Statement from fisher (1 Viewer)

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I'm not sure many of the previous statements from Fisher et al have been entirely reliable though. It would be nice for someone to see some accounts from the CCFC group to provde the validity of what they say.

Alas, that would include a necessity to view accounts they can't/won't file!?! Anything older than current would be irrelevant

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

"There is no benefit to the football club, its supporters or any other party to discuss financial and commercial details through the media.

"[/QUOTE]

When it suits you mean mr fisher!!

 

[theferret]

I'm not sure many of the previous statements from Fisher et al have been entirely reliable though. It would be nice for someone to see some accounts from the CCFC group to provde the validity of what they say.

Quite possibly, it is hard to know what to believe.

As Spencer has said though, if all SISU have to do is demonstrate that they are able to pay should they be ordered to do so, then it is difficult to see how the court can rule we are insolvent? And seeing as this court hearing is not deciding whether or not SISU should pay, then there can only be one outcome? A defeat in court for ACL would be very damaging for them.

Who knows, and SISU are hardly the most transparent of organisations. Perhaps they are broke, but I strongly suspect they are not. But again, perhaps my understanding of the legal position of ACL is a little simplistic and they have a stronger case than I give them credit for.

 

[Spencer]

Alas, that would include a necessity to view accounts they can't/won't file!?! Anything older than current would be irrelevant

I'm not an accountant, but does it matter what the accounts say? If they show we, on paper, lost £4m but SISU pumped in £5m are we not solvent.

If not, then surely a lot of clubs are trading insolvently.

 

[LarryGrayson]

I'm not an accountant, but does it matter what the accounts say? If they show we, on paper, lost £4m but SISU pumped in £5m are we not solvent.

If not, then surely a lot of clubs are trading insolvently.

so why ant the accounts filed then if its all ok

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

SISU have recently stated that a home average of 11K is our current break even point. If SISU can produce a set of management accounts showing a healthy enough balance sheet and no external creditors then it will ultimately come down to the issue of rent and how the judge views that. If SISU can demonstrate that it is not about an inability to pay but more an unwillingness to pay owing to the fact they dispute the terms of the agreement, then it is difficult to see how a judge can rule that we are insolvent?

I'm not a legal expert though and am just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that this is far from a formality.

The 11k figure is made up

 

[SkyblueBazza]

I just think that SISU are likely to have (& had) some of the finest legal, financial & regulatory brains studying all the possible outcomes at every stage since they took over. Their people will know what they want & pretty-much how to get it for the price they believe is best for them. Yes we know things can sometimes be missed or circumstances change (e.g. FFP rules, relegation) throwing a spanner in the works...I just think it unlikely that by the time (or even if) SISU decided to depart CCFC that they would do so much down on the deal overall IMO

 

[theferret]

The 11k figure is made up

Perhaps, but I suspect it isn't.

It was announced at a fans forum iirc, and was made as a general point rather than in relation to ACL and the rent deal. I'm not sure what they would have gained by making this up?

They may be the masters of spin, but I'm inclined to believe this particular statement, not least because I was told the other week by someone within the club that we have "almost broken even this season". I'll guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

[Spencer]

so why ant the accounts filed then if its all ok

Because SISU haven't decided if they want to pump £5m in. And why would they if ACL agree to a lower rent such that they only have to pump £4m in?

But, as I say, I'm no accountant - just my thoughts.

 

[Ashdown1]

SISU have recently stated that a home average of 11K is our current break even point. If SISU can produce a set of management accounts showing a healthy enough balance sheet and no external creditors then it will ultimately come down to the issue of rent and how the judge views that. If SISU can demonstrate that it is not about an inability to pay but more an unwillingness to pay owing to the fact they dispute the terms of the agreement, then it is difficult to see how a judge can rule that we are insolvent?

I'm not a legal expert though and am just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that this is far from a formality.

The judge will just tell the skunks to pay up if they play that game surely ?!

 

[SBT]

Tim Fisher, today:

"There is no benefit to the football club, its supporters or any other party to discuss financial and commercial details through the media.

"Why would we do that when we are at such a delicate stage in proceedings?"

Tim Fisher, five days ago, to The Guardian

"We are at a tipping point and insolvent liquidation cannot be reasonably avoided. They need to re-enter negotiations pronto or we file. When somebody puts a gun in your mouth, it is no longer a negotiation, it's an execution. You either accept the deal or get out of town. The council have gone on record and said 'get out of town'. We may have to take that invitation.

Worryingly desperate from Tim.

 

[oakey]

I just think that SISU are likely to have (& had) some of the finest legal, financial & regulatory brains studying all the possible outcomes at every stage since they took over. Their people will know what they want & pretty-much how to get it for the price they believe is best for them. Yes we know things can sometimes be missed or circumstances change (e.g. FFP rules, relegation) throwing a spanner in the works...I just think it unlikely that by the time (or even if) SISU decided to depart CCFC that they would do so much down on the deal overall IMO

Like Lehman bros, Northern Rock and all those other financiers had expert advice, you mean?
I don't quite get this blind faith that aggressive, ball breaking investment companies are really clever and don't crash and burn sometimes. SISU may well have more cards to play but they will lose money big time in the end. Their goose is being prepared for the oven IMO

 

[Ashdown1]

'We'.....................Does Tim 'nice but dim' think auntie Joy is going to take him back home to Mayfair, he'll be up on the scrapheap with everything else !!

