skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
SISU should have made an offer for the councils share at the same time then.
The point is irrelevant. The council in those negotiations never offered their share and indeed there would always have been the spectre of a veto rejecting the deal.
SISU and CCC worked together to agree a lease extension before, a 125 year one, clearly they must have thought that was long enough. They signed draft terms in August 2012. So it seems odd that anyone would think SISU weren't aware such an extension was possible.
I don't think Wasps negotiated it for the whole of ACL either initially. But when they purchased the Higgs share that of course changed.
SISU should have made an offer for the councils share at the same time then.
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"
But you admit that SISU new that the length of the lease was negotiable? Unlike what you were saying earlier?
The council had already stated they would never sell to the club their share.
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?
Can you read Tony?
But you admit that SISU new that the length of the lease was negotiable? Unlike what you were saying earlier?
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.
They publically announced they were building bridges with the club before perhaps selling the Ricoh - having already sold it to Wasps.
Which only confirms that should you have an appetite to do a deal for the Ricoh it was there to be done.
Can you show where in that post it says that CCC offered SISU the same terms they eventually sold ACL to Wasps under?
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.
I have never known anyone so determined to stick to there view that they will ignore every single fact presented as you Tony, guess I should congratulate you for that at least.
The council had already stated they would never sell to the club their share.
Was that for the whole of ACL?
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"
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?