Sisu will not drop JR appeal (12 Viewers)

oldskyblue58 · Jul 14, 2014

I have a problem with repeated assertions that 60p in every £ generated being given to Pressley. The maths and regulations show a different story

Player sales - well the headline figure might say £3.5m for Wilson but then you need to deduct agents fees etc. If the payments are staged well you only get to use what is received in the year. Ok you will get the credit eventually but not necessarily when we think

Ticket income - fairly straight forward isn't it. So is the fact that this will be the biggest difference in income between the Ricoh and Sixfields. Yet we persist at Sixfields and seem not to want to actually pick the damn phone up

F&B - the old chestnut. What the SMCP rules say is that the calculation in respect F&B is on the income after deducting VAT but also after deducting direct costs. Those costs you would assume would be the purchases for resale plus some utilities and direct wages. So say we receive £100k net of VAT TF is saying 60k would be available as a budget limit to SP. Its not the case because the direct costs could easily be 50% of that so the effect on the budget limit is 30k or 30p in the £. You would also have to assume that other sources with direct costs (car park, pitch side advertising, corporate hospitality) would have some direct costs to deduct too so SP isn't going to get 60p in the £

Now in years where we can sell a "Wilson" the effect of the other incomes is less critical but years when we don't .............

Will the F&B at the Ricoh make that much difference though? 30p or less in every £. Isnt it the ticket sales that make the real difference and give us any sort of budget at all?

Samo · Jul 14, 2014

dadgad said:
Quite.

My guess is - because Sisu do not want a resolution.

Why would they not want a resolution? Are they about to unveil the new stadium? Show us the land they've acquired? Do they still think they can out wait ACL? Do they think CCC will sell them the Ricoh? I don't think so. They are running out of time and options, they NEED a resolution.

edgy · Jul 14, 2014

I couldn't care less for ACL. I couldn't care less for SISU.

I can't believe what im reading from some. Telling ACL to hold out before negotiations can begin. Fuck that. Get round the table now, get a deal struck, get us back to the Ricoh and then sort out your other shit. Nevermind irrelevant over complications. Just fucking do it. Now.

sky blue john · Jul 14, 2014

Think I will file this one with the rest of Sisu's statements !
Its one for the benefit of the fl and hopefully they will see through it like anyone with an ounce of brains should.

chiefdave · Jul 14, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
I take this to mean that when it comes to negotiation, SISU will say "It will cost us £xx (let's say £100k for the sake of argument) to pay the break clause if we return right away to the Ricoh, ACL should pay this if they want us back, or it should be deducted from the rent we pay" - pure nonsense of course, as SISU chose to go to Northampton and were not forced out, but negotiation is all about going in looking like you want to earth, giving away things you're not bothered about as "concessions" and walking away with the deal you really wanted whilst looking like you have compromised.

That may not be a problem, didn't ACL offer the first season back free in one of their offers last year to offset the amount SISU would have to pay Northampton?

oldskyblue58 said:
I have a problem with repeated assertions that 60p in every £ generated being given to Pressley.

Think it's his new phrase to repeat as often as possible in the hope that people will take it at face value and not question the fact that it doesn't really add up.

Limey · Jul 14, 2014

Repeated talk of FFP is to give the impression that SISU/otium care about the wellbeing of ccfc.
Refusal to drop the appeal is the clearest indication that they actually don't.

Kingokings204 · Jul 14, 2014

Limey said:
Repeated talk of FFP is to give the impression that SISU/otium care about the wellbeing of ccfc.
Refusal to drop the appeal is the clearest indication that they actually don't.

100%

spider_ricoh · Jul 14, 2014

CCFC PimpRail said:
I think SISU are waiting to fail or drop the appeal, then when damaged are awarded they can say "drop those, and we'll return at £200k plus pie money".

ACL/CCC won't be getting any damages - they weren't the claimants

RoboCCFC90 · Jul 14, 2014

NW and OSB although you have differing views you both have valid points:

NW it's right that by not dropping the JR Sisu still have eggs to place into the basket of negotiations.

OSB you have a fair point though, ACL won't see this as a positive step I would of doubt.

However both sides now have something to offer the other IMO. I think it needs someone to allow these two parties to discuss negotiations in that mindset.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Astute · Jul 14, 2014

edgy said:
I couldn't care less for ACL. I couldn't care less for SISU.

I can't believe what im reading from some. Telling ACL to hold out before negotiations can begin. Fuck that. Get round the table now, get a deal struck, get us back to the Ricoh and then sort out your other shit. Nevermind irrelevant over complications. Just fucking do it. Now.

