Where are ACL? (2 Viewers)

Forums New posts
ohitsaidwalker king power

ohitsaidwalker king power

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
ACL – jointly owned by Coventry City Council and the Alan Higgs charity – has made the application to the High Court for administration over £1.3m in arrears, racked up after the club stopped paying rent, arguing they were being vastly overcharged. A judge is due to look at the case on Friday.

This could force out Mayfair-based hedge fund owner Sisu, which has ploughed more than £40m into the club and had hoped to acquire a stake in the Ricoh.

Potential American investors have been to the Ricoh Arena on two occasions, one being last week’s Colchester game, and understood to have been given a tour by ACL interim chief executive Jacky Isaac.

However, although ACL have seized the initiative to force a change of ownership, Sisu could turn the tables as the apparent end game plays out.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/american-tycoon-eyes-sky-blues-3013764

They have met with PHIV on numerous occasions since. And I'm sure sisu have complained about this in the JR.
Click to expand...

The JR that was thrown out with distain by the judge or the one pending appeal that delays any possible attempt at reconcilliation?
 
ohitsaidwalker king power

ohitsaidwalker king power

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
What if sisu's JR claims are true and ACL were always in on it?
Click to expand...

We'll see... but why was the original JR thrown out with such a clear and damning conclusion by the judge?
Yes the law is often an ass- as proven re the legal process whereby a company can be 're sold' to the owners that placed it where it was in the first place with no penalty... but do you really think the JR will be overturned?
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
ohitsaidwalker king power said:
We'll see... but why was the original JR thrown out with such a clear and damning conclusion by the judge?
Yes the law is often an ass- as proven re the legal process whereby a company can be 're sold' to the owners that placed it where it was in the first place with no penalty... but do you really think the JR will be overturned?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know, but even if it gets thrown out again it doesn't mean it never happened.
 
ohitsaidwalker king power

ohitsaidwalker king power

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
I honestly don't know, but even if it gets thrown out again it doesn't mean it never happened.
Click to expand...

So if it gets thrown out it might have happened.. if it gets upheld it did happen- so guilty until proven innocent then.. surely not. Come on Stu whilst you and I are never likely to agree on this whole SISU/ACL thing(which I accept).. surely you must conclude that British justice is the bastion upon which we all place our faith and trust- yes sometimes its found wanting... but in the main?
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
ohitsaidwalker king power said:
So if it gets thrown out it might have happened.. if it gets upheld it did happen- so guilty until proven innocent then.. surely not. Come on Stu whilst you and I are never likely to agree on this whole SISU/ACL thing(which I accept).. surely you must conclude that British justice is the bastion upon which we all place our faith and trust- yes sometimes its found wanting... but in the main?
Click to expand...

In the main yes, but interesting stats regarding the crown prosecution service.

Over 88,000 criminal cases – one in ten – that were charged were later dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in 2011/12 due to a lack of evidence or because prosecution was deemed not to be in the public interest. This cost the taxpayer over £25 million, wasted valuable police time and had an extremely detrimental impact on the victims of crime.

In the Public Interest explores the role and responsibility of the CPS. It says the prosecution service should retain its powers but calls for more transparency and accountability when it comes to measuring the organisation’s successes and failures.

New statistics contained within the report found:

The annual budget for the CPS amounts to over half a billion pounds yet it’s handling the smallest caseload of the past decade.
The official conviction rate masks deep failings in the CPS’ performance in court. When prosecutions reached trial, the CPS had successful outcomes in only 63% of Magistrates’ Court cases and in just over half of its Crown Court cases (55%).
In 2011, one third of cracked or ineffective trials in England and Wales were the result of the prosecution failing to offer evidence, not being ready, or a prosecution witness being absent
Of the 367,067 cases given to the CPS for pre-charge decisions, one in four were dropped, most frequently because of insufficient evidence. This feeds an undercurrent of mistrust between the police and the CPS which sometimes spills out into the media.
The report also suggests the need for a revised Public Interest Test that that accurately reflects the public’s view of when a prosecution should be dropped. In 2011, the CPS decided not to prosecute 109 out of the 139 suspects who broke into Fortnum & Mason during the student protests in London in 2011, on the grounds that they did not want to ‘criminalise’ the young people involved



Lack of evidence or not in the public interest does not mean that these 88k perpetrators didn't commit the crimes.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
In the main yes, but interesting stats regarding the crown prosecution service.

Over 88,000 criminal cases – one in ten – that were charged were later dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in 2011/12 due to a lack of evidence or because prosecution was deemed not to be in the public interest. This cost the taxpayer over £25 million, wasted valuable police time and had an extremely detrimental impact on the victims of crime.