 

[Spencer]

Tim Fisher, today:



Tim Fisher, five days ago, to The Guardian



Worryingly desperate from Tim.

I don't see it like that.

For me it is more brinkmanship. It is SISU saying, "come on then, sue us if you want but if you win we ain't paying! Oh, and by the way, we may just take your main source of income away - just for the spite of it!!!!"

 

[BackRoomRummermill]

It will all come out the real goings on in court, most of the posts on here are complete guesswork

 

[SBT]

I don't see it like that.

For me it is more brinkmanship. It is SISU saying, "come on then, sue us if you want but if you win we ain't paying! Oh, and by the way, we may just take your main source of income away - just for the spite of it!!!!"

When Tim's only comeback to ACL's latest manoeuvre is to complain about financial details being leaked to the press, when this whole administration move came as a direct result of him threatening liquidation in a national newspaper, you have to wonder if we're still dealing with a master tactician here.

 

[theferret]

It will all come out the real goings on in court, most of the posts on here are complete guesswork

Oh absolutely, we're all guessing, but I don't think it does any harm to try and get an understanding of what the court hearing is really about and what the likely outcome might be.

 

[6 Generations]

What don't you understand?

All SISU need to demonstrate in order to avoid admin is that they have an ability to pay their debts as they fall due.

SISU are saying the rent isn't due as they have a dispute. This is easily evidenced by the behaviour of ACL and their willingness to offer concessions on the rent.

This court hearing isn't about whether SISU should pay.

I just think ACL are now playing their only real card left. SISU have played a great game in terms of leaving ACL in no doubt that, even if they obtained a court order, they wouldn't get the rent as they'd merely liquidate the club.

Therefore, ACL will be throwing good money after bad if they decide to sue SISU.

Surely, regardless of their stance on what SISU might consider a fair level of rent, i believe one court of law in this country has already ruled in favour of ACL being owed an outstanding balance of approx £1.3 million.

That court of law categorically stated these monies are legally owed to ACL.

Unless, therefore SISU either pay some or all outstanding monies on or before Friday 22nd March 2013, i fail to see how the High Court can possibly reach any other conclusion but to accept ACL'S application for Administration, regardless of whether SISU can now suddenly prove means.

My preference would actually be that SISU at least make a 'gesture' payment, and promise to pay the balance of arrears over an agreed period.

 

[Spencer]

When Tim's only comeback to ACL's latest manoeuvre is to complain about financial details being leaked to the press, when this whole administration move came as a direct result of him threatening liquidation in a national newspaper, you have to wonder if we're still dealing with a master tactician here.

No, all Tim did was reinforce negotiations had been taking place. This demonstrates a dispute which, by virtue of the fact negotiations have faltered, has crystallised, and can be adjudicated upon by a third party.

The call for administration actually, to me as a total outsider guessing like everyone else, is a desperate move by ACL who have very few moves they can take.

 

[theferret]

Surely, regardless of their stance on what SISU might consider a fair level of rent, i believe one court of law in this country has already ruled in favour of ACL being owed an outstanding balance of approx £1.3 million.

That court of law categorically stated these monies are legally owed to ACL.

Unless, therefore SISU either pay some or all outstanding monies on or before Friday 22nd March 2013, i fail to see how the High Court can possibly reach any other conclusion but to accept ACL'S application for Administration, regardless of whether SISU can now suddenly prove means.

My preference would actually be that SISU at least make a 'gesture' payment, and promise to pay the balance of arrears over an agreed period.

This is a very good point. Perhaps the issue of means is indeed irrelevant at this stage.

 

[coundonskyblue]

Surely, regardless of their stance on what SISU might consider a fair level of rent, i believe one court of law in this country has already ruled in favour of ACL being owed an outstanding balance of approx £1.3 million.

That court of law categorically stated these monies are legally owed to ACL.

Unless, therefore SISU either pay some or all outstanding monies on or before Friday 22nd March 2013, i fail to see how the High Court can possibly reach any other conclusion but to accept ACL'S application for Administration, regardless of whether SISU can now suddenly prove means.

My preference would actually be that SISU at least make a 'gesture' payment, and promise to pay the balance of arrears over an agreed period.

Would that not be something ACL would have to agree to? If it went to court and Sisu offered it, but ACL refused, what would happen then?

 

[Spencer]

This is a very good point. Perhaps the issue of means is indeed irrelevant at this stage.

If a court has ruled that the rent should be paid you are correct - I didn't believe it had gone that far?

The third party order they got was an interim order - no more than SISU asking for security of costs (which I guess is their next move as the court has also asked for acl's accounts).

 

[6 Generations]

Would that not be something ACL would have to agree to? If it went to court and Sisu offered it, but ACL refused, what would happen then?

You maybe correct, and i do not profess to know.

