SISU Finances explained (1 Viewer)

[blueflint]

Hmmm. Unfortunately I think they may have a point there. Morally their case is flawed, but legally they seldom lose.

If it is true, as has been claimed, that they are deliberately setting out to kill ACL and pick up the land for a song, then they will have obtained a valuable asset for the price of a few million supporting the club. If it is true that they are charging 25% interest on loans to the club, then it is to an extent SISU that is causing the financial difficulties at the club. So, in my opinion this is morally wrong.

But local councils should not be using tax-payers' money to interfere with the economics of private companies - I agree with them on that point alone.

why as ACL is part owned by the council cant they re invest in it thats all they have done. i put that as simply as i could and i know its the arena not ACL owned but amounts to the same thing

 

---

[Sky Blue Kid]

<br />
<br />

Or they wanted the additional income streams for financial fair play & were told to do one by ACL - the only bargaining chip they had was the rent & so withheld that to try to force the issue - I think that's more accurate

One big problem with your post mate....ACL offered the F+B to SISU, who turned them down. SISU claimed this was the reason for them witholding the rent. Then it became something else, then something else, then yyaawwnnn something else. ad infinitum

 

[oldskyblue58]

can we be clear on something ............. the ccc have sourced money from the Public works Loans to support a landlord (ACL) that they own 50% of. That in reality does not directly affect the tenants of ACL, other than to provide stability. The rental levels for the tenants remain unchanged and set well before. However what the lower loan repayments did was to allow the ACL to give preferential treatment to CCFC in terms of its rental offer going forward when compared to the other tenants at the Ricoh. There are arguments for and against that. But does that mean the other tenants are disadvantaged by the proposals not CCFC ?

In deed the arguement about unfair competition seems to fall down if you go back to the start when the council assisted a loss making financiallly disabled company (CCFC) when it had for years singularly refused to assist other Coventry companies.

i guess nothing in this is straight forward

 

[chiefdave]

the ccc have sourced money from the Public works Loans

Unless this has changed in the last week ccc haven't actually sourced any money from the public works loans, it's come from "council cash balances", not entirely sure what that is but I assume its the money they have in the bank from council tax.