Search results

  1. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Which would mean CCC lied about not being insisting on it. As NW has pointed out the penalty for CCC making false public statements is far higher than for Sisu or Wasps. My working theory is still Wasps think action against CCC could take the Ricoh off them. Whether they worked that out...
  2. shmmeee

    So now we know

    “an indemnity clause as has been claimed” still leaves room for an indemnity clause not as has been claimed.
  3. shmmeee

    So now we know

    My thoughts exactly. Sisu need pushing on the “threaten the club” stuff. Clearly it’s not indemnity against Wasps payments from State Aid so it must be that the future of the club relies on Sisu suing someone. Also that if the state aid fails the club is fucked? Concerning.
  4. shmmeee

    So now we know

    I don’t see how that would be against CCC though? Wasps are the landlords subletting to CCFC so if they aren’t indemnified then CCFC could still sue in that case. I’d be surprised if this would over rule a leasehold contract anyway. We just don’t know do we? The word “indemnity” could mean a...
  5. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Yeah. They’re all at it. Leave enough wiggle room. That’s never been in doubt. It’s trying to cut through that crap that’s the problem. Again, I’m not making value judgements about Wasps’ actions, just trying to find a route that doesn’t rely on them being cartoon villains. Care to elaborate?
  6. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Yeah that’s weird. Maybe Wasps think that’s not the plan? I wish we had someone with good legal knowledge who could lay out what Sisus plan to get the Ricoh could be. We’re all just going “it might be something”. Come on someone leak the indemnity!
  7. shmmeee

    Gardening

    My ten year old tells me it’ll be her granny flat at 15. I’m thinking half home office half man cave. We’ll see who wins (the ten year old, it’s always the ten year old).
  8. shmmeee

    So now we know

    I don’t think it is. But we’re all grasping around in the legal dark. Makes sense to me that a general “back off the Ricoh shit” indemnity would be about action against CCC. But we don’t know the details. Is there something Sisu can do that would force Wasps out by suing CCC? No idea but they...
  9. shmmeee

    So now we know

    But we’ve just had it confirmed it’s not Wasps being indemnified? How would an indemnity for CCC mean Sisu (not the club) have to pay that?
  10. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Exactly. IMO forget the NDA. Ask Wasps and Sisu outright to make public the requirements Wasps are putting on Sisu. Then we can all make our minds up as to whether they’re unreasonable for CCFC or just for Sisu.
  11. shmmeee

    So now we know

    It’s not a lie. It’s word play. We don’t know what “indemnity” means still. Sisu claimed it would destroy the club, making is all think it was the state aid indemnity. Clearly it’s not.
  12. shmmeee

    Gardening

    Haha the seller whatsapped me randomly to tell me how much he was going to miss the garage.
  13. shmmeee

    Gardening

    Seems alright. I was about to buy in Acacia Crescent behind Nico and to be honest I got a curtain twitchy nosey neighbour Finham type vibe from it which is not my bag.
  14. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Keep reading. I get there in the end ;)
  15. shmmeee

    So now we know

    No. It’s in Wasps interests to protect themselves from losing the Ricoh. That’s worth more to them than any short term cash from CCFC sadly. Likewise it’s in Sisus interests to keep that option open, they stand to gain more than any short term losses at Brum. They said there wasn’t an...
  16. shmmeee

    So now we know

    Not saying they aren’t disingenuous, but what’s the outright lie? We still don’t know details of the indemnity and how it would impact CCFC. Wasps have said all along they want wider indemnity. We all suspected they were hiding behind the caterers. That was disingenuous but not technically a...
  17. shmmeee

    So now we know

    But it wasn’t for Wasps last year. Thats why talks broke down. Sisu signed a thing saying not Wasps then at the end of the talks when it came to finalising it Wasps wanted a wider indemnity/promise of no future legal action.
  18. shmmeee

    So now we know

    This is a very good point.
  19. shmmeee

    So now we know

    This is just arguing over the definition of “indemnity” though. The argument on here at least has been Wasps are asking for Sisu to pay any money back they’re forced to pay to CCC. This confirms that’s not true. It must be about future legal action against CCC.
  20. shmmeee

    So now we know

    No. Do you realise how many councillors there are? Any conspiracy theory involving that many people is nonsense. It’s where all conspiracy theories fall down.
Top