But in a purely arbitrary way, i fail to see what other stance SISU could adopt in their defence and assume that any High Court judge would have the power to find in favour of any attempt at compromise, prior to the last resort of ruling in favour of Administration.

 

[coundonskyblue]

You maybe correct, and i do not profess to know.

But in a purely arbitrary way, i fail to see what other stance SISU could adopt in their defence and assume that any High Court judge would have the power to find in favour of any attempt at compromise, prior to the last resort of ruling in favour of Administration.

Well we will know in a week.

If Sisu don't try and offer something then I think we can all take that as a sign that they have given up completely.

 

[play_in_skyblue_stripes]

I was also going to raise the point someone just made, that the legal system quite some time ago instructed SISU have to pay the money owed to ACL.

They have NOT made that payment. So showing evidence of ability to pay will NOT impress the high court as that ability to pay has NOT turned into hard cash payment previously.

Another recent failure to file accounts will NOT look good to the high court either as well as the two previous years.

As so many other posters, I am not a legal expert.

The only option for SISU I think is to pay. I suspect before Friday they will actually hand over the cash and avoid this action. If they done I believe the admistrator will be brought to run the club and find a buyer.

 

[SBT]

No, all Tim did was reinforce negotiations had been taking place.

You can't spot any financial details in that Guardian article at all?

 

[dongonzalos]

What a totally and utterly pointless statement.

If you were confident about your position and that you had been hard done by you would be shouting from the roof tops

 

[dongonzalos]

Surely, regardless of their stance on what SISU might consider a fair level of rent, i believe one court of law in this country has already ruled in favour of ACL being owed an outstanding balance of approx £1.3 million.

That court of law categorically stated these monies are legally owed to ACL.

Unless, therefore SISU either pay some or all outstanding monies on or before Friday 22nd March 2013, i fail to see how the High Court can possibly reach any other conclusion but to accept ACL'S application for Administration, regardless of whether SISU can now suddenly prove means.

My preference would actually be that SISU at least make a 'gesture' payment, and promise to pay the balance of arrears over an agreed period.

The problem is, they would make the gesture. Then ACL could argue how can they be trusted to pay the rest.

I think at this stage ACL will be demanding the full amount up front and the contract to be honoured as it stands in the future.

ACL I think have reached the point of no return.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Like Lehman bros, Northern Rock and all those other financiers had expert advice, you mean?
I don't quite get this blind faith that aggressive, ball breaking investment companies are really clever and don't crash and burn sometimes. SISU may well have more cards to play but they will lose money big time in the end. Their goose is being prepared for the oven IMO

Blind faith??? That comes across as snide, mocking, accusing or possibly all three. I can't think what bit suggests blind faith - and yes you are right that they can sometimes crash & burn like those mentioned...but for everyone that does there are ten-fold that prosper, often by the same or similar tactics. Even the giants like Tesco for example have to get their money to develop & invest from somewhere & where? The like of SISU is where i.e. raising capital! They rarely get it wrong - but who knows (you perhaps?) this might be one of those they do get wrong. Fact is they will still engineer everything to minimise damage to their investors.

 

[leicesterskyblue]

seems to me that its all fairly straight forward, SISU are digging their heels in over the rent, as obviously a League One club can't sustain that level of rent. They seem confident reading between the lines that they can prove when push comes to shove that they can pay, however Fisher needs to keep the public pressure on ACL that they are skint, really can't afford it, and if they are forced to pay then they go under potentially taking the club with it, thus making it not in ACL's interest to kill he golden goose. I actually think that while TF might not be being honest with anybody outside his office, but I dont see how its in SISU's (which unfortunately in this case means CCFC's) interests to he open and honest. It would be like bluffing in pokers then turning to your missus and shouting look at my aces! Whats good for CCFC is good SISU, yes they are corporate slime, but its not in their long term interests for the club to go into administration.

the 11k gate figure is interesting, I wonder if that includes the large number of fans who buy Senior or junior tickets when they should be paying full price and take advantage of the electronic system and ever so attentive stewards???

 

[6 Generations]

The problem is, they would make the gesture. Then ACL could argue how can they be trusted to pay the rest.

I think at this stage ACL will be demanding the full amount up front and the contract to be honoured as it stands in the future.

ACL I think have reached the point of no return.

Again you maybe correct but, i reiterate, the judge may well take an arbitrary stance and at least diplomatically encourage ACl to accept an offer from SISU.

 

[Flying Fokker]

SISU's offer of course? On their terms. Not likely now.

 

[Covstu]

oh 'woe is us' SISU..... do we all feel sorry for you, fuck of do we!

 

[dongonzalos]

Again you maybe correct but, i reiterate, the judge may well take an arbitrary stance and at least diplomatically encourage ACl to accept an offer from SISU.

I think he would probably say accept the full amount and see through the agreed new rent.

It is unlikely a judge would force ACL to accept a gesture now.

The judge I guess would be frustrated with SUSU to allow it to get in front if him before making the gesture.

Again I am only guessing.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Judges don't make arbtitary judgements, they have to work on the letter of the law.