J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Agreed mate, NOPM will work in the end..
Everyone makes good logical points. Nothing will happen until the JR in June.
Sisu win and they have a chance or ccc win and sisu but unfortunately ccfc are screwed. (only chance is if sisu take a short rental if they lose JR)
Despite this I want the ccc to win as I believe in morals and ethics.
Still disgusted with it all and Sisu lost 7m in the last accounts but what will next year show. Guess at around and 10m? No business can last this.
Something has to give this summer imo as it has to. JR is scheduled and Sisu cant keep losing 7m last year another 10m this year. Wont happen. Something will give. (remember sisu thought they would get crowds of 7,000 circa and its around 1500-2000 so 5,000 difference. Massive and MONEY ALWAYS TALKS!!!
And there you have the main point. They were going to do anything they had to if it meant breaking the lease. Yet you blame ACL :thinking about:
SISU threatened to liquidate our club. ACL threatened to put our club into admin. SISU put our club into admin instead so they could choose Appleton. And we know why they wanted him. Yet it is all the fault of ACL still?
ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your debt figures are grossly overstated - and you don't really realize the initial debt to the funds could probably be bought for a fraction of its nominal value.
But never mind that - I am curious to hear your opinion on the club wanting to buy the shares in ACL (and a new extra long lease for ACL) based on two independent valuations.
Come to think of it - I can't remember any of those constantly quoting a debt figure of £70m even asking why it's now only £45m.
ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
After Mr Fisher said CCFC were facing if I remember a catastrophic liquidation.
Well we are facing Liquidation now aren't we? CCFC Holdings and Ltd anyhow.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So you see nothing wrong in Mr Fisher giving that statement:thinking about:Forgot standard business practice
I think that is why Sisu wanted to purchase the Freehold because it skips dealing with ACL to a certain extent. Well the best way to deal with it would be to put mediators in, although this seems to simple.
With respect to the Debt I am not sure it will be quite that figure, Sisu have said they'd covert some of the existing debt into equity and use that to build the new Stadium along with a loan from a lender. Of course this is yet to be seen, but this was what Fisher stated way back at the Forums at the end of last season. Admittedly the appeal of attendances doesn't look great but if they did build their own Stadium it would at least be a business model of which the Club could grow from.
If our current debt stands around 40 million, 5 years at Sixfields with loses around 10 million a year (based on recent accounts plus much bigger than expected hits on attendances) and say the new stadium build is 30 million with half of loans, that seems like a lot of debt to be saddled with. Sisu can (and will) do what they want with the figures to make things look bigger or smaller depending on who they are talking too, but one thing is for sure, we are going to be paying a lot of interest for a very long time which will by far eclipse the original rental deal we had at the Ricoh, let alone the more recent revised ones with access etc. But listen, if you really want to argue that Sisu aren't that bad and we are better off playing and renting at Sixfields rather than the Ricoh then that is your right. Me personally and any other rational business minded person would see that a rental deal at the Ricoh is far better than at Sixfields.
That's not what I am saying at all, but I am just saying it's come round anyways.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words it was going to happen anyway it was engineered ie issue the statement knowing full well that ACL had to react then when they do put the blame on them put yourself into administration and appoint the administrator.
In other words it was going to happen anyway it was engineered ie issue the statement knowing full well that ACL had to react then when they do put the blame on them put yourself into administration and appoint the administrator.
ACL didn't really threaten to do it though did they? They were going to do it and all Sisu did was speed the process.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well you can't by the same token say they had to do that in light of fishers lowuidation threat as they ultimately liquidated the club anyway.
Well you can't by the same token say they had to do that in light of fishers lowuidation threat as they ultimately liquidated the club anyway.
It was nothing more than a threat in the end. It was done to stop the threat of liquidation that came from SISU. But some still twist it around to blame ACL although SISU were threatening worse.
Are you saying that ACL knew that SISU would liquidate at a later date......after moving everything of value out of LTD?
Are you suggesting that ACL wouldn't have put us into administration? That it was just an elaborate charade?
Fair enough that's your opinion and it could be as well valid as mine.
Yet the one part that let's down your whole post is this insinuation that I am defending the indefensible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually its the sad bastards who actually feel proud of a council that clearly see the club as nothing more than an entity to fleece money off that I feel sorry for.
No.
Are you saying that SISU wouldn't have liquidated like they had said they would or even put us into admin like they did if ACL hadn't done so? And are you still blaming ACL for SISU putting us into admin although it was done to get out of the rental contract?
It is you that is defending the fact that Sisu say they will not go back to a rental deal and you say you agree with them. I don't need to insinuate anything, it's what you are saying. All I am saying is that we would be better of with the latest rental deal at the Ricoh rather than at Sixfields, or do you think that the club is better off on the rental deal at Sixfields?
In any case - the goal is for the club to own its own stadium. We should all back that goal!
In principle yes, but the way SISU have gone about it is a disgrace - tearing up the lease and forfeiting the fans by dragging the club out of the city that bears its name.
No i don't think sisu would have liquidated, and I'm not personally convinced they'd have out us into admin if ACL hadn't already applied. There was still room for negotiation, they managed to get from £400k don't to £150k.
I'm not blaming ACL, I'm pointing out that it isn't black and white, had sisu not put us in admin, ACL would have 24 hours later.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
But neither a rental deal at sixfields or a rental deal at the Ricoh is the goal. Both are simply interim solutions. A short term rental deal at the Ricoh was NOT offered on acceptable terms before they signed the ground share deal.
In any case - the goal is for the club to own its own stadium. We should all back that goal!
The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.
The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.
So you agree that they put us into admin to get out of the lease but say they only did it because ACL did it first?
Grendel, is your spell check fucked? the last few days you spelling has been terrible (although slightly amusing).
The breaking of the lease is one of the few things they should be appluad end for.
No he's not. ACL raised an administration order as they claimed sisu had threatened liquidation and had to protect their interests.
Then when given the opportunity to get the club out if administration they voted to liquidate the club.
It is you that is defending the fact that Sisu say they will not go back to a rental deal and you say you agree with them. I don't need to insinuate anything, it's what you are saying. All I am saying is that we would be better of with the latest rental deal at the Ricoh rather than at Sixfields, or do you think that the club is better off on the rental deal at Sixfields?
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?