Frostie
Well-Known Member
mr_monkey
Well-Known Member
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
That doesn't disprove anything at all.
Boddy says he let them know in writing about the deadline, names who he went to.
Wasps copy and paste "We were surprised".
It effectively just says "It was all SISU" without any actual detail.
Nothing is actually clarified though? If anything they have dropped the council in it.
Wasps don't think it was just a discussion between those 2 though, neither does Dave Boddy.
SkyBlueTam
Well-Known Member
The third party could be the catering company possibly? Especially if we we're after a bigger share of the F&B income.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Can someone go back to Tom in twitter and point out Ccfc and Sisu didn’t say wasps had anything to hide. Mark and I sent an email to all parties and one responded to say ok if other parties said ok. It’s not clarity to repeat what you said earlier that the lead negotiator has taken issue with from the other side
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
And now they have replied...?
Nick
Administrator
Doesn't really answer anything at all though does it? It doesn't disprove things that Boddy was saying either.
They don't even seem to know it was the fans who approached them ALL at the same time to ask for the NDA to be dropped. Wasps were cc'd n on the email.
mr_monkey
Well-Known Member
Well tbf they might as well not replied as it's just the same as the other one in more words isn't it
Nick
Administrator
"We didn't do that, we didn't do that, CCFC are wrong"
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
What else are they going to say?
This whole stuff should be the negotiations, not the statement wars. Now all we need is for Hoffman to pop up and offer to pay the rent, and we're back in 2013.
cooperskyblue
Well-Known Member
I don't know what to make of it all to be honest, feels like piggy in the middle with contrasting claims coming from both sides. One side says there is an indemnity clause the other days that's a lie. Well there is only 1 way to find out for us fans to find out, and that is breaking this stupid NDA.
I would have though that if Wasps believe it is merely 'just a tactic by SISU' then call their bluff. Agree to waiving the NDA then expose SISU for lying about their being an indemnity.
I would have though that if Wasps believe it is merely 'just a tactic by SISU' then call their bluff. Agree to waiving the NDA then expose SISU for lying about their being an indemnity.
They said it was an implication which tbf it was.
It’s just going to end up as another game of he said, she said. Best thing we can probably do is coming up with some very specific probing questions and get a journalist or Pete and Mark to ask them.
One might be “what other parties are involved in the NDA?”. Unfortunately it probably breaking the NDA to say so.
One might be “what other parties are involved in the NDA?”. Unfortunately it probably breaking the NDA to say so.
Nick
Administrator
Not really, Mark and Pete approached them all in the same email.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Their implication, that Wasps has something to hide, is defamatory
It’s really not we asked cause we want transparency. That’s not defamation.
It’s really not we asked cause we want transparency. That’s not defamation.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Agree. I don't want to commit money to buy season tickets based on me believing sisu when they've been lying. On the flip side of that I don't want to not get them and deprive the club of money to find out it's wasps acting the twat.
I had to make decision last season based on the flimsiest of evidence, would be nice to be a bit more informed this season.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
It’s the right way round though
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yeah. It's easier said than done to get the answers that reveal things really. Asking questions to the people direct is probably not going to do it - really needs some undercover moles and whistleblowers
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
CCFC: this is what happened, we have the evidence to back it up and are happy to release it
CCC: nothing to do with us
Wasps: that's not what happened but we won't let you release the evidence
It doesn’t matter. For all intents and purposes the club are saying drop it and wasps are saying they can’t. The implication, even though it’s not intentional, is they have something to hide.
I called this yesterday. It might mean they have something to hide but it might just mean the club know it can’t be dropped and so there’s no harm in them taking the opportunity presented by the email.
The long and the short of it is wasps can say “it can’t be dropped” and there’s nothing we can do about it unless we can find out who the other parties are.
Anything that is asked has to be done very carefully. Mark and Pete submitted a reasonable question about the NDA yet are now at the centre of an argument about why it can’t be dropped. It’s all very excited us thinking wasps have something to hide but there could be nothing in it and we’re back to arguing over who we should believe. Every action can have unforeseeable consequences.Yeah. It's easier said than done to get the answers that reveal things really. Asking questions to the people direct is probably not going to do it - really needs some undercover moles and whistleblowers
Nick
Administrator
Nope, the club said they were willing to in reply to fans. They were all CC'd into the same email.
The email is in here, all that was said was "we will if others will". They have chosen to take it that way.