PH4 has bid (1 Viewer)

[dongonzalos]

Duly edited for the word 'speculation'

Les Reid ‏@Lesreidpolitics. Yes. I suspect we'll hear today #Sisu/holdings/Arvo will have bid to buy #CCFC Ltd. & they are major creditors

As I say would be very shocked if they don't and just try and argue that the golden share is not in admin and Mr Haskell can buy a pointless company if he wants

 

---

[Sub]

Rumours abound now that the administrator will have the option to reject both the Haskell and SISU bids and instead open a mystery box.

does he get to phone a friend first ?

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Rumours abound now that the administrator will have the option to reject both the Haskell and SISU bids and instead open a mystery box.

If Family Guy has taught us anything, you never take the Mystery Box.

 

[ajsccfc]

I read something that in Deal or No Deal if you're offered a swap statistically speaking you should take it. I assume it made sense but it was too mathematical and it was beyond me. I prefer Pointless anyway. The Chase too.

 

[wingy]

The post I quoted said discussions with ACL.

You'd think ACL would offer the same discussions for SISU wouldn't you, if they were being fair? SISU are prospective owners of the club too, after all.

I thought they did when they got as far as heads of terms and Due diligence
Who knows what happened afterwards?

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

I used to like Going for Gold....there's a pun in there somewhere. Something about a share...:thinking about:

 

[ajsccfc]

Were those people actually foreign on that show or did they just get locals to do comedy accents for the sake of the gimmick? Henry Kelly was definitely putting it on, the cockney swine.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Whenever Henry Kelly started a question with 'who am I?' I wished someone would buzz in and say 'You're Henry Kelly'

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Were those people actually foreign on that show or did they just get locals to do comedy accents for the sake of the gimmick? Henry Kelly was definitely putting it on, the cockney swine.

Some of the best national stereo-types in TV history. I'm sure they were genuine, though...I'll never forget feeling really sorry for the big Danish guy with curly hair who clearly couldn't speak English well enough to understand the questions! Although it may have been Henry's Irish accent that bewildered him

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Whenever Henry Kelly started a question with 'who am I?' I wished someone would buzz in and say 'You're Henry Kelly'

Me too! I was quite young at the time, though.

 

[dongonzalos]

I thought they did when they got as far as heads of terms and Due diligence
Who knows what happened afterwards?

According to Higgs they never heard from SISU again

 

[James Smith]

might it not have occurred to you that ACL have had many talks in the past with sisu including having drawn up a terms of agreement of 50% of ownership for sisu , only for sisu not to take it any further.

Also Might ACL be a little reluctant to deal with a company that owed them £1.3 million in rent then went into admin to avoid paying? Why would they be 'fair' to sisu?

That was for the Higgs share not the whole of ACL.

 

[WillieStanley]

I read something that in Deal or No Deal if you're offered a swap statistically speaking you should take it. I assume it made sense but it was too mathematical and it was beyond me. I prefer Pointless anyway. The Chase too.

I think it's somewhere along the lines of, you're reducing the odds to 2/1, although I can't remember what you're reducing them from as all the other boxes have been opened anyway - surely that leaves you at 2/1...

 

[lordsummerisle]

The picture appears to be that any voice not toeing the line completely is a secret SISU ninja or somehow not a real supporter. It's a very paranoid picture that helps nobody.

What if SISU did get someone to register and talk them up (which he's not actually doing, but let's ignore that vital nugget for now) - you'd just have people calling the person a dickhead and a bumlicker anyway, so there would be literally no point to it.

A few years ago you were called a Leicester supporter if you didn't back Sisu!

How times(and people) change.

 

[lordsummerisle]

As I say would be very shocked if they don't and just try and argue that the golden share is not in admin and Mr Haskell can buy a pointless company if he wants

Should be safe, Shaw won't be back.

 

[Noggin]

I think it's somewhere along the lines of, you're reducing the odds to 2/1, although I can't remember what you're reducing them from as all the other boxes have been opened anyway - surely that leaves you at 2/1...

While I've never watched a full episode of deal or no deal I don't think what you are talking about applies to that show.

