skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
SISU should have made an offer for the councils share at the same time then.
SISU should have made an offer for the councils share at the same time then.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If you're referencing what I think you are referencing then you are talking about SISU's negotiations with Higgs not CCC. SISU proposed purchasing Higgs share of ACL and as part of that deal the lease would be extended to 125 years which would have needed the approval of CCC. They entered into a period of exclusivity with Higgs however when they tried to extend the exclusivity period Higgs refused.
In the judicial review Justice Hickinbottom referred to this deal and stated there was"no possible way the council would be willing to agree a transaction with Sisu"
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Rubbish - they always were interested in 100% or not at all. L
Chief Dave has smashed you out of court in this debate - why keep coming back for more?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The council had already stated they would never sell to the club their share.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
But you admit that SISU new that the length of the lease was negotiable? Unlike what you were saying earlier?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Can you read Tony?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Was this before or after they publicly announced that they would listen to ANY serious offer for the Ricoh and then got on the train to meet Joy at SISU HQ in person?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They publically announced they were building bridges with the club before perhaps selling the Ricoh - having already sold it to Wasps.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Yes. Can you. Dave said earlier in this thread that CCC should have informed SISU that the length of the lease could be extended. It seems SISU were already aware of this fact having previously negotiated an extension on the lease.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Read it again, CCC never agreed to extend the lease to 125 years and Justice Hickinbottom stated there was "no possible way the council would be willing to agree a transaction with Sisu".
And of course even if SISU were 100% convinced a 200 year lease was available despite there never having been a single mention of it or even the slightest indication it was you still have the issue of sale price. Given that SISU were quoted £24m for matchday F&B access what would lead them to believe purchasing the whole of ACL with the lease quadrupled would cost £5.5m?
I would suggest that any such offer from SISU would have been dismissed out of hand, and once made public SISU would have been slaughtered for attempting to rip off the local taxpayer and a childrens charity.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Can you show where in that post it says that CCC offered SISU the same terms they eventually sold ACL to Wasps under?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Which only confirms that should you have an appetite to do a deal for the Ricoh it was there to be done.
How did Joy follow up Ann's visit to SISU HQ over six months prior to the Wasps deal being completed?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
No it doesn't, the only thing it confirms is that the council are incapable of being straight up and truthful where this matter is concerned.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Let's not go around in circles with this again Dave in your imagination land (remember stay away from the Christmas Critters).
SISU knew that the length of the lease was negotiable. It's down to SISU to get the deal done, no one else. Perhaps if they weren't so distracted in the pointless JR they might have realised now was the time to come to the table. Why didn't they?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
/sighs for 10 characters
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Again. You're really struggling with this. The JR deal's with what happened up until the point that the council bailed out ACL with the YB loan. The JR is about a very specific timescale and a very specific set of events. I'm talking about what's happening/happened after that set timescale and set of events.
The public statement inviting ANY serious offer for the Ricoh came AFTER this timescale as did the subsequent trip to meet Joy at SISU HQ.
I'll say that again. The public statement inviting ANY serious offer came AFTER the timescale set out in the JR.
Things do change Dave. There was a time we were never coming back to the Ricoh remember.
Last edited:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Likewise.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Yeah and SISU stated that the club would never return to the Ricoh but back at the Ricoh we are. Things change. Accept it.
I do hope you and Dave didn't stop paying attention in history lessons when learning about WW2 at the point when we evacuated the beaches at Dunkirk otherwise you'd be thinking that the Nazis won the war. You need to start paying attention to what happened after the events and time period covered in the JR.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Yes. How could the lease be extended for only part of ACL?
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Draft Heads of Terms were
indeed signed by the Council and SISU, on 2 August 2012. Those more or less
reiterated the principles of the SISU plan I have already outlined, i.e. (i) SISU would
purchase the Higgs Charity’s share of ACL, (ii)SISU would discharge and write off
the Bank loan debt, in return for the lease to ACL being extended to 125 years, and
(iii) rent was to be agreed between CCFC and ACL.
To be clear then, the Council and SISU signed the draft terms to extend the lease. SISU were definitely aware that the lease could be extended.