They were getting a lot of heat from fans /constituents at the time.:thinking about:
SCG Meeting Summary from 9/7/2013 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter kingharvest
- Start date
They were getting a lot of heat from fans /constituents at the time.:thinking about:
kingharvest
New Member
OSB - that may be my misinterpretation (the £7m each bit). The actual Fisher comment reads as follows:
In 2012 SISU and the council came to an agreement whereby SISU could buy half the Higgs share and the council would not veto the deal.SISU and the council agreed to either split the debt purchase or Sisu buy out all the bank debt. In simple terms this meant that by buying out the debt both halves of the stadium company equity would get an uplift in value – which was the motivation for the council to not veto the purchase of the Higgs stake. But the council then decided they would buy-out all the debt (via a £14m bailout) and the Higgs-Sisu deal never happened. Fast forward to Feb 2013 and ACL say they will no longer negotiate. In March ACL forced the admin issue and issued an administration order - the rest we know.
Apologies if i've confused things there.
I'd say the Guy who went to YB has been the sharpest cookie of them all.
you havn't confused anything unless the "(via a £14 million bailout)" wasn't said by fisher. What OSB said applies however the 14 mill is split
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
The origin of strained relationships between council/charity & SISU goes back much further than TF would like to suggest.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15823850
Also the council vote to take over the debt was unanimous http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-21033825
If there were issues about it not being the right thing to do then I think there would have been some opposition, the unanimity of that vote tells me that more is yet to come out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15823850
Also the council vote to take over the debt was unanimous http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-21033825
If there were issues about it not being the right thing to do then I think there would have been some opposition, the unanimity of that vote tells me that more is yet to come out.
To give some balance you want to believe something the twerp says but in truth it's almost impossible after all the previous bullshit and bluster. Of course there is two sides to this debacle, on one side you have a distrusted London based hedge fund trying desperately to recoup investors money and secure an outlet to seemingly dump debt on and on the other a company albeit local who are anxious to protect their bottom line and real costs of running a huge community asset. Deals were done years ago that have not necessarily benefited the football club and advantage has been taken of the footfall brought by the clubs fans, thing is when the deals were struck the club was once again on its knees and out with a begging bowl so needed help in funding what is basically a Premiership Arena. The upshot is the club has to break even, as does the Arena and the contracts with Compass etc have to also be honoured.
All that said moving the club 35 miles away from its main fanbase is going to instigate further losses and financial hardship for all interested parties !!
All that said moving the club 35 miles away from its main fanbase is going to instigate further losses and financial hardship for all interested parties !!
The story TF tells over and over is this:
sisu/ccc agree a plan that will have sisu buy the Higgs shares. Sisu would buy out the ACL mortgage - yes, at a discounted level (which required the rent strike, my opinion). Sisu would then discharge the mortgage, and by doing so increase the share value in ACL.
I don't remember him putting in a number - wasn't it in fact the two of us who a year ago speculated that the number could be around £5m?
It's the first time I see a report that there was a suggestion of ccc/sisu splitting the mortgage. Maybe it was discussed, but the agreement ended up with sisu to buy it all?
My take is:
The council turned on the deal at the time the rent strike was in effect, when ACL chairman went to YB and Hoffman/Elliot turned up with PH4.
I really, truly would like to know what caused the council to back down. Were they playing sisu from the start of the negotiations? Did they suddenly get scared of doing something illegal? Were somebody tapping into the 'brotherhood'?
Or is it after all just a figment of Fishers imagination?
Yes you know the rent strike that involved SISU paying almost nothing to use a fantastic Arena whilst handing out stupid contracts to underforming or injured players and slipping down the League pyramid. All the while dumping strange and ludicrous £2.6 million administration charges on the club, adding to the debt pile that we were told didn't actually exist?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Sorry Ashdown, the general line is that SISU didn't hand out enough stupid contracts and sold all the best players causing relegation.
Or has that changed as well now?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
duffer
Well-Known Member
Tim Fisher pores over the plans for HR2 with architect Chad Valley.
Loving Tim's Christmas jumper... you just know he's still got one of those...
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
He's saying to the speccy twat "The floodlights work and everything, though we haven't got any batteries yet".
Before I get any complaints, I happen to be a speccy twat, so I'm allowed to say it.
Before I get any complaints, I happen to be a speccy twat, so I'm allowed to say it.
Loving Tim's Christmas jumper... you just know he's still got one of those...
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or not but just to be clear: that article is about unanimous support for bailing out ACL after the Sisu deal went south, not the Sisu deal itself.
