Desperados
New Member
Massive lot of waffle from Tim......give us the details of the "agreed" deal....... "It’s worth noting at this point that when it became clear that they would not do the deal that had been agreed"
So to sum up, if you lie enough, eventually people will give up and assume that you're telling the truth?
What do you expect after all that bullshitting fuckwit has put us through? It's not abuse for the sake of it; it's abuse because we're very, very pissed off!
leave the forum please
No, he has every right to be here.
leave the forum please
well i have done it beforeYou gonna make me leave again with your "Goldlike Powers?" :claping hands:
wrote much more than intended ................ sorry
Spin.......
Please leave our Club Tim ........... most of us have had enough of your input
I have changed my mind.
Before this Q&A I believed ACL would have to write off the rent arrears. But now I think they will receive what they are owed.
The debt owed to ACL is not £1.2m but £650k (ish) according to Mr Appelton.
Not that I think sisu will enjoy pay that debt, but simply because it indicate that sisu's plan is to offer the Administrator to pay off all debts in Limited.
That will mean Haskel or any other potential buyer would have to offer in the region of £70m for Limited - that won't happen. Sisu can offer to write off all debts to ARVO and the other companies in the group so in reality they would only need to pay the £650k to ACL plus the fees to Appelton and his lawyer - in total around £1.2m.
It will also shown FL that the exit from administration didn't put losses on third parties - that's fit and proper.
So I have to say I was wrong - sisu actually intend to pay ACL what is owed.
Well I certainly don't expect people to be finding our situation funny & making jokes but others manage to come up with sensible replies based on the questions asked in the article, take a look at OSB's posts for example if you need a few pointers.
OSB is a clever fella but he is blinded in this case and nothing more than an anti-sisu WUM, a real shame
sisu AND council are in wrong, any sane person can see that
Please leave the forum. Calling OSB an anti-SISU WUM just shows what a clueless pratt you are.
What is owed Godiva ?
There are two little matters that affect that .....
The Escrow account is a legal liability so there is £500k there to be paid, guaranteed by GR & MM..... is that being chased?
What about the settlement of the balance of the lease & Licence ? only 42 years left ...............
Please leave the forum. Calling OSB an anti-SISU WUM just shows what a clueless pratt you are.
Trying to suppress freedom of speech now?
Please leave the forum. Calling OSB an anti-SISU WUM just shows what a clueless pratt you are.
is it ALL bullshit though? not really
way i see it he is right about council being dicks and sabotagging a similiar move for sisu that PH4 would like to take
he is right about council coming in to help ACL when they had no right
and he is right about them refusing to put a good deal on the table that will how ccfc become viable
tbh if i felt the stadium would be in a good location i probably wouldnt mind so much but i am sure they will bang it on outskirts and it will only be in coventry to the letter of the law
the council have shafted CCFC just as much as sisu, we should not forget that
So covcity4llife tells NLHWC to leave the forum and you don't comment.
Then NLHWC tells covcity4life to leave the forum and you accuse him of suppressing free speech.
Good to see your usual even handed rational approach being maintained
I don't agree with either sentiment, just missed the covcity4life post - an innocent oversight.
Ok, so that's the first part sorted. How about:
1. Demonstrating that the club is a going concern for the purposes of getting the accounts signed off
2. Surviving on crowds of 2 to 3k whilst the new ground is being built and complying with FFP at the same time
3. Getting planning permission for the new ground
4. Funding the new ground
5. Persuading supporters who've deserted the club to return in 3 years time (given by some miracle the club still exists)
Why are the Telegraph unable to ask these questions ? Their ineptitude at getting any meaningful answers is so frustrating !!
My friend ... you have not got a clue.
You may enjoy watching city in a 12k Stadium and moving backwards most of us don't.
As Sisu owe us our ACL part of tax payers ... then he should pay up.
Yeah right, so the council had no right to buy the mortgage of one of the businesses that the council is a 50% shareholder in? Are you serious?is it ALL bullshit though? not really
way i see it he is right about council being dicks and sabotagging a similiar move for sisu that PH4 would like to take
he is right about council coming in to help ACL when they had no right
and he is right about them refusing to put a good deal on the table that will how ccfc become viable
tbh if i felt the stadium would be in a good location i probably wouldnt mind so much but i am sure they will bang it on outskirts and it will only be in coventry to the letter of the law
the council have shafted CCFC just as much as sisu, we should not forget that
I have changed my mind.
Before this Q&A I believed ACL would have to write off the rent arrears. But now I think they will receive what they are owed.
The debt owed to ACL is not £1.2m but £650k (ish) according to Mr Appelton.
Not that I think sisu will enjoy pay that debt, but simply because it indicate that sisu's plan is to offer the Administrator to pay off all debts in Limited.
That will mean Haskel or any other potential buyer would have to offer in the region of £70m for Limited - that won't happen. Sisu can offer to write off all debts to ARVO and the other companies in the group so in reality they would only need to pay the £650k to ACL plus the fees to Appelton and his lawyer - in total around £1.2m.
It will also shown FL that the exit from administration didn't put losses on third parties - that's fit and proper.
So I have to say I was wrong - sisu actually intend to pay ACL what is owed.
It's defamation not deformation but don't worry the Guardian newspaper made the same mistake in an article about that subject, so it's an easy mistake to make apparently. Yes they could easily take him to court however when he's made similar inaccuracies in the past they've not done so. PWKH usually appears on here and says that Uncle Tim is talking balls (again). I've only skimmed it but there are certainly some things that would concern me from a defamation point of view if Uncle Tim can't back these statements up with evidence/facts.I was having a conversation with someone yesterday (a saints fan, happy they didn't get stuck with SISU) and he did ask me was there any actual evidence that what SISU say is false and really there isn't a great deal. You get one side saying something one day and then the other side saying no that's not right - how do we really know who is telling the truth? If, and it's a huge if, the actions of the council / ACL are as in this article then a lot of the blame has to be placed on them.
