Search results

I think the opposite, if they were confident the facts were going to come out why would they need this forum? If the evidence in the JR shows CCC, Higgs or ACL to be at the root of our move away then there will be enough pressure on them without the need for something like this. Not like there...

Again this is why SISU need to make a very clear statement on what Plan A actually is and if there even is a Plan B. At the smaller meetings we have had people reporting back that they have been told there is zero chance of the club ever returning to the Ricoh and then you get ML making a...

Yes they did so if there was any plan to pull a fast one by making it seem ACL were in trouble it would have failed once someone at YB knew what was going on.

Doesn't that then blow out of the water the theory that the loan could be purchase at below value by SISU?

If there are any details SISU want out in public about what has happened in the past why not just release them, even if they don't want to release them directly I'm sure they could get them out as part of the JR. This seems a waste of time and designed more at placing blame and going over the...

For the vast majority of fans the biggest single factor is how well the club is doing. If we were at the Ricoh, under SISU, and had a hint of success the fans would soon be coming back. You only need to look at the JPT game to see that. Of course there will be some that won't return until SISU...

Well for a start Leeds got promoted after a points deduction. Without looking at the stats after a handful of games wasn't our points total this season higher than last season? Also at the halfway point the play offs were a very realistic possibility. If the players decided it wasn't worth...

Not sure that is strictly true. Took a look at Southampton as a comparison (yes it is a very quiet day in the office!): The Dell PL 97/98 15,159 98/99 15,140 99/00 15,132 00/01 15,115 St Marys PL 01/02 30,633 02/03 30,680 03/04 31,716 04/05 30,609 Championship 05/06 23,613 06/07 23,556 07/08...

These are the average home attendances since relegation from PL: Championship at HR 2001/02 15,436 2002/03 14,812 2003/04 14,816 2004/05 16,047 Championship at Ricoh 2005/06 21,301 2006/07 20,342 2007/08 19,123 Championship under SISU at Ricoh (tookover Dec 2007) 2008/09 17,407 2009/10 17,305...

From what he's been saying on Facebook he's just bought a new house locally so if he has gone it wouldn't seem he was expecting to be gone!

Great plan, lets have a football forum where we're not allowed to speculate about football!

Depends what agreement was made between GR&MM and ACL. If ACL said we will accept £300K as total payment then the £500K is paid, however if they have said you pay £300K and we'll pursue the remaining £200K from elsewhere then that remaining amount is still owed.

The initial offer was based on p in the £ (can't remember the exact amount, sure someone will know), a revised CVA could be made that increased the p in the £. The second question would need to be answered by ACL however PWKH has stated that it was rejected as SISU / Otium wouldn't agree to 2...

Why would ACL prepare a revised CVA (the job of the administrator not those owed money) when, from what we are told, they stated they would accept the CVA proposed by Appleton if SISU / Otium agreed to 2 pre-conditions? The contents of the CVA don't appear to be the issue here, the real issue...

Think you're making it more complicated than it is. From what we have been told ACL said they would agree to the CVA proposed by Appleton (with no changes to it) as long as 2 conditions were agreed to, those conditions are widely believed to be no longer pursuing the JR and agreeing to a 10 year...

I think that's a touch misleading. The two modifications couldn't be included in the CVA but they could have been agreed to by SISU / Otium as a side deal concluded prior to the signing of the CVA. Its generally believed the two modifications were dropping the JR and agreeing to a 10 year...

I would be happier if I knew the full amount was in Escrow and that this arrangement was acceptable to the FL. We need them to explain what has changed, we've established the payment isn't rent or part of the rejected CVA so why having said Otium must pay £590K is there now doubt, if there even...

Not at all, although I would not object to further scrutiny of the administration process carried out by Appleton. Your statement made it sound as if the rejection of the CVA gave no option than to liquidate which is incorrect, it is one available option and it was Appleton who chose that course...