Search results

Why would any of those other parties wish to be involved? It will turn in to a shouting match pointing figures and explaining nothing. What happened 1,2, 5 or 10 years ago just is not important to most fans. Its been done to death surely. The fans are tired and fed up with it. What the fans...

Didn't the bank knock the first couple of CCC proposals back? When was the deal actually agreed with the bank? Aside from being more open is there anything legally that stops two deals being worked on at the same time? seems to me both sides provided their own little bombshells. CCC in buying...

Did SISU have an exclusivity period with CCC like they did with Higgs Charity? Were the HOT's binding in any legal sense at all? Poor business ethics or morals really do not come in to it. Is there anything that stops two deals running alongside each other until a final decision is made? You...

Am going to sit on the fence on that one BA and say they are both at fault for bad communication and I would guess each would say they had their reasons I suppose. I think from early 2012 the trust between the parties was rapidly going down the tubes and both sides kept things to themselves that...

Judges conclusion based on all the evidence was...... "the reality was that there was no real prospect of a deal on those terms being done and neither party had any appetite to seek to pursue any negotiations based on the term sheet to attempt to conclude such a deal." and "I have come to...

It has been said before and perhaps we need to keep saying it "We need to look forward not back in order to solve this"

"and coursing all what happened since" are your words not mine and the "penalties" you suggest are all aimed at the council. It was only a question though Godiva. Could a deal of all that was outlined have taken place without an agreement between Charity and SISU? I don't see how and there was...

Separate agreements true Godiva but without either one then the "road map" falls down. I think you will be waiting a long time for the parties involved to go back to those agreements. Just do not see it happening. Neither side will want to. So it is all the councils fault then ?

I agree ......... it is hard to believe everyone was not aware of the situation isn't it. Did SISU and CCC believe they could force the Charity to sell? It seems to me the HOT's were worthless and should not have been signed so why were they

looks like it yes unless there is other things that counter that view. The Charity position has been examined pretty thoroughly in court already. The Judge said there was no deal to be done and that the Trustees had acted in good faith at all times. His judgement was that the Charity/SISU deal...

You see that's where I find things get unclear. How I understand it ..... TF proposed the road map in March 2012. That was rejected by the Charity Trustees April 2012. Which is important because the "Road Map" included the purchase of the Charity shares. However the Charity and SISU talked and...

Which road map are we talking about BA ? The one proposed in March 2012 by TF?

This is the bit I find a little misleading..... the guarantees were to a maximum of £500k. The statement can be read that they paid £500k which of course they did not. Would be interesting to see how the FL worded the condition on the payment. I have a suspicion they told Otium to pay the rent...

Here is another thought Say the pot available for creditors is £570k ACL is due £5200 say ............ the balance of £565K goes to ............ ARVO/SBS&L and Otium (because they acquired the assets of CCFC H ) So after the rates rebate 440k and the final distribution from the liquidation...

It was, certain of CCFC H assets went to Otium but no details yet, yes good point ...... just wondered if the shares became property of liquidator or had they died with CCFCH. Nothing filed at company house to say one way or other. The SBS&L 2013 accounts signed off 28/02/14 say CCFCH still...

Not sure if it was on this thread or not but just to confirm the lease was not broken by the administration order in March 2013 nor by the rejection of the CVA 02/08/13 nor by the appointment of a liquidator 21/10/13. A lease can only be broken by the landlord cancelling it or by the liquidator...

Just checked the Company House website - the final notice to dissolve CCFC H has been posted. The company is marked as dissolved

So many places where this can be " re interpreted" The rent that ACL claimed as owed was around 1.4m The administrator included an amount in his report at 636K after deducting the proceeds of the escrow account £536k and the match day payments approx. £230k It seems that GR & MM have paid...

Good luck to him, if he can get paid more somewhere else for doing exactly the same thing then why not. Most people would at the very least seriously consider doing the same if they are honest about it Clearly the lad doesn't want to be here on what has been offered but to move to the MLS at...

As they own all of North Coventry Holdings Limited you would have to think they can (NCH owns 100% Coventry North Regeneration Ltd which in turn owns 50% of ACL)