Telling ACL not to negotiate until SISU give up on litigation?

More like the majority of us know that meaningful negotiations won't happen until SISU at least start to build bridges. How many times have we thought we were getting close to a deal? How many times have we thought that an olive branch had been accepted? All that has happened is that SISU have gone against their word. Yet some think that they can continue in the same way and everything can get resolved :facepalm:

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jul 14, 2014

Can anyone give me an example of a situation in which two parties engaged in ongoing litigation manage to shelf their differences in a side agreement?

RoboCCFC90 · Jul 14, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Can anyone give me an example of a situation in which two parties engaged in ongoing litigation manage to shelf their differences in a side agreement?

I don't know about that but if two warring parties can come out of there trenches at Christmas, exchange warm messages and gather to play a good natured game of Football, then Sisu and ACL can put aside their differences and come to a mutual agreement.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mattylad · Jul 14, 2014

They have no intention of returning to the ricoh unless they can get ridf of ACL first, but they have to show willing to the league. Sorry folks thats all this is.

lapsed_skyblue · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
I don't know about that but if two warring parties can come out of there trenches at Christmas, exchange warm messages and gather to play a good natured game of Football, then Sisu and ACL can put aside their differences and come to a mutual agreement.

But they did resume shooting at each other after the football match.

Astute · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
I don't know about that but if two warring parties can come out of there trenches at Christmas, exchange warm messages and gather to play a good natured game of Football, then Sisu and ACL can put aside their differences and come to a mutual agreement.

That was two sides that didn't want to be at war with each other. They were sent to the trenches. They didn't decide to go. Whereas we have SISU that want an all out war. They don't want peace.......or should I say Joy doesn't want peace. Didn't Fisher shake hands on the 400k rent offer to be overruled by Joy? Fisher wanted to play. The one in charge wanted to carry on with the war.

RoboCCFC90 · Jul 14, 2014

lapsed_skyblue said:
But they did resume shooting at each other after the football match.

But for that moment they put their differences aside, that is my point, parties can put their differences aside and come to a mutual understanding, the Club would like Matchday revenues, ACL would like the Court action dropped, it's simple come and negotiate, you both have something to offer the other and mutual ground can be met.

That's the way I see it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RoboCCFC90 · Jul 14, 2014

Astute said:
That was two sides that didn't want to be at war with each other. They were sent to the trenches. They didn't decide to go. Whereas we have SISU that want an all out war. They don't want peace.......or should I say Joy doesn't want peace. Didn't Fisher shake hands on the 400k rent offer to be overruled by Joy? Fisher wanted to play. The one in charge wanted to carry on with the war.

Because there was no Matchday revenues hence why it didn't go through, we know that why bring it up again?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

covmark · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
Because there was no Matchday revenues hence why it didn't go through, we know that why bring it up again?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because he's blinded by the love of ACL or the hate of sisu. I can't work out which. It seems Astute is dead against talks, fuck knows why.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
Because there was no Matchday revenues hence why it didn't go through, we know that why bring it up again?

Why agree it then, just to have it vetoed from above?

And what about the comparison between Sixfields, with ticket sales and matchday revenue, versus the Ricoh, with ticket income only - but with larger gates? Which makes the most financial sense?

If you agree it's the latter; then what's being said - with regards the new stadium and the like - is wholly misleading. A bit like agreeing a deal and then changing your mind. As above. How - really - do you think it's possible to negotiate with a party such as this?

Leamington Pete · Jul 14, 2014

I've now got an image of a peace making game at the Ricoh between ACL and a SISU 11 captained by an umbrella carrying Joy patrolling the midfield with Tim "The Cat" Fisher in goal. ML won't be playing, just appearing sporadically on the tannoy with claims that SISU are winning 5 nil when they're actually 7 nil down. The ref and linesmen are three High Court judges. The game will be watched by a crowd of 2000, but Tim will claim it's between 3 and 7 thousand.

RoboCCFC90 · Jul 14, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Why agree it then, just to have it vetoed from above?

And what about the comparison between Sixfields, with ticket sales and matchday revenue, versus the Ricoh, with ticket income only - but with larger gates? Which makes the most financial sense?

If you agree it's the latter; then what's being said - with regards the new stadium and the like - is wholly misleading. A bit like agreeing a deal and then changing your mind. As above. How - really - do you think it's possible to negotiate with a party such as this?

