Has the trust contacted joy seppela to discuss sisu's way forward ?
"Paul agreed to pursue all those matters. In relation to the Academy, he confirmed that he had told both Coventry City (Holdings) Limited and the Higgs Trust that they are able to resolve the matter without delay, with all the costs met by Holdings."
Please concentrate on finding the Golden Share without a matter of delay Mr Appleton..
So let me get this right the trust has visited the person currently running what ?
I think it's good he's meeting with them & making it clear that he considers to be such an important stakeholder. Although a stakeholder without being a debtor in financial terms - he seems to have left himself open to criticism should he ride rough-shod over fan's interests.
They've met the Administrator. That's the person currently running CCFC Ltd.
Has the trust contacted joy seppela to discuss sisu's way forward ?
What is there to run in ccfc ltd ?
For example is he over seeing the team manager ?
Why does it take so long to read documents SISU are fecking us around
Would probably help of the administrator worked from Coventry, not London
Would probably help of the administrator worked from Coventry, not London
How many times do people have to answer this question fuck me don't people read treads before they ask questions getting bored of this as an argument,So please explain what the trust is going to do regarding getting the club out of the mess its in ?
Wrong questions to the wrong people make you look stupid.
I will expand a telephone conversation would suffice in this instance rather than announce a big meeting and then an announcement of a statement before even doing the the statement , then tell us nothing new.
Just wasting everyone's time and isn't very clever.
Have you? Me neither. I'm all mouth and no trousers so I'm glad we have people like the Trust to ask questions on our behalf.
The administrator is running CCFC Ltd. There is debt to SISU and some others. As far as we know that is not the football club and therefore nothing to do with players, their contracts or of any other employee of the football club. Those are all Holdings. Quite why you would ask him about anything not related to what his is running is crazy. Quite why the administrator thinks he can tell holdings what to do about the academy seems stretched too. When has the academy been a part of CCFC Ltd?
It's not a matter of where the golden share is but establishing which entity has the right to it. But as I said before the football club (Holdings) nothing to do with the administrator is fielding a team, paying wages and completing fixtures.
Now again quite why the administrator is receiving the match day revenue (if that is true) is also rather strange?
Perhaps these simple questions would have clarified a lot for all of us. In other words what is he administering?
He also sounds like he's bloody Columbo rather than an administrator. Just ask what part if any of the football club currently fielding a team do you run? I think the answer is none. that is being run by SISU's company CCFC (Holdings) Ltd. and are not in admin!
Just some questions
- what exactly are Mr Appletons terms of reference?
- if appointed to CCFC Ltd why does he feel able to tell CCFC H what to do ?
- How can he dismiss a claim from a creditor by saying someone else who he doesnt act for will pay it and why does he feel he can tell a third party to accept it. The contract at AEH or at ACL as yet is not broken until CCFC Ltd is liquidated or agreement reached?
- If he is acting for a non trading property subsidiary - surely the only decision he has is to liquidate, so the only reason it is still going it would seem is that he needs to to secure the League share for CCFC (the club) which is apparently operated by CCFC H Ltd, does that mean he is acting jointly with CCFC H Ltd?
- How difficult can it be to establish who is registered as the owner of the share...... If the league has records he can obtain those but he can also obtain other records (as administrator under the insolvency acts he has rights to obtain information). It doesnt matter what the intended owner is, it does matter who the registered owner is. For example the Football League annual return to Company House 23/06/08 lists it as company number 3056875 ........ that is CCFC Ltd. So in 2008 that is who the Football League registered and recognised as the owner. Surely SISU have the relevant paperwork transferring that share since then ? The football league annual return 23/06/12 still lists it as CCFC Ltd so no change had been registered by that date. So how long can the paper trail be ? Intention doesnt matter, internal accounting jiggery pokery doesnt matter, what was registered and approved by the Football League?
Up until last June when the 2011 accounts were signed off the trade was clearly in CCFC Ltd (including the academy). The accounts could only be signed off because there were cash flows/budgets for 12 months from that date indicating the company (CCFC Ltd) was a going concern ie not non trading. We are still in that period. If the directors were aware at June 2012 that CCFC Ltd was not trading and that the trade was now in CCFCH then that is significant to anyone reading the accounts and should have been declared in the accounts. For instance had ACL been aware that CCFC Ltd no longer traded then their actions would almost certainly have been different. CCFC Ltd is portrayed as having nothing other than the lease, no income, if that were the case last June I suspect the club would have started the season under administration and embargo. The administrator will have to investigate this period thoroughly
There is a lot in this that just doesnt seem to stack up. Of course the administrators report will or should enlighten and clarify all this and other matters ...........
The administrators terms of reference seem to have very fluid boundaries though to me
Just some questions
- what exactly are Mr Appletons terms of reference?
- if appointed to CCFC Ltd why does he feel able to tell CCFC H what to do ?
- How can he dismiss a claim from a creditor by saying someone else who he doesnt act for will pay it and why does he feel he can tell a third party to accept it. The contract at AEH or at ACL as yet is not broken until CCFC Ltd is liquidated or agreement reached?
- If he is acting for a non trading property subsidiary - surely the only decision he has is to liquidate, so the only reason it is still going it would seem is that he needs to to secure the League share for CCFC (the club) which is apparently operated by CCFC H Ltd, does that mean he is acting jointly with CCFC H Ltd? or that he believes the whole operation is wrong and the club is CCFC Ltd's?
- How difficult is it to establish what a non trading property subsidiary with just a lease has by way of assets, liabilities or income? There should be nothing other than the lease and an inter company debt
- If both CCFC Ltd and CCFC H Ltd have been charged by ARVO why did ARVO go after the company that apparently has no assets and leave the company with assets alone?
- How difficult can it be to establish who is registered as the owner of the share...... If the league has records he can obtain those but he can also obtain other records (as administrator under the insolvency acts he has rights to obtain information). It doesnt matter what the intended owner is, it does matter who the registered owner is. For example the Football League annual return to Company House 23/06/08 lists it as company number 3056875 ........ that is CCFC Ltd. So in 2008 that is who the Football League registered and recognised as the owner. Surely SISU have the relevant paperwork transferring that share since then ? The football league annual return 23/06/12 still lists it as CCFC Ltd so no change had been registered by that date. So how long can the paper trail be ? Intention doesnt matter, internal accounting jiggery pokery doesnt matter, what was registered and approved by the Football League?
Up until last June when the 2011 accounts were signed off the trade was clearly in CCFC Ltd (including the academy). The accounts could only be signed off because there were cash flows/budgets for 12 months from that date indicating the company (CCFC Ltd) was a going concern ie not non trading. We are still in that period. If the directors were aware at June 2012 that CCFC Ltd was not trading and that the trade was now in CCFCH then that is significant to anyone reading the accounts and should have been declared in the accounts. For instance had ACL been aware that CCFC Ltd no longer traded then their actions would almost certainly have been different. CCFC Ltd is portrayed as having nothing other than the lease, no income, if that were the case last June I suspect the club would have started the season under administration and embargo. The administrator will have to investigate this period thoroughly
There is a lot in this that just doesnt seem to stack up. Of course the administrators report will or should enlighten and clarify all this and other matters ...........
The administrators terms of reference seem to have very fluid boundaries though to me
Not inferring it no soe............ administration is a matter of legal fact. CCFCH is no in admin
If you look at CCFC it is owned by CCFCH ......... so effectively one business........ or if you accept that everything bar the lease is in CCFCH it is one business. Clearly that business doesnt seem able to pay its bill which ever way you choose to package it. All that has happened is that the same figures have been allocated in the same group in a different way .......... they are still the same figures in total though. So why is it a solvent going concern? Why did ARVO go after CCFC Ltd (no assets) but not CCFC H (assets Ryton, equipment, trademarks, players contracts etc ) it has a charge on both companies? Which would you choose if you wanted your money back?
Perhaps it should all be in admin.............perhaps it will be in time ......... we will have to wait see
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?