Search results

It is exactly what they proposed to do, either all or 50%, whichever the council wanted. CCC then decided to do it themselves, thus taking all risk on the mortgage. Understandable a little when they had a stake in the company, not at all now.

Especially as I quoted him back to himself in my very first response to this thread. Not my fault he doesn't remember what he says, then argues with himself that he's a bit of a twat and doesn't understand himself.

That is the whole point, Anne Lucas(and many on here), said that ACL was very profitable without the club, when it was evident to anybody that it wasn't, or wouldn't be. This is all based on figures after the more "affordable" loan was in place and the season that Cov weren't playing at the Ricoh.

Seeing as none of us know the details of any of the "deals" it would be hard to be justified in having a concrete view on any of them.

So you were wrong before, but are right now, despite it being the same scenario, except that it was proven not to be state aid when protecting it's own asset, but wpuld be to a private company which it is now. You've spun yourself into a corner, changing your argument to suit your whims. First...

Is ACL not now a totally private company? Thank fuck for that, the whole Wasps thing just a horrible dream.

Quotes from you. http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/43006-A-Question-for-The-Accountants?highlight=acl+loan+illegal Post 37. See you in court?

It wasn't state aid when being made to a company protecting it's own investment. That is no longer the case, as you saaid yoursself, it would be state aid if maade to an entirely private company. That is what has happened now.

Do you mean that it does work like that when you use it to support the argument that it wasn't state aid, but doesn't when it doesn't?

Sisu were going to discharge the loan, so no public money would have been involved. Pretty much argues the case entirely for the offer Sisu put in.

You said it in relation to the CCC loan to ACL, ACL is now a totally seperate private body, who should repay the loan to the local taxpayers, either through their own funds(if they have them), or through their own borrowing(if they can get it). Local taxpayers should not have their funds put at...

No, you did, did you not recognise your own quote above?

Don't give a fuck about Northampton to be honest, besides it's in the past, so doesn't matter.

In the eyes of bigfatronssba that means it was state aid then.

Of course it's state aid if loan is to a private company now rather than to a Council one.

No, the £400 k loss is for the year that we weren't there with the £14million turnover(second year of that doubled turnover, due to the incorporation of IEC into ACL accounts I think?). The year that Anne Lucas said that ACL was "very profitable" without the club. Also looks like the outside...

Come on, a profit of £700,000 the year before turning into a £400,000 loss the next year would be £1.1million, attributable to CCFc not being there. In fact wasn't it a £1.5million profit the previous year? People were saying that the reduced profit the following year was due to extra costs...

Lying to councillors, local taxpayers and voters doesn't matter. It's all in the past.

It was said to be so, but think was admitted by AL last week that it came from Council reserves, not outside prudential borrowing as was claimed.

I think the end of the Isle of Capri money could be a big impact, also not sure how the £4million received from Compass for their share of IEC was shown? Was it over so many years? In which case at least would be money coming in whilst that runs, or was it a lump sum already shown in the books...