In the Public Interest explores the role and responsibility of the CPS. It says the prosecution service should retain its powers but calls for more transparency and accountability when it comes to measuring the organisation’s successes and failures.

New statistics contained within the report found:

The annual budget for the CPS amounts to over half a billion pounds yet it’s handling the smallest caseload of the past decade.
The official conviction rate masks deep failings in the CPS’ performance in court. When prosecutions reached trial, the CPS had successful outcomes in only 63% of Magistrates’ Court cases and in just over half of its Crown Court cases (55%).
In 2011, one third of cracked or ineffective trials in England and Wales were the result of the prosecution failing to offer evidence, not being ready, or a prosecution witness being absent
Of the 367,067 cases given to the CPS for pre-charge decisions, one in four were dropped, most frequently because of insufficient evidence. This feeds an undercurrent of mistrust between the police and the CPS which sometimes spills out into the media.
The report also suggests the need for a revised Public Interest Test that that accurately reflects the public’s view of when a prosecution should be dropped. In 2011, the CPS decided not to prosecute 109 out of the 139 suspects who broke into Fortnum & Mason during the student protests in London in 2011, on the grounds that they did not want to ‘criminalise’ the young people involved



Lack of evidence or not in the public interest does not mean that these 88k perpetrators didn't commit the crimes.
Click to expand...

Wow.

Just Wow.

Talk about entrenched in a position. Now you're implying (if) the judicial review is thrown out it's because the entire legal system is lacking.

Dude, just accept when you're wrong.
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Wow.

Just Wow.

Talk about entrenched in a position. Now you're implying (if) the judicial review is thrown out it's because the entire legal system is lacking.

Dude, just accept when you're wrong.
Click to expand...

I wasn't implying that at all.

The judge said ""I am not persuaded that there is an arguable case that the loan by the council constituted an unlawful state aid.

"It was made on commercial terms, in order to protect the council's investment in ACL, in circumstances where ACL's bank was threatening to hold ACL in default."

It doesn't mean that ACL weren't complicit with sisu in trying to distress ACL to buy the debt out on the cheap, and like sisu argue they were back stabbed in the process.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-council-accused-trying-3312579
 
Last edited:
T

Tonylinc

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
In the main yes, but interesting stats regarding the crown prosecution service.

Over 88,000 criminal cases – one in ten – that were charged were later dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in 2011/12 due to a lack of evidence or because prosecution was deemed not to be in the public interest. This cost the taxpayer over £25 million, wasted valuable police time and had an extremely detrimental impact on the victims of crime.

In the Public Interest explores the role and responsibility of the CPS. It says the prosecution service should retain its powers but calls for more transparency and accountability when it comes to measuring the organisation’s successes and failures.

New statistics contained within the report found:

The annual budget for the CPS amounts to over half a billion pounds yet it’s handling the smallest caseload of the past decade.
The official conviction rate masks deep failings in the CPS’ performance in court. When prosecutions reached trial, the CPS had successful outcomes in only 63% of Magistrates’ Court cases and in just over half of its Crown Court cases (55%).
In 2011, one third of cracked or ineffective trials in England and Wales were the result of the prosecution failing to offer evidence, not being ready, or a prosecution witness being absent
Of the 367,067 cases given to the CPS for pre-charge decisions, one in four were dropped, most frequently because of insufficient evidence. This feeds an undercurrent of mistrust between the police and the CPS which sometimes spills out into the media.
The report also suggests the need for a revised Public Interest Test that that accurately reflects the public’s view of when a prosecution should be dropped. In 2011, the CPS decided not to prosecute 109 out of the 139 suspects who broke into Fortnum & Mason during the student protests in London in 2011, on the grounds that they did not want to ‘criminalise’ the young people involved



Lack of evidence or not in the public interest does not mean that these 88k perpetrators didn't commit the crimes.
Click to expand...
Do your own statistics not prove that OSWKP was correct in his assertion, "in the main".
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Tonylinc said:
Do your own statistics not prove that OSWKP was correct in his assertion, "in the main".
Click to expand...

OSWKP's assertion is correct as I acknowledge in my post, but his assertion also suggested that there couldn't be any margin for error which is incorrect.
 
covmark

covmark

Well-Known Member
Spionkop said:
Jesus wept. Ever decreasing circles. The Sisu apologists will drag anything up. They're completely bonkers.
Click to expand...
you cannot accuse anyone of being an apologist with the amount of tripe you spout. Your love of stadium management companies knows no bounds
 
Q

quinn1971

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
ACL have been very quiet the last couple of months. Why are they not showing publicly that they are bothered about getting CCFC back? They could at least be in the press saying publicly they are still willing to talk, or better still, making a public offer to CCFC. All I ever see are sarcastic remarks from PWKH on here, which comes across a little unprofessional - particularly after the baloon incident. To be honest the lack of intent ACL are showing is making me think I may have been wrong about Sisu and I am honestly considering going to watch a game.

