Search results

Perhaps Nick could start a thread for points and proposals that could be put to the next Trust meeting. Anyone who can attend could have a proxy from all those who agree to present them?

I have done! But that does not tell the majority what they are up to in between in members names. The "statement" confirms that

But we dont really know their views are or what they are doing. Obviously they have their own agenda and do not include their members

Joe Elliott and Co,?

Taken from it's own home though!

Not sure how old you are, but that happened years before SISU and WASPs

I don't think the present media coverage is doing them any favours, is it?

I still don't understand why the majority of you on here don't form your own Cov Trust, what's actually stopping you all doing it? If I had the time I would , but prepared to help any one who wants to

But surely the value of the asset that the bonds are secured on has doubled?

Even if the Council have done wrong it may not follow that WASPS will be penalised However, if it can shown WASPS were complicit in the wrong doing .......................

Deluded! Look at his history with the Club

Also CCC held the deciding vote on these matters

The complaint to the EU was lodged in February it was against CCC WASPS were in discussions to renew the lease in April and SISU were agreeing to drop legals against THEM Then WASPS got a nod from somewhere that if the complaint went against CCC then they could have a problem. Of course that...

He says WASPS do not want to buy the Club - I suspect he means get them for nothing!

Only needed two weekly at the Ricoh?

VOR can you clarify if you mean the situation as at today with the current lease position or over all or even both?

I think it may be if the Council AND WASPS are in the wrong for them to be involved. So their panic has be they think they not 100% in the clear I think the reports say SISU did ask for counter guarantees ( or whatever the wording was )

If WASPS undertook a bona fide purchase that meets all the criteria through normal negotiations then they should not be worried ( one would have thought ) However, if they took part in a collusion to get a better deal to suit them and CCC and in so doing broke some EU / Local Government rules -...

( Allegedly) WASPs wanted indemnity for all and any losses THEY considered arose from the complaint, they then extended that to include their business partners. One could assume that to include CCC and Bond Holders? They also wanted a sum depositing to cover such an eventuality but, when asked...