Search results

Why would he need to? Only you are questioning it. Nobody from ACL/CCC has EVER denied that the agreement, referred to by TF, was as he describes it.

All this considered though, on the face of it, it didn't seem like a bad deal. Mortgage would have been settled (effectively putting a value of £14 million on the Higgs share), and CCC would have retained 50% of ACL and complete ownership of the freehold. Yes, with a lease extension, but it...

Yes, but only slightly. Message board monkeys are only a rung or two up from the dribbling simpletons that leave comments below online newspaper articles.

The OP might seem like an extreme example of stating the obvious, but it's amazing how many there are urging ACL to NOT do a deal with SISU. You usually find these people lurking in the comments section beneath CT articles. They really are a special breed.

I see your point now, but FP answers that above I guess.

I don't understand what you are saying. It was precisely at the time that the ACL loan was re-financed that the 'deal' collapsed - and I suspect this came somewhat out of the blue for SISU. I could be wrong, but there has never really been a denial by ACL or CCC that there was an agreement in...

Hold on, are you suggesting the FL should now NOT threaten SISU with expulsion from the FL if they fail to return to Coventry? It seems that people want it both ways. They complain that they are 'complicit' with SISU's actions, then seemingly complain when they use strong language to describe...

No.

Because it has a capacity of 3000, no segregation, a couple of turnstiles and would require at least 7000 temporary seats - and that would require planning permission from CCC, who of course, own a whacking great football stadium on the edge of town sitting empty. On top of that, don't they...

Yeah, but their away support has been poor recently, they barely averaged half what we did last season in a higher division. Would still expect them to sell their allocation with it being the first away game of the season though. I still think it'll be 2-3K at Sixfields. I know a few that are...

His point was a good one though - AFC fans traveled to MK in big numbers last season - and if anyone has reason to boycott that place it is them, and yet they didn't, so I don't think we ought really be questioning our moral compass because we turned out in numbers last season. The situations...

They are not ignoring FL rules. They are operating within established FL rules concerning transfer embargoes - or at least that is my reading of it going by the statement issued. It seems to me some people are genuinely annoyed that the FL are allowing us to sign players. It's almost as...

If it is the case that ACL will not sell to SISU under any circumstances, then I take your point, but then pointless debates are what internet message boards exist for, so there is no harm in discussing these matters. Not only that, the absence of an anchor tenant at the Ricoh will undoubtedly...

I've never quite understood why people make such a big deal about the auditors signing off the accounts. It's nothing more than an educated guess. I'm pretty sure the likes of HMV, Woolworths, JJB and Comet had their accounts signed off by auditors at some point before going belly up, but...

Of course they do, and to argue otherwise is absurd, unless you subscribe to the view that ownership, or part ownership of the ground we play in, should not be on the agenda of either current or future owners of the football club. You'll be hard-pressed to find anyone on here who doesn't argue...

Because the share is now with a company not in admin, it has been transferred. CCFC Ltd is no longer of any relevance to the FL.

In the year up to the end of May 2012 yes, but the club were still paying rent then. That isn't to say they haven't made a profit since, but we cannot know that until the next set of accounts are published.

I think the issue is that she seems to have contradicted herself somewhat - on the one hand stating ACL would have been in a "right mess" were it not for the bail out, to now saying it is "very profitable", all in the space of 24 hours. Those statements do seem to come from opposite ends of two...

Why didn't they do a fit a proper test when they insisted GR sell to SISU in the first place? I do agree with the general point though. If new owners of the football club were to make an approach to buy a stake then there is no way they would close the door on that and would happily negotiate...

What alternate uses?