So ACL had no option (3 Viewers)

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

procdoc · Aug 3, 2013

Yet another attention seeking thread. You just keep burying your head in the sand Grenduffy

covmark · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

Get ready for the barrage

Otis · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

If only it was all so simple.

Tim Fisher says the club really want to play at the Ricoh, yet Sisu take the club 34 miles away.

Nothing is black and white and I think your post is disingenuous.

I do believe Sisu want us to play in Coventry. I do believe that ACL want what is best for CCFC (to play at the Ricoh). Both sides need each other.

You seem to slate ACL an awful lot. Some focus entirely on Sisu.

As per usual, the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

stupot07 · Aug 3, 2013

Otis said:
If only it was all so simple.

Tim Fisher says the club really want to play at the Ricoh, yet Sisu take the club 34 miles away.

Nothing is black and white and I think your post is disingenuous.

I do believe Sisu want us to play in Coventry. I do believe that ACL want what is best for CCFC (to play at the Ricoh). Both sides need each other.

You seem to slate ACL an awful lot. Some focus entirely on Sisu.

As per usual, the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

But what if the rent deal is subject to ccfc dropping the judicial review?

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

Otis said:
If only it was all so simple.

Tim Fisher says the club really want to play at the Ricoh, yet Sisu take the club 34 miles away.

Nothing is black and white and I think your post is disingenuous.

I do believe Sisu want us to play in Coventry. I do believe that ACL want what is best for CCFC (to play at the Ricoh). Both sides need each other.

You seem to slate ACL an awful lot. Some focus entirely on Sisu.

As per usual, the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

Of course it lies in between and I hold each side culpable. The issue though is unless people start to apportion blame both ways we are finished.

I don't see any evidence either side cares about the club or the fans.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

But we have to keep tolerating the same one sided rubbish thread after thread from the SHITSU apologists. Cracking thread keep it up.

Otis · Aug 3, 2013

You're right, they don't.

Both sides are culpable. There can be no doubt about that.

valiant15 · Aug 3, 2013

Im upset duffy didn't include me. I was about to buy a marrilion album to.

covmark · Aug 3, 2013

skybluehugh said:
But we have to keep tolerating the same one sided rubbish thread after thread from the SHITSU apologists. Cracking thread keep it up.

Works both ways. And why do people keep saying 'shitsu' is it supposed to be funny, makes you come across as a bit of a dick

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

skybluehugh said:
But we have to keep tolerating the same one sided rubbish thread after thread from the SHITSU apologists. Cracking thread keep it up.

Ok Hugh why did they liquidate the club? For once instead of talking SHITSU nonsense explain how this has enhanced the clubs chances of playing in Coventry?

The Reverend Skyblue · Aug 3, 2013

Can't we now move on and stop this bloody boring blame game.

Whats happened, we went into admin , we came out of admin without an agreed CVA, so can we now start talking about what the future may hold for us.

We all hold different opinions,we are a democracy aren't we, on who was to blame for the admin, now its come and gone lets talk about how to get our club back into Cov, some players we MAY sign, etc

I'm bored shitless with he said ,she said shit

SkyblueBazza · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

Maybe an indication of how much the either want or need the club to play there. When you are fighting for something that means so much to you...you become prepared to do whatever you think is necessary. Maybe they feel their actions yesterday is a battle lost...but the war is still to win?

sky blue john · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So, first ACL had no option to put the club into administration.

They had to, to protect shareholders interests after fisher threatened liquidation.

Then they reject the CVA and so liquidate the club.

This site is now riddled with fools who slavishly support the disgraceful management company that continued to heap misery on an already miserable situation. We know who they are. They give themselves simple names like jack or James or they reside overseas. They have multiple identities or like sky blue John they are just plain stupid.

Whatever they should no longer be tolerated. The shameful action yesterday is beyond defending.

lol extremely deluded post !!!!!

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Otis said:
You're right, they don't.

Both sides are culpable. There can be no doubt about that.

Otis, I mostly agree with most you write on this board, but I can not agree with on this.