I said on here a couple of weeks ago when ACL were saying we weren't locked out of the stadium why didn't they call SISUs bluff and make a statement that whoever the FL deems to be in charge they will allow CCFC to continue to play at the Ricoh on the same terms as the last 3 matches of last season until a new deal is agreed, this article (again if true) shows why, because they won't offer SISU that deal.
One question really. If, as we all suspect, Tim is in fantasy land the surely some of this must be provable, couldn't the council or ACL take him to court for deformation or something similar?
1: If Limited is liquidated after all creditors have been paid in full, and assuming FL will give the GS to Holdings, then the club will no longer be in administration. Fisher says the accounts will be signed off and filed when the club exits admin, and that makes sense (to me).
2: We really don't know what the crows will be, but in any case I would think sisu are capable to find sponsor (SISU Capital?) and/or other revenues to counter some of the decreased income effect on FFP.
3: I don't have a clue!
4: Fisher says sisu will fund the building themselves, but I believe that when I see it. The important stuff is that sisu seem very serious on leaving Ricoh, so I am sure they have the funding ready.
5: Three years is a very, very long time! When we left HR and moved to RA the attendances increased from 16k to 22k (from memory). When a new stadium is built people will come. There is a potential for more than 10K.
Trying to suppress freedom of speech now?
usual spin, and cant be bothered to reply in detail
- How is it TF is running the club as we all know the Golden share is in ccfc ltd?
- season ticket sales to be announced, good luck with that going to be a big disappointment to you TF i think
- very close to the city isnt in the city
- Interesting on CWR this morning guy from Oxford supporters trust said Oxford pay £600k a year lease/licence in League 2 for 12500 capacity stadium and do not get the F&B's (their stadium cost £15m in 2001)
- seriously the cost of phones etc kept us from being viable????
- the request for three year deal made at end of January 2013, in TF's own words they had a plan to leave in December 2012, hardly negotiating in good faith
- there was a lease with 42 years left on it why would any landlord say ok just go do your own thing ?
- reinvest what back in the team? after paying off loans, the other running expenses, the wages based on a smaller FFP figure, interest to ARVO, return for investors, losses for the 3 years playing away from Coventry there wont be much left
- Actually the huge financial stress was the result mainly of 5 years of mis control and management. No not absolving ACL but lets be clear they do not run the club and certainly do not form the majority of the 30m losses to 31/05/11
- the ACL administration was withdrawn TF it was ARVO who put ccfc ltd in to administration - it is all in the administrators report if you care to read it
- Only way the club breaks even is to reduce costs to match income...... you know things like wages or interest paid to ARVO....... but income is about to nose dive for 3 years at least..... harder to finance the players on the pitch if break even is the target surely?
- lets be clear we were under transfer embargo before we went in to administration. You could have filed accounts July 2012 had you used a different strategy
- there was a deal on offer 29/01/13 (better than Oxfords it would seem) but SISU turned it down
- why is there old debt on the balance sheet when the takeover discounted that debt by 35m?
- did SBS&L actually ever pay out the old debt? No so why is it owed that money ?
- the debt hasnt been proven TF it is just the figure you have told the administrator.
- the 500K was actually grant money put to one side in an account that the club did not have rights to draw down but was legally required to top up.
- The £800k is not rent though is it Tim it is also the service charge for running the stadium usage by CCFC (light heat undersol heating repairs staffing of hospitality etc etc etc)
- what was the offer that was so generous - seems that the offer came from ACL (which was better than some other clubs get for lesser facilities)
- I would guess that ACL's bankers were also very happy with the deal that ACL did to clear the loan
- how was ACL going to be debt free if SISU apparently did a deal to take out the loan for them ?
- didnt the deal on the loan go through before the offer to reduce the rent etc on the 29th so why did the loan takeout terminate discussions?
- everyone and their dog knows that the main SISU tactic on anything is to head for the lawyers TF dont be so disingenuous...... who is going to be saddled with the lawyers costs i wonder? the club perhaps?
- SISU may have made proposals last December but it doesnt mean ACL/ council signed it or couldnt make other arrangements that they felt more appropriate for their business etc
- didnt actually answer question 9 TF
- A 125 year lease is viewed as the next best thing to freehold ownership, getting 50% of ACL on that basis was very valuable to the club
- forgot to mention that they agreed to buy out the debt 100% then changed their mind and wanted the council to buy 50% of it
- 50% of ACL still doesnt mean you access all the income TF
- there was I believe no contratc only Heads of Terms - those are not binding! as you well know from the dealings TF had with the Charity
- So what was it an offer on the table, heads of terms, a done deal ? make your mind up
- So what is the market rate for usage of the facilities? The fact we are L1 is not a great factor in that but is in the ability to afford any deal offered there is a difference
- no one is forcing CCFC out of the city other than SISU
- errr to be viable Tim you are going to need to costs including jobs/ staff etc ......
- the creditors listed show ACL owed £600k what about the rest of the lease which is a legal debt too
- oh by the way I can think of other creditors that should have been on the list
- there is of course a theory that SISU stage managed the whole thing to get to this point and got caught out by the Council backed loan
- retained specialists in December 2012 to get the land yet acted in good faith ? really?
wrote much more than intended ................ sorry
Spin.......
Please leave our Club Tim ........... most of us have had enough of your input
Do try to pay attention-I was just asking him to do what he asked me to do a few posts above!
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?