What you are talking about is a game show where there are 3 doors and behind one of them is something great like a car. You chose a door, the gameshow host opens one of the doors that doesn't have the car and gives you the option to switch. Most people when put in this situation belive that the odds of the car being behind each door is 50% and so it doesn't matter if they switch or not, this combined with the fact that people don't like to change means the majority of people who don't understand the game fully will chose to stick. This is wrong.

Switching is the best option by a very significant margin. Most people think that the 2 doors have a 50% chance of having the car, that is incorrect, the door you originally picked has a 33% chance of having the car, the other door has a 66% chance of having the car. It's a little hard to explain. but I'm sure you will agree that at the start each door has a 33% chance of having a car. So you chose one, you have a 33% chance of winning, now the gameshow host will open one of the other doors, he will always open a losing one whatever you picked. Him opening this door has not increased your chance of winning to 50% you are still at 33%, there is always at least one losing door to open and he will always open a losing door, your odds have not changed.

Now if you chose to switch you will have a 66% chance of winning, because in essence then instead of your original choice being to try and pick the winner you are trying to pick the one without the car (and there is 2 of those thus 66%), then you will get both other doors. one the gameshow host will open and one you will switch too.

I hope that makes sence.

 

[valiant15]

A few years ago you were called a Leicester supporter if you didn't back Sisu!

How times(and people) change.

Maybe because people knew nothing about them back then or that they'd turn out to be complete arseholes, I wasnt aware people can predict the future. So your saying you didnt trust them at the start when they'd done nothing wrong, but now they've royally fucked up you want them to stay? Very odd.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Maybe because people knew nothing about them back then or that they'd turn out to be complete arseholes, I wasnt aware people can predict the future. So your saying you didnt trust them at the start when they'd done nothing wrong, but now they've royally fucked up you want them to stay? Very odd.

Or that fools like you shouted down anyone who showed things about them.

Selective memory to hide your own shame eh.

 

[Sub]

While I've never watched a full episode of deal or no deal I don't think what you are talking about applies to that show.

What you are talking about is a game show where there are 3 doors and behind one of them is something great like a car. You chose a door, the gameshow host opens one of the doors that doesn't have the car and gives you the option to switch. Most people when put in this situation belive that the odds of the car being behind each door is 50% and so it doesn't matter if they switch or not, this combined with the fact that people don't like to change means the majority of people who don't understand the game fully will chose to stick. This is wrong.

Switching is the best option by a very significant margin. Most people think that the 2 doors have a 50% chance of having the car, that is incorrect, the door you originally picked has a 33% chance of having the car, the other door has a 66% chance of having the car. It's a little hard to explain. but I'm sure you will agree that at the start each door has a 33% chance of having a car. So you chose one, you have a 33% chance of winning, now the gameshow host will open one of the other doors, he will always open a losing one whatever you picked. Him opening this door has not increased your chance of winning to 50% you are still at 33%, there is always at least one losing door to open and he will always open a losing door, your odds have not changed.

Now if you chose to switch you will have a 66% chance of winning, because in essence then instead of your original choice being to try and pick the winner you are trying to pick the one without the car (and there is 2 of those thus 66%), then you will get both other doors. one the gameshow host will open and one you will switch too.

I hope that makes sence.

so do you knowwhat the percentage of where the golden share is? LTD or Holdings which door should we open ?:thinking about::thinking about:

 

[ajsccfc]

While I've never watched a full episode of deal or no deal I don't think what you are talking about applies to that show.

What you are talking about is a game show where there are 3 doors and behind one of them is something great like a car. You chose a door, the gameshow host opens one of the doors that doesn't have the car and gives you the option to switch. Most people when put in this situation belive that the odds of the car being behind each door is 50% and so it doesn't matter if they switch or not, this combined with the fact that people don't like to change means the majority of people who don't understand the game fully will chose to stick. This is wrong.

Switching is the best option by a very significant margin. Most people think that the 2 doors have a 50% chance of having the car, that is incorrect, the door you originally picked has a 33% chance of having the car, the other door has a 66% chance of having the car. It's a little hard to explain. but I'm sure you will agree that at the start each door has a 33% chance of having a car. So you chose one, you have a 33% chance of winning, now the gameshow host will open one of the other doors, he will always open a losing one whatever you picked. Him opening this door has not increased your chance of winning to 50% you are still at 33%, there is always at least one losing door to open and he will always open a losing door, your odds have not changed.

