Search results

Still doesn't change the original post about who owns SBSL shares now. And who Sconset actually are.

That French link is basically saying SISU's shares in that business were transferred to this Sconset. It's probably just SISU under a different name.

This is obviously a side that is currently heading towards relegation. 1. Do they intend to do anything about it? 2. Can the club realistically survive the loss of the 4 million income that relegation would bring? 3. Who really makes the decisions about the club - SISU, an individual at SISU...

somebody needs to tell the club who owns what - as in the 2010 accounts there is reference to the Group's option to buy 50% of the ACL "who own the Ricoh Arena".

If he goes in Jan it won't be for much as he's out of contract in June

Do the accounts of CCFC and CCFC holding have any significance to the overall picture? For example CCFC show net liabilities of just under 50 million for 2010.

surely some of this bank money was the loan secured against season ticket sales and league money - the premiership payment

Was Dulieu mistaken then when he said that the owners had been to the bank in March and again in July in order to secure funding until the end of the season? "In March ....we were fortunate enough to get the bank to put more money in and back the new board and this was reinforced by a very good...

Sorry you've still got to explain a couple of things for me. 1. The bank has only guaranteed funding to the end of the season. If SISU can't find new funding do we go through all the doomsday scenarios again? 2. Why would anyone want to go into business with SISU whilst this 30 million debt...

Beginning to see how SISU aren't able to improve revenue if they insist on giving away a player like Turner for only 750k. There'll be the normal spin about add-ons, sell-ons etc. But this is well under his value. Surprised Brum didn't come back in.

It's Sven. He's a shopaholic! Everywhere he goes he just has to keep spending. Lazio, Man City (with that Thai guy), Notts County (didn't end up that well for them) and now leicester. The guy needs therapy to break his addiction to spending other people's money!

He's pretty much a dead man walking! Unfortunately (as with many clubs) he'll end up taking the blame for poor results later on as the board looks for a scapegoat. As regards compensation isn't he only on a one year rolling contract anyway? Sack him around end of january and they'd only have to...

Deadline day is a defining day for SISU particularly if players are sold. SISU have stated often that there is financing in place for all the running costs until the end of the season. There's no excuse for selling players from a struggling side.

Again semantics - if there is no formal offer and a price hasn't been set then how does KD know what % of the money the people at the meeting represented. I'm still not clear why Hoffman has to produce the principal investors so long as he has proof of whatever funds are required. If Hoffman...

yep - the boardroom's looking a bit weak so I reckon we'll see another couple of directors/advisers in before the end of the window:jerkit:

"And stats back up the fact that we matched them in every area of the pitch!!" answered your own point there - we just matched a league one side. So that gives an indication of where we are at.

Realistically we've got about 4 saleable assets - Clingan, Crainie, Jutki and Turner. Can't afford to lose Clingan or Jutki and would get more for Turner than Crainie. McPake getting a contract extension would also seem to suggest the board are thinking that way as well. A couple of million for...

Take the cash with a sell-on %. Plenty of cover at the back. Also might give us more chance of holding onto Jutki.

Maybe a lot of clubs are going for it this season because of the major disparity parachute payments will make when the rules change.