Wasps going into admin & the impact on CCFC (6 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
From the prospectus -

Risks relating the head lease of the Arena granted to ACL2006

Under the terms of the head lease granted by Coventry City Council (“CCC”) to Arena Coventry (2006) Limited (“ACL2006”) in respect of the Arena (the “Head Lease”), CCC have reserved the right to forfeit the Head Lease if ACL2006 becomes insolvent.

Insolvency in this scenario means a situation where ACL2006 becomes unable to pay its debts, has a receiver/administrator/provisional liquidator appointed over its assets, has assets seized in order to pay debts of ACL2006 or has a winding-up order made against it.

The effect of forfeiture would be that the 250 year Head Lease would fall away and that ACL would then become the tenant of CCC at the Arena for the remaining 38 years of its existing lease.

However, the right of CCC to claim forfeiture of the Head Lease is not an automatic right. If CCC made a claim for such forfeiture, this could be contested by ACL2006, any third party that held security over ACL2006 and any subtenants of ACL2006 by making application to a court in England.

Further, if an administrator was to be appointed over the assets of ACL2006, then CCC would not be able to forfeit the Head Lease without the consent of the appointed administrator or with the leave of the courts.
This is where the bondholders dropping the ball may be to their detriment

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
However, the right of CCC to claim forfeiture of the Head Lease is not an automatic right. If CCC made a claim for such forfeiture, this could be contested by ACL2006, any third party that held security over ACL2006 and any subtenants of ACL2006 by making application to a court in England.
Are CCFC a subtenant?
Probably yeah but ACL is too

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
How’s Sunderland?
No idea. Couldn't even tell you where they are in the table. Why don't you ask those from here that visited their site well after we last played them last season?

It is idiotic comments like this that keeps me away from commenting on here. As you well know my wife has cancer and when I can't be in France with her and look after my children I am on the phone to her for hours each day trying to keep her together.

But thanks for thinking about me.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
This is where the bondholders dropping the ball may be to their detriment

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The problem is that the bondholders don't have direct rights, everything goes through the trustee... who was originally appointed by Wasps and seems remarkably reluctant to take any action.

If SISU pulled this kind of crap, the local media would be all over it. Wasps, for reasons that are entirely opaque to me, seem to get away with it.
 

Gynnsthetonic

Well-Known Member
The problem is that the bondholders don't have direct rights, everything goes through the trustee... who was originally appointed by Wasps and seems remarkably reluctant to take any action.

If SISU pulled this kind of crap, the local media would be all over it. Wasps, for reasons that are entirely opaque to me, seem to get away with it.
And we know what our local media are like, say what you like about Gilbert but he does do some digging and report on it
 

MusicDating

Euro 2016 Prediction League Champion!!
From the DT article on Worcs, saying they're likely to be relegated. The administrator expects their appeal on Covid grounds to be rejected by the RFU...

Even were a takeover to be completed in time for Worcester to see out the season, Palmer expected the Rugby Football Union to relegate them anyway at the end of the campaign.

Palmer had lobbied the RFU not to impose the sanction designed to punish clubs that enter administration, asking them to invoke a no-fault clause covering insolvencies triggered by the coronavirus crisis.

“We put in our appeal, as we were required to, within 24 hours,” she said.

“The RFU’s response to that appears to be – but not fully confirmed – that we’re on very thin ground in terms of that appeal.”
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
From the DT article on Worcs, saying they're likely to be relegated. The administrator expects their appeal on Covid grounds to be rejected by the RFU...

Even were a takeover to be completed in time for Worcester to see out the season, Palmer expected the Rugby Football Union to relegate them anyway at the end of the campaign.

Palmer had lobbied the RFU not to impose the sanction designed to punish clubs that enter administration, asking them to invoke a no-fault clause covering insolvencies triggered by the coronavirus crisis.

“We put in our appeal, as we were required to, within 24 hours,” she said.

“The RFU’s response to that appears to be – but not fully confirmed – that we’re on very thin ground in terms of that appeal.”
Worcester could be an issue for Wasps. If a new owners comes in and thinks they have been treated differently to Wasps by the RFU they might consider taking legal action. Not sure the RFU will be keen on leaving themselves open to that.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Browsing the Web whilst on the phone. Been announced that all players and staff at Worcester are having their contracts cancelled and are free to sign elsewhere


So how much longer can Wasps kick the can down the road?
 

steve cooper

Well-Known Member

Article published today - headline sounds more positive than the detail in the article.
That was Sep 5th
Just goes to show though to take anything said with a massive pinch of salt.
This is an article from a couple of weeks ago with similarly positive headline.
It's massively in anyone's interest in this position to talk things up, in the hope that something will turn up.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
I didn't know either. Best wishes for you and your wife, Astute. 🤞

Just to second that, I'm sure everyone here would wish you the best, Astute, it sounds like you're really going through it.