Now if you chose to switch you will have a 66% chance of winning, because in essence then instead of your original choice being to try and pick the winner you are trying to pick the one without the car (and there is 2 of those thus 66%), then you will get both other doors. one the gameshow host will open and one you will switch too.

I hope that makes sence.

That's the very thing. I knew it was something to do with swapping.

 

[Ripbuster]

So has the yank put a bid in or have we won a sierra?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Maybe because people knew nothing about them back then or that they'd turn out to be complete arseholes, I wasnt aware people can predict the future. So your saying you didnt trust them at the start when they'd done nothing wrong, but now they've royally fucked up you want them to stay? Very odd.

I'm saying I predicted that they would be no good for us, never wanted them in the first place, and don't want them now.

Didn't need to be fucking Nostradamus to predict the behaviour of a hedge-fund with previous against them being led by a bloke who had been turned down by more punters than an 88 year old aids ridden whore.

We know nothing about PH4 either really, could be good, but very little real information on him out there, but will be lauded for a bit I expect.

Give you three years though Valiant if things not going well before you're calling him "a property developing c**t, HIV, Aids boy".

 

[Noggin]

so do you knowwhat the percentage of where the golden share is? LTD or Holdings which door should we open ?:thinking about::thinking about:

sorry I don't understand morally bankrupt financial wizardy combined with misdirection. The door we should open though is the one for sisu to leave through.

 

[Sick Boy]

Maybe because people knew nothing about them back then or that they'd turn out to be complete arseholes, I wasnt aware people can predict the future. So your saying you didnt trust them at the start when they'd done nothing wrong, but now they've royally fucked up you want them to stay? Very odd.

To anyone who had the ability to make up their own mind and not follow the sheep mentality amongst CCFC fans it didn't take a genius to work out what was going to happen, and how a hedge fund would operate.

There is nothing in LS' posts to suggest that he wants SISU to stay, and there never has been.

 

[valiant15]

Or that fools like you shouted down anyone who showed things about them.

Selective memory to hide your own shame eh.

I turned against them after they sold fox and dann, it was obvious what their plan was after that. Why have i got a selective memory? How would you know about me shouting people down if you only joined this forum recently?

 

[Sub]

on the BBC site now

16 May 2013 Last updated at 09:39 GMT
Share this page 23

• Share
• Facebook
• Twitter

• print

Coventry City: Haskell consortium confirm bid for Sky Blues


Coventry City's prospective owners have confirmed that a takeover bid has been made by a consortium involving American multi-millionaire Preston Haskell IV.
The deal would also involve owning a half share in the Sky Blues' home at the Ricoh Arena.
Life president Joe Elliott, who is fronting the Haskell consortium, told BBC Coventry & Warwickshire: "Preston Haskell is extremely serious.
"We've been working on this for some time. He was here only on Tuesday."
Elliott also admitted that, following the year-long rent row with their landlords, Arena Coventry Ltd (ACL), relations are now much improved and moving towards an agreement that would involve the club's new owners also half-owning their eight-year-old, 32,000-seater home.
"We are talking to ACL, we have a good relationship with them and the door is open," added Elliott.
"They want Coventry City to play at the Ricoh Arena. And the city of Coventry deserves for this team to play in Coventry."
The League One club, who have been owned by SISU since 2007, have been in administration since late March.
More to follow.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

While I've never watched a full episode of deal or no deal I don't think what you are talking about applies to that show.

What you are talking about is a game show where there are 3 doors and behind one of them is something great like a car. You chose a door, the gameshow host opens one of the doors that doesn't have the car and gives you the option to switch. Most people when put in this situation belive that the odds of the car being behind each door is 50% and so it doesn't matter if they switch or not, this combined with the fact that people don't like to change means the majority of people who don't understand the game fully will chose to stick. This is wrong.