If I had to hazard a guess it would be that upon further inspection of the Sisu offer the council realised they were going to get screwed. This is pretty standard for any Sisu contract. They then pulled out. I'd also suggest that Sisu are to blame for any bad blood due to their negotiating tactics (legal but not ethical)
The long and the short of it is there was always a very generous offer to the club for the Ricoh the club got greedy and are now throwing their toys out the pram to get what they want.
Fuck em. I hope they burn. This isn't about logic or reason any more. They fucked with something dear to me and now I want revenge.
I'm anti-capital punishment and pacifist. If someone messed with my daughter Id kill then in a heart beat even though I know its wrong. Same deal here.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Fisher: It's modular too. If we want to increase capacity, we just glue another bit on the top of the stand over there.
Speccy Twat: What scale is this?
Fisher: Er.... 1:1
Speccy Twat: What scale is this?
Fisher: Er.... 1:1
If, and i agree it is a big if, these events are a factual report on the negotiation's that were held between SISU and CCC in regards to the debt purchase of the Yorkshire banks mortgage as well as the Higgs share, then it does raise a question as far as a post by PWKH in reply to a post by luwalla on the 'here comes Fisher thread' saying that ''the Council were never asked about an agreement to purchase the Higgs share, so it could not have been vetoed''
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/33377-here-comes-fisher/page21
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
That's a stupid comment to make if you don't know who was there?
sky blue zam
Member
does it? i cant see how theyve gone for a judicial review when sisu agreed to go halves on the £14m. is it just because the council trumped sisu?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
If I've got this right, Timmy claims that the original deal was for the council and SISU to each buy out half of ACL's bank debt.
What actually happened was that the council bought out all of it. SISU then launched their legal action, claiming that this was an illegal act by the council.
Doesn't it seem a little odd that in the original deal SISU were (presumably) happy for the council to buy the debt, but then all of a sudden turn into "concerned citizens" trying to "prevent an abuse of council power"?
What actually happened was that the council bought out all of it. SISU then launched their legal action, claiming that this was an illegal act by the council.
Doesn't it seem a little odd that in the original deal SISU were (presumably) happy for the council to buy the debt, but then all of a sudden turn into "concerned citizens" trying to "prevent an abuse of council power"?
Its personal for us and I think it is from the top for them .the destruction of this football Club would not matter to the Bitch at the Top ,Or Franchising It away from this City ,Massive satisfaction i'd wager.
I'd seriously question the timing and motives for this JR .
The CCC bailout occurred late Jan IIRC , Papers Issued April, no prospect of being heard before the season Kick off,Too convenient ??:thinking about:
Why such a delay?? Now an obstacle to negotiation,or just the pace of the Law in this country. I'd have expected a much swifter Action.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
FWIW I can doubt it too. The cynical part of me says what better way to introduce doubt than a spot of smoke without fire.
However, if they happen to be right, it's just as important it's over quickly, as that smoke would be real!
Either way it's not to our advantage for it to drag on.
Anyway, the law does indeed move slowly! Might be important to us, but in the scheme of things, just another case to fit into a schedule.
Its more to do with the Initial delay of three months that gives me doubt more than anything else.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I wanted it too, but looking back now through adult eyes you wouldn't have been able to play it anyway as the stands would be in the way. I had the TV gantry too.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
But as discussed earlier, they didn't seem to have a problem with the council putting funds in when it was going to be half each.
Presumably they had some form of damascene conversion.....
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
I think that put me off a little. It looked great but you'd have to take up yoga to get comfortable playing it over those big stands. I'd end up using it as a battlefield for my green army men, Black Hawk Down style.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
For better or worse, a delay is 'normal'
no he means the delay in taking the action.
Not from me. I've never advocated the club running insolvently to accommodate the wage demands of the likes of Sheffers, Richard Wood and David Bell etc We are what we are these days and if the club { SISU} want to make demands on all suppliers/contracts then they cannot be seen to be throwing money around on a series of piss poor managers and equally underperforming and poor value players.
The tragedy of all of this is both on the pitch and undoubtedly off the pitch the club were making positive strides. With the removal of the high earners this summer and the shrewd acquisition of a few more Blair Adams type finds we could have been solvent and competitive for the first time in a few years..................Problem is SISU then showed their true colours and ambitions which was an outright and obvious attempt at landgrab by distressing the current owners of the stadium. They've now fucked the whole shebang up for everyone including themselves !
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
They're not concerned citizens, they're bringing the case as an economic entity trading in the European Union who has been disadvantaged by a public body distorting the market in favour of another entity.
