Search results

Last week the football league said just that. http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/cash-row-between-coventry-city-7408563

The point I was trying to make is that even if ACL and SISU agree to get together - you are then waiting on a third party. Also.. I don't see why Michael making a statement on the situation is of any importance or consequence. It's not his call is it?

Why would you do that? If the money is with the FL why can you not take that as sufficient?

Exactly... this is why that part of their conditions should be waived. Now it's up to SISU to drop the appeal.

The monies transfer is not in SISU's control is it? The FL are controlling that part now. So it would involve the FL being part of that arrangement wouldn't it?

Quite frankly - the FL put the agreement in place... it is theirs to manage. As long as SISU have done what the FL expect and the club is free of sanctions I couldn't care less. It is up to ACL to arrange the transfer of the monies from FL. If everything was crystal clear then surely they would...

Thanks for that.... you know full well that even if SISU did drop the JR appeal today that not all of those conditions could be met by Friday. Stop talking shit.

The JR showed that CCC/ACL acted lawfully. So you are happy for this 'legal process' to occur and produce that result. But now you want 'legal process' to be ignored just so ACL get some money. Absurd.

You mean the judge that has had no involvement in the CVA or subsequent deal that came out of it's rejection? He might have given a scathing review of SISU in relation to the JR but it's not relevant in this particular scenario. I don't understand why you keep going over the same bit...

If they have any sense they will buy the latter option.

As someone said previously on another thread... it was voluntary. ACL chose to reject it. If they had chosen differently we may have had a significantly better position for all sides by now.

To be fair - none of the actions are disassociated. They are all connected. This is the point where both sides need to give a little. SISU need to drop the court appeal, and ACL need to retract their previous stance on only dealing once monies paid. The money is with the FL now, its their call...

Actually Michael it depends on both parties to get themselves together and do a deal. Perhaps you were not aware of the existence of the other party in this deal, much like your rental offer that you didn't clear with the most important party.

I'm struggling to see what the difficulty is. The FL have said that SISU have paid the full amount into the ESCROW. So it's been ringfenced and no-one can get hold of it until FL say so. The club only thing the club can do now is drop the legal action... which they should do as a matter of...

1)The move to Sixfields was clearly not about revenue... and yes I agree that it wad done to try and put pressure on ACL. It hasn't worked so now they have got to take a different approach. As I have said on several occasions, the only viable long term solution is for them to buy out ACL in its...

Or you don't understand it.

They didn't buy them... only only purchase was Higgs obtaining the 50% share of ACL sold by CCFC.

Really? When exactly was that then?

SISU's responsibility is to pay the full monies into the ESCROW.. and now the FL have stated this has occurred. So the club is not going to be subject to any penalties. This is by far the more pressing fact that has been clarified at least. It is now the duty of the FL to investigate the claim...

If they are now going to concede to bring us back then let them all get on with it. It's a step in the right direction.