Switching is the best option by a very significant margin. Most people think that the 2 doors have a 50% chance of having the car, that is incorrect, the door you originally picked has a 33% chance of having the car, the other door has a 66% chance of having the car. It's a little hard to explain. but I'm sure you will agree that at the start each door has a 33% chance of having a car. So you chose one, you have a 33% chance of winning, now the gameshow host will open one of the other doors, he will always open a losing one whatever you picked. Him opening this door has not increased your chance of winning to 50% you are still at 33%, there is always at least one losing door to open and he will always open a losing door, your odds have not changed.

Now if you chose to switch you will have a 66% chance of winning, because in essence then instead of your original choice being to try and pick the winner you are trying to pick the one without the car (and there is 2 of those thus 66%), then you will get both other doors. one the gameshow host will open and one you will switch too.

I hope that makes sence.

It is known as the Monty Hall problem. Here is a YouTube clip, from an Alan Davies-led documentary, demonstrating the profitable results of swapping boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_djTy3G0pg

 

[valiant15]

Inconclusive interim report? What's that all about?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Inconclusive interim report? What's that all about?

Don't know, he's probably a c**t.

 

[Noggin]

I'm saying I predicted that they would be no good for us, never wanted them in the first place, and don't want them now.

Didn't need to be fucking Nostradamus to predict the behaviour of a hedge-fund with previous against them being led by a bloke who had been turned down by more punters than an 88 year old aids ridden whore.

We know nothing about PH4 either really, could be good, but very little real information on him out there, but will be lauded for a bit I expect.

Give you three years though Valiant if things not going well before you're calling him "a property developing c**t, HIV, Aids boy".

I think most people were nervous about a hedge fund taking over, but it certainly seemed like we had no other choice and most of us perhaps niavly thought that yes there plan is to use us, make some money and leave but we felt that the only way they could get the profit would be to leave us in a better state than they found us, ie get to the prem. I don't think anyone could have predicted how bad it would be.

I think now most of us feel almost anyone will be better than sisu and its pretty hard to argue against that. There is always the risk we'll be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. But if I'm in a frying pan you bet your ass im jumping out even if that jump is blind and the landing could be fatal, staying where I am certainly is.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I turned against them after they sold fox and dann, it was obvious what their plan was after that. Why have i got a selective memory? How would you know about me shouting people down if you only joined this forum recently?

Football club sells two players it purchased. With breaking news like that, I'm surprised the entire fanbase didn't see the light.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

I turned against them after they sold fox and dann, it was obvious what their plan was after that. Why have i got a selective memory? How would you know about me shouting people down if you only joined this forum recently?

The concept of reading really is beyond you isn't it?

Still, from someone who just spouts foul-mouthed gibberish I'm not surprised.

You really are the kind of 'fan' who doesn't deserve a club.

 

[ajsccfc]

Look at that photo the BBC have used. He simply must have you and the family over to the vineyard this summer, they're expecting a real vintage.

 

[Ashdown1]

I'm saying I predicted that they would be no good for us, never wanted them in the first place, and don't want them now.

Didn't need to be fucking Nostradamus to predict the behaviour of a hedge-fund with previous against them being led by a bloke who had been turned down by more punters than an 88 year old aids ridden whore.

We know nothing about PH4 either really, could be good, but very little real information on him out there, but will be lauded for a bit I expect.

Give you three years though Valiant if things not going well before you're calling him "a property developing c**t, HIV, Aids boy".

The bare facts though Lord are that the club is on the verge of collapse with the hedge fund in charge and threatening all sorts of rubbish. I had misgivings from the start as you may remember from those good old days of GMK but it happened and it has been a disaster. The club is in a lot worse position than in 2007, no we don't know too much about the American but if nothing else he's not a hedge fund and I'd expect a lot more transparency at the very least. I'm sure he's not going to throw silly money at it and I don't blame him but we should with some debt interest reduction, Management fee reduction, player salary reduction, rent reduction and increased revenue from FFP have a more solid foundation to build from.

 

[valiant15]

the concept of reading really is beyond you isn't it?

Still, from someone who just spouts foul-mouthed gibberish i'm not surprised.

You really are the kind of 'fan' who doesn't deserve a club.

zzzzzzzzzzzz.