Don't get me wrong it makes sense going back to the Ricoh just for the above, that's not the argument, but what the Club believes is that it should be entitled to all the money it's customers put into it. Now IMO this doesn't sound unreasonable yet we have go determine whether ACL require a fee for this pleasure.

As I said both parties have eggs to place in the basket of negotiations, but it's getting these two to talk to one another first!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CCFC PimpRail · Jul 14, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
ACL/CCC won't be getting any damages - they weren't the claimants

They are due costs incurred after not being battered in court.

Jack Griffin · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
I don't know about that but if two warring parties can come out of there trenches at Christmas, exchange warm messages and gather to play a good natured game of Football, then Sisu and ACL can put aside their differences and come to a mutual agreement.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then kill each other using increasingly novel and destructive methods for another 3 1/2 years.

Gas gas!!!!!

Astute · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
Because there was no Matchday revenues hence why it didn't go through, we know that why bring it up again?

If it was so important why did Fisher shake on it?

IIRC it was the first time that match day revenues were mentioned.

Kingokings204 · Jul 14, 2014

Astute said:
If it was so important why did Fisher shake on it?

IIRC it was the first time that match day revenues were mentioned.

The deal that was shook on and then JS over ruled had nothing to do with match days revenues. It's been proved.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jul 14, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
Don't get me wrong it makes sense going back to the Ricoh just for the above, that's not the argument, but what the Club believes is that it should be entitled to all the money it's customers put into it. Now IMO this doesn't sound unreasonable yet we have go determine whether ACL require a fee for this pleasure.

As I said both parties have eggs to place in the basket of negotiations, but it's getting these two to talk to one another first!

Again, that's true. But one of the key elements of any negotiation is trust. The deal 'agreed' by Fisher was touched on in the JR. There was no smoking gun associated with it. SISU reneged. Now look at the stadium situation. There isn't one, is there?

This is a silly way of negotiating. Like the Judicial Review, and the rent strike. Successive judges have seen the actions for what they are. Surely ACL/CCC do too.

All this posturing has to stop. Then sit down to negotiate properly. This is an impossible backdrop from which to try to negotiate a deal

Astute · Jul 14, 2014

covmark said:
Because he's blinded by the love of ACL or the hate of sisu. I can't work out which. It seems Astute is dead against talks, fuck knows why.

So easy to make a comment like that than consider the truth isn't it?

Would you be happy to negotiate with someone that has been playing silly games with you and costing you a lot of money through needless litigation whilst they are carrying on with more litigation on the same case that they have shown to be fully in the wrong? I want negotiations to happen, but there is hardly any chance of them happening and working out whilst they keep up with their games. What proof have we that SISU actually want to do a deal? Ah I get you the statement made the day before the march is the first bit of truth from SISU in ages. We should all believe them. We should all trust them.

Not me. Not most of us. They have done nothing to try and gain a bit of trust back. They haven't changed their plan. But if you can see this you don't want negotiations to happen :thinking about:

Paxman II · Jul 14, 2014

Surely the legal process must be followed through to conclusion, even if that is the appeal process?
They would look mighty weak if they retract that now. But they are asking for talks even referencing to a return to the Ricoh.
So lets talk about it. ACL can respond very easily so lets hope they do and see what can be achieved.

You all want to say everything is 'bollocks' or just stop all that has gone on and return without thought of the historical situation over this last few years.
Stop talking about pie money, it's got no bearing.
Please also remember if SISU are distressing ACL what is the end game of that? It won't automatically give them the Ricoh!

I hate that I sound like I'm supporting SISU here but they have finally made suggestion of a compromise being found to bring the club home for a while at least and who knows what bridges can then be mended?

ACL have nothing to lose and everything to gain themselves and the satisfaction SISU are crawling back somewhat with the fans at everyone's mercy holding breath that these protagonist can deliver something for these hard done by fans.
If SISU go on to lose the appeal then ACL are looking good having already agreed a return short term. The pressure on SISU at that point would be immense unless they could produce a new stadium!

Kingokings204 · Jul 14, 2014

Paxman II said:
Surely the legal process must be followed through to conclusion, even if that is the appeal process?
They would look mighty weak if they retract that now. But they are asking for talks even referencing to a return to the Ricoh.
So lets talk about it. ACL can respond very easily so lets hope they do and see what can be achieved.

You all want to say everything is 'bollocks' or just stop all that has gone on and return without thought of the historical situation over this last few years.
Stop talking about pie money, it's got no bearing.
Please also remember if SISU are distressing ACL what is the end game of that? It won't automatically give them the Ricoh!