We might differ over football, (and rugby, politics, accountancy, and law for that matter!*), but we're still all fans together at the end of the day. If there's anything you need I'll bet there's someone hereabouts who'll be willing to help - just ask mate.

(*and music, this lot just have the worst taste in music) 🙂
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
Browsing the Web whilst on the phone. Been announced that all players and staff at Worcester are having their contracts cancelled and are free to sign elsewhere


So how much longer can Wasps kick the can down the road?

I'm going to guess another 10 working days at the most, then HMRC are going to get their kicking boots on and put a stop to it even if no one else does.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
I'm amazed the trustee hasn't done anything for the bondholders.

You'd think they'd be all set up with something for this sort of the event but they've done fuck all and left it to the bondholders to set up a Facebook group.
 

Nick

Administrator
I'm amazed the trustee hasn't done anything for the bondholders.

You'd think they'd be all set up with something for this sort of the event but they've done fuck all and left it to the bondholders to set up a Facebook group.

What is the relationship between Trustee and Wasps?
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
What is the relationship between Trustee and Wasps?

The trustee was appointed by Wasps when the bonds were issued, notionally to represent the interests of the bondholders.

It's starting to look like that system is somewhat flawed, as what it really does is mean that the bondholders can't take action other than through the trustee.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
What would have to change for the exchange to remove the restrictions on trading the bond's?
 

Mcbean

Well-Known Member
That interest payment is 6.5% every six months !!!! No wonder the £2k was forthcoming from the bond holders
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
It's probably not looking like such a good return now though. And given what's gone on and where interest rates currently are, what rate would bondholders need to be offered to extend? Double and then some, I'd venture.

How could Wasps afford to pay interest at (say) 13% per annum on 35million. That's £4.5 million just in interest.

If they can get out of this one it'll make those 'A-Team' escapes look realistic. 😁
 

MusicDating

Euro 2016 Prediction League Champion!!
It's probably not looking like such a good return now though. And given what's gone on and where interest rates currently are, what rate would bondholders need to be offered to extend? Double and then some, I'd venture.

How could Wasps afford to pay interest at (say) 13% per annum on 35million. That's £4.5 million just in interest.

If they can get out of this one it'll make those 'A-Team' escapes look realistic. 😁
Yup, the timing couldn't have come at a worst time for Wasps (they might have got away with it in May!) and I really can't see how they can avoid admin. Even posters on Onceawasp are starting to realise that.

I've no doubt Wasps continued to issue optimistic statements since the default so that the Trustees could justify not taking any action.

What happens in the event of a forfeiture is too opaque for me to understand but does point towards the courts to decide and I've very glad I'm not a bondholder...
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
I still suspect Wasps will find a way to hang around, but let’s imagine they are gone. I want to believe CCFC might gain – but how exactly, apart from a flatter pitch?

The web of companies is way beyond me. Who would be calling the shots if Wasps were out of the equation? Would Sisu be looking to get the 250 year lease, or would they go back to their old demands for the unencumbered freehold with all the contracts paid off? Would they treat CCFC any differently to the way they do now? They aren’t showing any interest in the Premier League, but would that change? Would we be any more attractive to a new owner, or would the debts and the costs of owning the white elephant still be prohibitive?
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
What would have to change for the exchange to remove the restrictions on trading the bond's?

As I understand it, it's controlled by the FCA and you need stuff like a draft bond prospectus that meets with their approval.

Given the current bond is supposed to have redeemed in May, and all of the confusion around administration, I can't see the FCA relisting it.

That's because I also can't see how the current prospectus can be seen to apply and that the bonds themselves are now technically in default.

In short, I can't see it happening.

The only way I see the bondholders getting paid is a new investor clearing the debt, possibly by offering a haircut, or the bondholders forcing the sale of the lease and any other assets held by Wasps/ACL.

Thinking it through further, the problem with offering a haircut is that they'd have to get a certain proportion to agree, and I don't think that's going to be easy in the amount of time Wasps have left; especially now that the administration clock is ticking.

Unless there's genuinely someone out there with a lot of money to throw at Wasps, £40-50m, then I can't see any way they avoid administration. Just my personal opinion though, obviously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top