Maybe PWKH can clear this up and state once and for all that they would still want CCFC back. Why not make some kind of offer of renting the stadium with an option to buy, but with a certain portion of the annual rent paid taken off the purchase price so they don't see it as dead money (a bit like the rent to buy schemes you see these days). Surely there is some middle ground that can be reached.
Click to expand...

He's a bit busy working out a deal for the club to return to the higgs I expect ? Once that's agreed then there maybe a slight chance that negotiations could begin for the ricoh. .I wish somebody would come out and say something either way...if we're never going back to the ricoh at least tell us
 
mark82

mark82

Super Moderator
Could do both at once.

I just don't get why everyone loves ACL so much. Yes, Sisu are quite possibly the worst owners ever to grace football but why is everyone giving ACL an easy ride? They have just as much to answer for and continue to be complicit in this whole mess.
 
S

skybluesam66

Well-Known Member
id just put fisher seppalla lucas and pwkh in a ring - tag wrestling - fight to the death
then whoever was left - we would just throw the lions in

they are all a cancer that the club doesnt need
Every one of them is responsible for the position we are in either directly or for the organisation they represent

they have killed our club and the reason why my saturdays will never be the same (albeit cant wait for saturday)

pusb
 
Moff

Moff

Well-Known Member
Spionkop said:
Coventry City - Sisu - Northampton.
Click to expand...

Did you post this in case anyone hadn't realised we had moved and you didn't want them to turn up on a Saturday at the Ricoh and be disappointed, as it hasnt been covered much in the press or on the forum has it? Otherwise the point is? :whistle:
 
Sky Blue Kid

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
Baginton....... said they 'may' be forced into liquidation. Didn't say they'd actually do it, its called business, calling ones bluff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Which part of SISU ARE liquidating CCFC ltd...DON'T you understand?
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Of course we don't understand why don't they just do it then they can show us where we are going to play in 5 years time who our sponsor is what the ground is going to look like.
When it's going to be started and finished then maybe we will start understanding what is actually going on'

Then again we are just stupid football fans why do we need to know.



Sky Blue Kid said:
Baginton....... said they 'may' be forced into liquidation. Didn't say they'd actually do it, its called business, calling ones bluff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Which part of SISU ARE liquidating CCFC ltd...DON'T you understand?
Click to expand...
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Ah, here we go again. Having a go at someone else for their lack of "aspiration". Says the man who's just going to stop supporting the club. We are where we are.

italiahorse said:
Just remind me who we played on Sunday?
I'm not happy at this level !! Surely you have aspirations?
You can settle for beating some small town team but I want more than this.

I want to play in a Premier League Stadium, be on match of the day, and compete in the FA Cup.

It isn't going to happen after 5 years in Northampton and in a small stadium in Rugby.

But each to his own !!
Click to expand...
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Isn't that what every fan wants for there team?


torchomatic said:
Ah, here we go again. Having a go at someone else for their lack of "aspiration". Says the man who's just going to stop supporting the club. We are where we are.
Click to expand...
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
torchomatic said:
Ah, here we go again. Having a go at someone else for their lack of "aspiration". Says the man who's just going to stop supporting the club. We are where we are.
Click to expand...

Having a go at who ?
Someone said they were happy with SISU and the good football we were playing.

Just telling him that I am not happy at this level. Are you?
I will only stop 46 years of support as soon as plans for the L1 stadium are confirmed.
Once we settle for this level I'm out.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
letsallsingtogether said:
Isn't that what every fan wants for there team?
Click to expand...

Yes but since 2000 we have been in decline. We are light years away from where we were and fans cannot accept teams like Swansea Blackpool and hull are bigger better and financially much more viable.

The need for a 32,000 stadium is folly - if we were still in highfiekd road would people be objecting its not big enough? No they wouldn't.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
italiahorse said:
Having a go at who ?
Someone said they were happy with SISU and the good football we were playing.

Just telling him that I am not happy at this level. Are you?
I will only stop 46 years of support as soon as plans for the L1 stadium are confirmed.
Once we settle for this level I'm out.
Click to expand...

So how did the likes of Qpr and Blackpool ever get promoted with their "league one" stadiums?
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Yes but since 2000 we have been in decline. We are light years away from where we were and fans cannot accept teams like Swansea Blackpool and hull are bigger better and financially much more viable.

The need for a 32,000 stadium is folly - if we were still in highfiekd road would people be objecting its not big enough? No they wouldn't.
Click to expand...

We've been there already, why accept second best?
Damn, that will take you over the 11,000 posts.:facepalm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top