Wasps going into admin & the impact on CCFC (218 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Reeves is still saying he wants to Wasps to keep playing there.

"There was no detailed proposal" Enough details for Wasps to vote on it?

He is saying it's truthful about no discussions because it wasn't a formal request.

He also says he hasn't signed an NDA (after saying he can't say things because of an NDA).
 
jordan210

jordan210

Well-Known Member
Nick said:


The bloke is all over the shop.

"No funding into Wasps"
"It wasn't about that, it was about the wider issue of the arena"
Click to expand...


Looks like he is on MDMA
giphy.gif
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator


Reeves "doesn't know" if Richardson will still be involved ;)

He also drops Duggins in it multiple times by saying Duggins knows things he has claimed he doesn't.

He is saying that people haven't asked about "discussions" and that they have only asked about "formal requests for funding".

What a c**t.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Nick said:


Reeves "doesn't know" if Richardson will still be involved ;)

He also drops Duggins in it multiple times by saying Duggins knows things he has claimed he doesn't.

He is saying that people haven't asked about "discussions" and that they have only asked about "formal requests for funding".

What a c**t.
Click to expand...


Imagine if the football club were given this much help and charity since 2005
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Nick said:


The bloke is all over the shop.

"No funding into Wasps"
"It wasn't about that, it was about the wider issue of the arena"
Click to expand...

I thought Duggins was bad at interviews, that's a shocker. Can't keep his answers straight from one question to the next.

We're supposed to believe he was having discussions, no matter how detailed or not they were, about wasps but has no idea if Richardson has a desire to stay involved or not.

If you're going to make stuff up at least make it vaguely believable. They thing because 'look SISU' worked last time they can come up with any old rubbish this time and people will fall for it.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
He has literally said that Duggins was lying in the council meeting when asked. He has said Duggins was briefed.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
The Philosopher said:
Looks like the Bondholders could do worse than find an alternative partner.

The fact is company number 04187289 (Wasps) has gone (think of it as just a company number for a minute) and the creditors of the group (including Richardson) want the proceeds of the sale of the Arena Lease.

The Bondholders are in the strongest position because they have security (which is being argued but I still think is strong. I get criticism on here but DGAF. Let me explain: it was sold as being secure but there were loopholes. Think PPI - was sold as one thing and it was ruled the sale was misleading. Nothing is straightforward in commercial law).

It smells of a strong-arming. “Accept this or you’ll get nothing”

“The lease will revert to CCC”.

Who is going to blink first?
Click to expand...

PPI is a consumer law issue isn't it?
 
C

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Nick said:


Reeves "doesn't know" if Richardson will still be involved ;)

He also drops Duggins in it multiple times by saying Duggins knows things he has claimed he doesn't.

He is saying that people haven't asked about "discussions" and that they have only asked about "formal requests for funding".

What a c**t.
Click to expand...


I could watch that video 100 times and I’d be none the wiser as to what he was saying/trying to say. All I could hear was politician speak ie probably bullshit
 
Esoterica

Esoterica

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
I'm not convinced he would be. Wasps were broke and realised they needed us here, same can't be said of Ashley.

Without knowing his motives for buying the stadium how he will act as a landlord is very much an unknown.

He doesn't seem to have involvement in similar businesses we can look to as a guide
Click to expand...
Keep seeing comments that 'Mike Ashley will have done his due diligence' too. The same guy who openly admits he did 0 due diligence when he took over Newcastle and was completely surprised to find them 100M in debt!
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Esoterica said:
Keep seeing comments that 'Mike Ashley will have done his due diligence' too. The same guy who openly admits he did 0 due diligence when he took over Newcastle and was completely surprised to find them 100M in debt!
Click to expand...
As a small aside, when SISU took us over they found a large tax bill they had to pay off, that they weren't expecting. It's partly why we only got one Freddie Eastwood, rather than two or three of them.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Esoterica said:
Keep seeing comments that 'Mike Ashley will have done his due diligence' too. The same guy who openly admits he did 0 due diligence when he took over Newcastle and was completely surprised to find them 100M in debt!
Click to expand...

Robins just needs to get him down the pub fast

www.mirror.co.uk

Inside story of Mike Ashley offering eight-year Pardew contract in nightclub

Alan Pardew and his coaching staff landed eight year contracts after storming to fifth place, stunning rival managers. Now the full story of the boozy Friday night when Ashley made his generous move is told...
www.mirror.co.uk www.mirror.co.uk
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
MalcSB said:
I can’t see any mays at all.
Click to expand...

Specsavers?

If forfeiture was to take place prior to maturity of the Bonds, then U.S. Bank Trustees Limited, the entity that will hold the security on behalf of Bondholders, may not be in a position to assign the Head Lease for value in the event CCC forfeited the lease as described in the preceding paragraph. This may have an impact on the Bondholders’ ability to receive full repayment of their investment in the Bonds on the occurrence of such an insolvency event...

If - leads to May
 
jordan210

jordan210

Well-Known Member
He slips up in the last sentence about tax pays money.

He says he has never committed formally. So he clearly has had informal conversations about it.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Nick said:


Reeves "doesn't know" if Richardson will still be involved ;)

He also drops Duggins in it multiple times by saying Duggins knows things he has claimed he doesn't.

He is saying that people haven't asked about "discussions" and that they have only asked about "formal requests for funding".

What a c**t.
Click to expand...


He says potato and I say potato.
 
SHUNT31

SHUNT31

Well-Known Member
They will never allow CCFC to have ownership of the stadium.

Him and Duggins both always saying that they are working above and beyond to keep CCFC as TENANTS. Why can’t they understand that CCFC owning their own stadium is massive for our future.

Bunch of absolute pricks.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
SHUNT31 said:
They will never allow CCFC to have ownership of the stadium.

Him and Duggins both always saying that they are working above and beyond to keep CCFC as TENANTS. Why can’t they understand that CCFC owning their own stadium is massive for our future.

Bunch of absolute pricks.
Click to expand...
They worked to get games on because it kept ACL from going under.
 
MalcSB

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
oldfiver said:
Specsavers?

If forfeiture was to take place prior to maturity of the Bonds, then U.S. Bank Trustees Limited, the entity that will hold the security on behalf of Bondholders, may not be in a position to assign the Head Lease for value in the event CCC forfeited the lease as described in the preceding paragraph. This may have an impact on the Bondholders’ ability to receive full repayment of their investment in the Bonds on the occurrence of such an insolvency event...

If - leads to May
Click to expand...
Ive cleaned my specs and I wiIl give you that there is one “may not“ and one “may” - but not lots of mays. The council may choose not to forfeit the lease, but if they do then the bondholders would have to challenge the forfeiture, if the bondholders lost that challenge, the mays in red would become wills.

it is very complex, people in this thread are mixing up administration and liquidation and most haven’t read the prospectus. I’m not sure many of the bondholders have read it, tbh.

If the administrators application is successful on Thursday then ACL enters administration and continues trading until the purchase is completed without the burden of the charge on the long lease. If the application fails, then the administrators are saying ACL will be liquidated opening up the potential for forfeiture and the bondholders would face a legal battle and potentially end up with a worse outcome. Ashley could easily walk away, there isn’t a huge queue for the arena, SISU could seize the day ( but not holding my breath).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 213 (members: 0, guests: 213)
Top