I think that many Bondholders invested because it looked a secure investment.The administrators are independent and have an obligation to act in creditors interests. Potentially this is their licences/livelihoods on the line. They would’ve weighed up all the pros and cons of the things raised/mentioned previously and made a call
An administrators duty is not to gamble on a potential better solution in the future especially when there’s no funding available to cover trading. If bondholders aren’t happy they should have to fund trading in the intervening period until another sale is secured
I can’t really comment on the trustees position in this. All I can say is if their communication with bondholders has been poor that certainly wouldn’t have helped and is maybe a big part of the problem here
edit - this isn’t me being heartless, I do sympathise with bondholders, especially in current difficult times for many. It was a risky investment and they believed valuations that appear overstated, many probably only got involved because they supported Wasps
And I’m suggesting that Ashley became preferred bidder after ACL (whoever) heard that SISU actually had funding to bid for the stadium and would bid when the company went into administration.
SISU (and so were the NEC Group) were then royally fucked up before they could even bid.
Point is Shmmee nobody actually really knows what ‘process’ was followed and the real reasons why Ashley became preferred bidder.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Good post.Thats fair and I totally get those concerns. Again I think the council would be fucking stupid to open themselves up to more Sisu lawsuits. I just also think Sisu haven’t played their strongest hand. They have fan support, they’re riding the crest of a wave with how the team is performing and there’s no appetite in the wider council for more bollocks.
As I said before if it comes out that the council have in any way blocked Sisu from bidding then I’ll borrow your pitchfork. But everything I’ve heard so far is Sisu we’re waiting for liquidation/open admin and you run the risk of being beaten to the punch with that strategy.
I think it was more a contra against rents due. (Did I read that somewhere?). CCFC had to get rent up to date and park their contra to get the games on.I'm guessing if CCFC made a claim about the pitch and games being off they might be a small / unsecured creditor?
This is what’s annoyed me. The council have been shifty as fuck getting Ashley in and supporting that bid. But all this time SISU sat on their hands and waiting for it to be worthless.Thats fair and I totally get those concerns. Again I think the council would be fucking stupid to open themselves up to more Sisu lawsuits. I just also think Sisu haven’t played their strongest hand. They have fan support, they’re riding the crest of a wave with how the team is performing and there’s no appetite in the wider council for more bollocks.
As I said before if it comes out that the council have in any way blocked Sisu from bidding then I’ll borrow your pitchfork. But everything I’ve heard so far is Sisu we’re waiting for liquidation/open admin and you run the risk of being beaten to the punch with that strategy.
This is what’s annoyed me. The council have been shifty as fuck getting Ashley in and supporting that bid. But all this time SISU sat on their hands and waiting for it to be worthless.
tbeyve been beaten to the punch again. They need to take it out of the council’s hands and should have matched Ashley’s bid
Need to build a jail for the council. With one wing for the political prisoners and another for the white collar fraudsters.He's directly quoted saying he did.
"Yeah but sisu wouldn't build a hotel for the council"
That’s what I have read,I think it was more a contra against rents due. (Did I read that somewhere?). CCFC had to get rent up to date and park their contra to get the games on.
Because they might mortgage it?I don’t want sisu anywhere near owning the ground and eventually my club, hopefully soon the first part of that statement happens.
Wouldn’t it be better for them to own it all so it’s a better product to sell? Because right now we’re not that appealing without the groundI don’t want sisu anywhere near owning the ground and eventually my club, hopefully soon the first part of that statement happens.
Exactly. Much better package to sell.Wouldn’t it be better for them to own it all so it’s a better product to sell? Because right now we’re not that appealing without the ground
Wouldn’t it be better for them to own it all so it’s a better product to sell? Because right now we’re not that appealing without the ground
In a word no, “big” Mike can do that.
In a word no, “big” Mike can do that.
Why do you keep calling him "big" Mike?
Not Christmas yetWhat’s happening with our happy Christmas?
Not Christmas yet
He likes it.Why do you keep calling him "big" Mike?
That might be down to “big” MikeStill expecting it to be happy though?
That might be down to “big” Mike
Why do you ask ?
Did he not originally praise the Wasp finance model?
Impossible to assume noclients invested and he’s acting on a professional capacity?
Are you him? If not why answer?
wtf are you on aboutBig Mike forecast downgraded from fireplace chunder to minor spew.
Thats fair and I totally get those concerns. Again I think the council would be fucking stupid to open themselves up to more Sisu lawsuits. I just also think Sisu haven’t played their strongest hand. They have fan support, they’re riding the crest of a wave with how the team is performing and there’s no appetite in the wider council for more bollocks.
As I said before if it comes out that the council have in any way blocked Sisu from bidding then I’ll borrow your pitchfork. But everything I’ve heard so far is Sisu we’re waiting for liquidation/open admin and you run the risk of being beaten to the punch with that strategy.
?Because accusing someone of working for Wasps/SISU/CCC on the basis of a post you might disagree with is a bit juvenile, maybe?
If you want to challenge something he's said, challenge it on the facts, rather than on some assumed motive.
Respect that point of view mate, but what I'd say is that it's entirely possible that SISU are incompetent/reckless/broke *and* that the Council have also been doing what they've done in the past, i.e. trying to do backhanded deals and influence things in secret (with similar levels of incompetence).
There's not much I can do about SISU, but personally I hold the Council and its officers to a higher standard.
Exactly - SISU are always the one backed into a corner, they should have gone on the offensiveI think the council have different priorities and I think 2014 was a total clusterfuck for a variety of reasons. But I don’t think it’s the same council now and politically the topic is a lot more heated than when Sisu were simultaneously threatening to wind up the club.
The council have been very clear on what they want, but ultimately they can’t really do much to influence the administrator without serious legal issues and despite what people think they do have lawyers look over everything to check it’s legally above board.
I’d just rather any dodginess was forced out rather than alluded to. Put a bid in, make it public, let the council answer awkward questions if it’s not taken seriously.
Why do you keep calling him "big" Mike?
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?