Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
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 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.
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
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.
The 11k figure is made upSISU 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
so why ant the accounts filed then if its all ok
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.
"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?"
"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.
Like Lehman bros, Northern Rock and all those other financiers had expert advice, you mean?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
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!!!!"
It will all come out the real goings on in court, most of the posts on here are complete guesswork
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
No, all Tim did was reinforce negotiations had been taking place.
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.
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
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?