I would like to know how ACL own any blame for this mess. I am genuinely asking the question to someone who is happy to share the blame between the two. I personally 100% blame this mess on our owners. I said on the old 606 site when they first took over that this was the worst take over outcome we could have, having a HF owning us. (And this is in NO WAY GLOATING)

Otis · Aug 3, 2013

skybluehugh said:
Otis, I mostly agree with most you write on this board, but I can not agree with on this.

I would like to know how ACL own any blame for this mess. I am genuinely asking the question to someone who is happy to share the blame between the two. I personally 100% blame this mess on our owners. I said on the old 606 site when they first took over that this was the worst take over outcome we could have, having a HF owning us. (And this is in NO WAY GLOATING)

ACL charged an extortionate annual rental. Let's go with that for starters. It was ridiculously high whether Sisu originally agreed to it or not. They also said they would no longer negotiate with the club back in February I believe it was. Talks should have never ever stopped.

If they really cared about the fans of CCFC they would have left the door open for negotiation.

Doesn't matter whether or not people think Sisu are more culpable or not, the point is both sides have brought about this demise.

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

skybluehugh said:
Otis, I mostly agree with most you write on this board, but I can not agree with on this.

I would like to know how ACL own any blame for this mess. I am genuinely asking the question to someone who is happy to share the blame between the two. I personally 100% blame this mess on our owners. I said on the old 606 site when they first took over that this was the worst take over outcome we could have, having a HF owning us. (And this is in NO WAY GLOATING)

So answer, how did ACL's action yesterday show they have the clubs interests at heart. Your constant refusal to answer any serious questions raises doubts regarding your credibility.

sky blue john · Aug 3, 2013

My only desire is to see to see ccfc united with the Ricoh stadium !!!
Unfortunately Sisu are not capable of making this happen !!!!
I also don't like Sisu's running of the club their tactics, embargos every year, secretive nature, loans against season tickets, loans against Ryton, debt creating !!!!

longjohnskyblue · Aug 3, 2013

Yet again the sisu apologists forget the critical point in all of this (to bolster their agenda)

Sisu had an opportunity to buy the stadium and refused to do so! There simply is no getting around this! The rental situation was only ever designed for a temporary period. Sisu, for capital fluidity purposes chose not to invest in bricks and mortar. Usually companies do this so that they can invest in the business, however sisu didn't do that either!

Sisu went public saying that they were considering putting the club into liquidation. Spare me the myth it was ACL, sisu engineered the entire scenario - they are very very experienced in dealing this way. That is why the judge in open court denounced sisu!

GaryPendrysEyes · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel I would suggest your 1000's of posts attacking ACL/CCC, with close to 0 attacking the actual owners of CCFC Sisu who are supposedly responsible for the club's well being - makes a lie to your 'neutrality'.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
Ok Hugh why did they liquidate the club? For once instead of talking SHITSU nonsense explain how this has enhanced the clubs chances of playing in Coventry?

Of course being liquidated hasn't enhanced our club. But you tell me what more ACL could do to. ACL have made EVERY back down move to sort this mess. Lowering rent (I really do not care if the rent was too high before April last year, they signed the rent agreement), offering part of the FB, and other concessions. Name me ONE area where our owners have moved?

shy_tall_knight · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel ACL aas you well know are 50% owned by a charity because CCFC were skint, they later purchases the rights to F&B again cos the club were in dire financial straits. Most good citizens recognise the role the charity have played. Hedge funds care little for this and since they can no longer distress ACL, they are looking to distress the fans. Cobblers was an avoidable option it makes no financial sense but that is what SISU are prepared to do, to get their way.

Having worked for a company that was taken over by a hedge fund I understand the type of people they employ and would hate to ever have to confront them in business.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So answer, how did ACL's action yesterday show they have the clubs interests at heart. Your constant refusal to answer any serious questions raises doubts regarding your credibility.

Debate please Grendel, not name calling again.

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

shy_tall_knight said:
Grendel ACL aas you well know are 50% owned by a charity because CCFC were skint, they later purchases the rights to F&B again cos the club were in dire financial straits. Most good citizens recognise the role the charity have played. Hedge funds care little for this and since they can no longer distress ACL, they are looking to distress the fans. Cobblers was an avoidable option it makes no financial sense but that is what SISU are prepared to do, to get their way.