I hate that I sound like I'm supporting SISU here but they have finally made suggestion of a compromise being found to bring the club home for a while at least and who knows what bridges can then be mended?

ACL have nothing to lose and everything to gain themselves and the satisfaction SISU are crawling back somewhat with the fans at everyone's mercy holding breath that these protagonist can deliver something for these hard done by fans.
If SISU go on to lose the appeal then ACL are looking good having already agreed a return short term. The pressure on SISU at that point would be immense unless they could produce a new stadium!

Yes I agree with this. Ideally sisu would drop the appeal but I understand why they have appealed because it was such a battering then they have to follow it through really just to not look weak etc.

How much better would sisu look if they dropped the appeal because they agreed a deal with ACL for short term deal. See the point.

I genuinely believe sisu want to come back as none of us have found even one reason to stay at sixfields and even if they are distressing ACL they don't automatically get the Ricoh. They can't wait forever for ACL to go bust and then it's not certain they come in.

ACL just talk to sisu nothing to lose and tell them to fuck off of they are messing around and best case is a deal can be agreed and already dropped. I can see that happening if they talk.

lapsed_skyblue · Jul 14, 2014

So, we've had two public statements from SISU that they are prepared to talk. They expect ACL to drop their objections to talks whilst legal matters continue and not to wait until they get paid courtesy of the FL. Yet they endanger any talks by giving parameters on what they expect to be discussed.
Given that they must know that their credibility must be shot, do they follow up these "initiatives" by picking up the phone to ACL? Apparently not.
Realistically if I was ACL I would restrict myself to waiting for a call. If they get one I would expect them to answer and be prepared to talk.

Gosford Green · Jul 14, 2014

2 statements in almost as many days. Season ticket sales low and /or trying to stick the blame on ACL for not coming back to the Ricoh.

With the exception of some on here no one realistically takes what they say as anywhere approaching the truth.

Kingokings204 · Jul 14, 2014

Gosford Green said:
2 statements in almost as many days. Season ticket sales low and /or trying to stick the blame on ACL for not coming back to the Ricoh.

With the exception of some on here no one realistically takes what they say as anywhere approaching the truth.

Exactly, why would you? Been proved beyond doubt they have been lying to us for over 2 years at least now Ricoh arena saga alone.

I can only think they thought ccc would back down before court, court has done nothing for them except to prove they lie and bully others.

torchomatic · Jul 14, 2014

Well the government negotiated with the IRA and they were up to more than "silly games".

There's no proof either side want to seriously enter talks, is there? Fisher with his spiel and Lucas saying she is happy to talk to the "football club or anyone else". So there is risk all round but if there's a chance that it will bring us home then it's a risk worth taking.

After all when we have nothing then there's nothing to lose.

Astute said:
So easy to make a comment like that than consider the truth isn't it?

Would you be happy to negotiate with someone that has been playing silly games with you and costing you a lot of money through needless litigation whilst they are carrying on with more litigation on the same case that they have shown to be fully in the wrong? I want negotiations to happen, but there is hardly any chance of them happening and working out whilst they keep up with their games. What proof have we that SISU actually want to do a deal? Ah I get you the statement made the day before the march is the first bit of truth from SISU in ages. We should all believe them. We should all trust them.

Not me. Not most of us. They have done nothing to try and gain a bit of trust back. They haven't changed their plan. But if you can see this you don't want negotiations to happen :thinking about:

Godiva · Jul 14, 2014

So if I am correct this is the general consensus:

ACL should:
- sit back and wait for ...

Sisu should:
- Withdraw the appeal
- Pay £590k to ACL
- Call ACL and ask for 'negotiations'
- Accept any rent deal offered (we expect approximately £400k p.a.)
- Abstain from any match day revenues
- Pay the penalty to Northampton for breaking the agreement there
- Return to the Ricoh and accept the scene is set for sisu-out-campaign 2.0

That's just about it, right?

torchomatic · Jul 14, 2014

Seems about right. Ccfc shoukd get every penny generated on a match day.

Godiva said:
So if I am correct this is the general consensus:

ACL should:
- sit back and wait for ...

Sisu should:
- Withdraw the appeal
- Pay £590k to ACL
- Call ACL and ask for 'negotiations'
- Accept any rent deal offered (we expect approximately £400k p.a.)
- Abstain from any match day revenues
- Pay the penalty to Northampton for breaking the agreement there
- Return to the Ricoh and accept the scene is set for sisu-out-campaign 2.0

That's just about it, right?

Sisu will not drop JR appeal (12 Viewers)

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency