Here’s a headline for you….Sadly I don't work in the self employed or work when suits world of journalism. Surely anyone who doesn't like writing about royalty or Love Island has decided to take two weeks off.
If it will cheer you up, I'll pretend to be a journalist. You write the headline and I'll write some words.
Just £2 a month can help me buy a new electric kettle in time for Christmas, guys.
Where is this? Is it the inspiration for Jurrasic Five's work?
Where is this? Is it the inspiration for Jurrasic Five's work?
However, one thing that is 100% categorically true, I believe, is that each company has had a notice of winding-up against them which could make it is easier for another company to regain control of the lease.
That’s not true though?
Help me out here Grendel because my business knowledge isn't that great.
Well it’s all guesswork
Clearly there was some issue with the accounts.
The only thing we know is that clearly there’s some issue with refinancing
there’s a strong hint as well more than one funding source is needed to raise the full amount
I don’t personally see the Head Lease being sold to a third party or surely that would have been leaked
Late interest payments and bond not being repaid when it was due, then I would agree, this has a high probability.
Head Lease can be returned to Coventry City Council in the event of the winding-up order, as what is in the prospectus. I can't remember the exact wording.
I wonder if this criteria has now been reached?
no and it’s not an automatic right - sorry you are just seeing things that aren’t there
Surely this action can now be taken, I'm not saying it will, before the automatic rights of the bondholders come into force with another notice of a winding-up order in a worse case scenario.
Again, I am not saying this is happening, but there must be a reason for this.
no it can’t as the business hasnt defaulted
I can't see anything in the prospectus about a default being needed before a winding-up order for CCC to act if they required it. Just on a winding-up order.
Yet!no it can’t as the business hasnt defaulted
In short then, this is the way I see it.
If Wasps can't refinance the bond, the primary security is the 250-year head-lease held by ACL (for the purposes of this, ACL and ACL (2006), who actually hold the lease can be considered the same).
One scenario is that the bond holders take ownership of the head-lease and sell it to recover as much of the debt as possible. They could sell to whomever they choose, obviously.
Perhaps the other scenario is that ACL goes into administration. If that happens, the head-lease could revert to the council, but it leaves the bond-holders completely out of pocket so I'd fancy that results in a court challenge.
Either way though, if refinancing fails, you'd have to think that the head-lease for the stadium ends up in someone else's hands - that was the whole point of offering it as security. It's an enormous blow for Wasps if that happens, I think, because they're reliant on the income derived from the lease.
For CCFC, I still think the overall picture here would be positive. Whoever takes over the lease is still going to want CCFC to play at the stadium. It might even be that CCFC would try to buy the lease themselves at a discount. The only people who really lose are Wasps, because at best they become tenants too.
Last point: If refinancing was straightforward, it would have been in place long before now. The deadline has been known since the bonds were issued. The fact that it's been missed, and the late filing of accounts all points to Wasps being under serious pressure. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
There are the facts of the finances, but then there is the experience and lifestyle of owning a Rugby club in a large English city.
If you were in charge of things and even though you were losing money, the council would prop you up and defend you (probably using local tax payers money), the local media won't publish anything negative about you, and even at one stage fans of the hosted football club were coming to watch you - wouldn't that feel a bit God like? I might be going off on a bit of a tangent here, but there are a lot of factors which don't offer any incentive for the Wasps hierarchy to leave whatsoever.
There are alarm bells going off everywhere here, and given the information posted by certain members of this forum and their exchanges with journalists, there is obviously some sort of cover up going on given their defensiveness, willingness to block people, and flat out denial that there is anything worth reporting on.
'I´m on holiday'
'The Jubilee is more important, I will write about it in a few weeks'
'I don't cover Wasps'
'I'm going to block you now for asking a reasonable question'
No doubt there will be some of these journalists reading this thread, well, we are watching you too. The whole Wasps affair has been a dodgy shit show from start to finish (that is putting it politely), and we won't forget it. It isn't too late to do the right thing.
Can't see anyway CCFC buy the lease. Even if the owners did Id imagine we'd still be a tenant, albeit one whose tenancy was a lot more secure than currently.
So many variables it's hard to know for sure. Reuniting the ground and the club even under an OpCo/PropCo (Operating Company/Property owning Company) umbrella would have to be beneficial you'd think. Access to those ACL revenues has always been the key issue, apparently.
Even if we build our own stadium elsewhere I doubt the club will over own it as a single company now, it just doesn't seem to be the way our current owners would structure it.
However, just to bring it back on track, I still don't see Wasps losing control of the lease as being a bad thing if that's what ultimately happens. Whatever they'd like to think, CCFC is still by far the biggest draw in the city, and that puts us in the box seat with whomever might end up with the lease, imho.
So many variables it's hard to know for sure. Reuniting the ground and the club even under an OpCo/PropCo (Operating Company/Property owning Company) umbrella would have to be beneficial you'd think. Access to those ACL revenues has always been the key issue, apparently.
Even if we build our own stadium elsewhere I doubt the club will over own it as a single company now, it just doesn't seem to be the way our current owners would structure it.
However, just to bring it back on track, I still don't see Wasps losing control of the lease as being a bad thing if that's what ultimately happens. Whatever they'd like to think, CCFC is still by far the biggest draw in the city, and that puts us in the box seat with whomever might end up with the lease, imho.
Well said. Always an excuse to not doing something. If London wasps had just signed half the all blacks team he would be on that like shit off a stick within minutes. Holiday, honeymoon wouldn’t hold him back. If SISU were to invest £5b into CCFC that wouldn’t get a mention until two days later and a negative spin put over it.There are the facts of the finances, but then there is the experience and lifestyle of owning a Rugby club in a large English city.
If you were in charge of things and even though you were losing money, the council would prop you up and defend you (probably using local tax payers money), the local media won't publish anything negative about you, and even at one stage fans of the hosted football club were coming to watch you - wouldn't that feel a bit God like? I might be going off on a bit of a tangent here, but there are a lot of factors which don't offer any incentive for the Wasps hierarchy to leave whatsoever.
There are alarm bells going off everywhere here, and given the information posted by certain members of this forum and their exchanges with journalists, there is obviously some sort of cover up going on given their defensiveness, willingness to block people, and flat out denial that there is anything worth reporting on.
'I´m on holiday'
'The Jubilee is more important, I will write about it in a few weeks'
'I don't cover Wasps'
'I'm going to block you now for asking a reasonable question'
No doubt there will be some of these journalists reading this thread, well, we are watching you too. The whole Wasps affair has been a dodgy shit show from start to finish (that is putting it politely), and we won't forget it. It isn't too late to do the right thing.
It's like having an interest only mortgage and then after 25 years telling your bank, 'Yer, haven't quite sorted out the repayment yet, can I have a bit longer?'.In short then, this is the way I see it.
If Wasps can't refinance the bond, the primary security is the 250-year head-lease held by ACL (for the purposes of this, ACL and ACL (2006), who actually hold the lease can be considered the same).
One scenario is that the bond holders take ownership of the head-lease and sell it to recover as much of the debt as possible. They could sell to whomever they choose, obviously.
Perhaps the other scenario is that ACL goes into administration. If that happens, the head-lease could revert to the council, but it leaves the bond-holders completely out of pocket so I'd fancy that results in a court challenge.
Either way though, if refinancing fails, you'd have to think that the head-lease for the stadium ends up in someone else's hands - that was the whole point of offering it as security. It's an enormous blow for Wasps if that happens, I think, because they're reliant on the income derived from the lease.
For CCFC, I still think the overall picture here would be positive. Whoever takes over the lease is still going to want CCFC to play at the stadium. It might even be that CCFC would try to buy the lease themselves at a discount. The only people who really lose are Wasps, because at best they become tenants too.
Last point: If refinancing was straightforward, it would have been in place long before now. The deadline has been known since the bonds were issued. The fact that it's been missed, and the late filing of accounts all points to Wasps being under serious pressure. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
If the council end up in court because of the arena and not by sisu again I will piss my bladder out.In short then, this is the way I see it.
If Wasps can't refinance the bond, the primary security is the 250-year head-lease held by ACL (for the purposes of this, ACL and ACL (2006), who actually hold the lease can be considered the same).
One scenario is that the bond holders take ownership of the head-lease and sell it to recover as much of the debt as possible. They could sell to whomever they choose, obviously.
Perhaps the other scenario is that ACL goes into administration. If that happens, the head-lease could revert to the council, but it leaves the bond-holders completely out of pocket so I'd fancy that results in a court challenge.
Either way though, if refinancing fails, you'd have to think that the head-lease for the stadium ends up in someone else's hands - that was the whole point of offering it as security. It's an enormous blow for Wasps if that happens, I think, because they're reliant on the income derived from the lease.
For CCFC, I still think the overall picture here would be positive. Whoever takes over the lease is still going to want CCFC to play at the stadium. It might even be that CCFC would try to buy the lease themselves at a discount. The only people who really lose are Wasps, because at best they become tenants too.
Last point: If refinancing was straightforward, it would have been in place long before now. The deadline has been known since the bonds were issued. The fact that it's been missed, and the late filing of accounts all points to Wasps being under serious pressure. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
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?