I repeat for the last time, nothing in what you've said has anything to do with Coventry City FC.
I repeat for the last time, nothing in what you've said has anything to do with Coventry City FC.
Interestingly that Phil was Chicago has made some more comments after his phone call yesterday. Seems to have caused quite a stir.
Basically he doesn't have a clue. He is just a fan like us all. Nothing more.
Basically he doesn't have a clue. He is just a fan like us all. Nothing more.
ffs 'in the opinion of many'
jeez, not only a humility & reality bypass,
but certain dorks are stricken with a myopic bigotry, where conceit knows no bounds,
'the gloves are off'
jeez, not only a humility & reality bypass,
but certain dorks are stricken with a myopic bigotry, where conceit knows no bounds,
'the gloves are off'
Hobo, I respect you as a poster but I can't be arsed to go into detail on a reply. I'll leave it as Bryan Richardson as a starter. You can disagree if you like but I'm bored of this conversation now.
I'm off to watch Rory try and win the golf. Laters.
Well it clearly does. For one you haven't addressed why the football club had to pay a much higher rate of interest on the loans made by a company that was owned by ranson than those that were owned by sisu. Why?
As to the more relevant point there were several newspaper articles that suggested he had to resign from CCFC because his mortgage to his friend Mr Risdakes' club compromised league rules as the terms said ranson had control over sales of players
You know a lot about this club so you know this surely?
Yes Bryan Richardson created a right mess. But SISU bought the club and took it on. They have not made progress, in fact they have made things worse.
It would be like me saying Tony Mowbray isn't at fault because Gordon Strachan cocked it up.
Take responsibility for your own watch is my message.
Best analogy on here for a long time. And I fully agree with it.
I wouldn't be surprised if this website disappears at the same time SISU do to be honest.We all know there are a lot of complicit parties in this shitfest, and yes CCC is one of them, but why when SISU are mentioned do people jump to their defence... Yes Nick, I'm talking about you, and don't give us that shit line about it being "Just for balance" They are without doubt the biggest part of this mess... Have they got something on you mate? While we're on the subject, give RFC a wave from me will you
Said the same months ago and got shot down. I'm right with you .
We all know there are a lot of complicit parties in this shitfest, and yes CCC is one of them, but why when SISU are mentioned do people jump to their defence... Yes Nick, I'm talking about you, and don't give us that shit line about it being "Just for balance" They are without doubt the biggest part of this mess... Have they got something on you mate? While we're on the subject, give RFC a wave from me will you
So what defence has there been? There has been things like saying it doesn't look like they have taken money out from things like the maddison transfer but then also have a look through at all of the "they should be targeted as sisu rather than ccfc" which always gets palmed off as them being the same.
Look at the thread earlier, whether it turns out to be true or not its a lot more hard hitting isn't it?
Why would they have anything on me? Funnily enough they wouldn't know me if I walked past them in the street.
ARVO for one. She signed of the debenture on Ryton on behalf of ARVO so she has a level of control on the debt that the club owes to ARVO.
Seems from what I've seen they only win if the opponent can't afford to fight. If the opponent let's it gets to court SISU rarely if ever get a result. Using the courts to batter people who can't afford to fight you would be more appt. Not batter people in court.
That's unfair. I'm sure we'll lose one of two posters though.
On the bright side, at least we wouldn't have to put up with the drivel you and a few other mouth breathers spout.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
The higher interest rate is an indication of the higher risk in making the loan. Note the word making does not mean, as you might think judging by your damning of the interest rates, the club were made to take the loan. The club were a high risk loanee.
If the money was so badly needed they could've (& I am sure would've) sought better alternatives.
...onwards & upwards PUSB
Newspaper articles...hmmm. They don't stand up as evidence of anything really do they?...other than Grendel reads the papers!
...onwards & upwards PUSB
The rate of interest was considerably higher than the loans made by sisu. Ranson was chairman wasn't he?
Otium and SBS&L would be others she has a degree of influence and control over, wouldn't they.
Well if he was able to perform such a self-serving deal as you suggest - SISU have even less of a clue than even I credited them with.
...onwards & upwards PUSB
Interesting summary by the OP. It is of course opinion, and it may well be right. However some seem to be taking it as fact which it is notand I prefer to keep an open mind on whether SISU are about to go bust.
The last set of figures from SISU Capital were not great but it still left them with 400k in the bank after the 400k loss. But that information is 18 months old. If they have lost staff then that is overhead saved especially if the operation is smaller. The accounts also state that they were (a) restructuring (b) expecting the benefits of a investment sale deal to come through. Perhaps most of their investments are non UK based so would the CCFC problems make much/any difference? Do the recent losses balance against past profits? Have they changed the focus of their activities? Have the SISU owners set up other investment vehicles that are not part of SISU Capital? ARVO are the finance provider to CCFC and have control so is SISU business directed through that instead? Investment returns for the managing agents can depend on the timings involved in each investment?
Not sure as yet I see the demise of Seppala's empire
The last set of figures from SISU Capital were not great but it still left them with 400k in the bank after the 400k loss. But that information is 18 months old. If they have lost staff then that is overhead saved especially if the operation is smaller. The accounts also state that they were (a) restructuring (b) expecting the benefits of a investment sale deal to come through. Perhaps most of their investments are non UK based so would the CCFC problems make much/any difference? Do the recent losses balance against past profits? Have they changed the focus of their activities? Have the SISU owners set up other investment vehicles that are not part of SISU Capital? ARVO are the finance provider to CCFC and have control so is SISU business directed through that instead? Investment returns for the managing agents can depend on the timings involved in each investment?
Not sure as yet I see the demise of Seppala's empire
I'll just stir the pot by suggesting that would have been CCFC after the successful conclusion of the Ricoh saga
I wouldn't call 400k an empire but it might cover the next year's legal fees.