Having worked for a company that was taken over by a hedge fund I understand the type of people they employ and would hate to ever have to confront them in business.

I'm sorry but if your only interest is the football club such considerations are not relevant.

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

skybluehugh said:
Of course being liquidated hasn't enhanced our club. But you tell me what more ACL could do to. ACL have made EVERY back down move to sort this mess. Lowering rent (I really do not care if the rent was too high before April last year, they signed the rent agreement), offering part of the FB, and other concessions. Name me ONE area where our owners have moved?

I think they round take the £150,000 deal if it is offered to them.

tbh444 · Aug 3, 2013

Otis said:
ACL charged an extortionate annual rental. Let's go with that for starters. It was ridiculously high whether Sisu originally agreed to it or not. They also said they would no longer negotiate with the club back in February I believe it was. Talks should have never ever stopped.

If they really cared about the fans of CCFC they would have left the door open for negotiation.

Doesn't matter whether or not people think Sisu are more culpable or not, the point is both sides have brought about this demise.

The talks stopped because SISU were never interested in a deal short of buying the whole thing on the cheap. This has been proven by the Seppala quote

GaryPendrysEyes · Aug 3, 2013

What this became was a battle for the Ricoh. Now confirmed Sisu wanted ownership on the cheap - rent was a red herring.
ACL/CCC decided some time ago, Sisu were not a suitable owner for a key Coventry asset (Sisu being a failed, unethical and untrustworthy business) who who would just cause ongoing pain and aggravation. They want to wait for a new owner.

ACL/CCC are quite right.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
So answer, how did ACL's action yesterday show they have the clubs interests at heart. Your constant refusal to answer any serious questions raises doubts regarding your credibility.

EVEN if ACL had signed the CVA, CCFC would not have come back to the Ricoh. Fisher has said this on numerous times. I.believe ACL knew that sisu would get the GS. That is the only real worth now and the biggest thing they can sell. As others on this board have mentioned, there is no way sisu can continue to accept the losses they are going to make in NT. They sell the GS to recoup at least some of their losses. Who ever buys GS have a ready stadium to move in too.

Grendel · Aug 3, 2013

GaryPendrysEyes said:
What this became was a battle for the Ricoh. Now confirmed Sisu wanted ownership on the cheap - rent was a red herring.
ACL/CCC decided some time ago, Sisu were not a suitable owner for a key Coventry asset (Sisu being a failed, unethical and untrustworthy business) who who would just cause ongoing pain and aggravation. They want to wait for a new owner.

ACL/CCC are quite right.

With fans like you we deserve our fate. Probably the most shameful post I've seen on here - you never go and support the team though do you?

shy_tall_knight · Aug 3, 2013

Higgs charity could not back down in reality, they are a local based charity set up from the wealth of a former coventry fan, they are there to perform charitable acts for the people of Cov, the city I live in. Backing down to SISU would be a huge financial cost as well as allowing the playground bully to win. The liquidation may mean they have lost out permanently or it may lead to driving SISU out and a more suitable trustworthy owner that they can actually work with. Again I think you need to put yourself in their shoes when negotiating with SISU.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
I think they round take the £150,000 deal if it is offered to them.

And sadly Grendel that is why we will never see eye to eye on this. I believe there is no way in hell they would have, or maybe just maybe, if hell had frozen over.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
I'm sorry but if your only interest is the football club such considerations are not relevant.

But ACL can not just be concerned with the football club legally because they own much more than a football pitch and have to do what is best for the whole group or could end up in court themselves.

skybluehugh · Aug 3, 2013

Grendel said:
With fans like you we deserve our fate. Probably the most shameful post I've seen on here - you never go and support the team though do you?

You ask for genuine debate and then when you do get it and don't like the answers we get the above post. Why?

procdoc · Aug 4, 2013

skybluehugh said:
You ask for genuine debate and then when you do get it and don't like the answers we get the above post. Why?

Because he's an arse who is incapable of debating

sky blue john · Aug 4, 2013

procdoc said:
Because he's an arse who is incapable of debating

I actually think Grendel is a bitch because she certainly has no balls !!!!!

So ACL had no option (3 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New 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

longjohnskyblue

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency