Search results

You know, people keep asking for the smoking gun. This could actually be it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31708/10-1154-state-aid-notification-process-flowchart.pdf

Well, the money is given to a stadium management company. The stadium is used for international matches - the Olympics in 2012 for instance. So in theory the Ricoh could be competing with other venues within the EU. Council QC did his best to blur this, but saying Coventry isn't metropolitan...

Oh, you think she would share? More likely you would have been stripped of all you had in the divorce process.

His ex-wife I would say from the way he talks about her.

Three days using the judge as arbitrator. Could have been productive.

I really wasn't on about the escrow - we all know it was there and it was used. Nothing new and nothing criminal. I was simply saying the language between the two reporters is different.

It's the language difference. One says 'rent was paid' - that requires two parties, a payer and a receiver. The other says 'took' - that suggest self service. Only one part involved.

There's a very subtle difference in the reporting.

If someone could now clean the thread up and remove everything irrelevant to the case ... Would make it a 3 or 4 page thread - easy to read and worth going back to for references in the future.

The court also heard how a £400,000 Ricoh rent deal was agreed in principle between the club and ACL in January 2014 but the council QC said this was later rejected by the club. ... 2014???

I don't think so - in case the use of public funds is found illegal state aid the judge will rule so. I believe he will tell the council to revoke the loan - probably giving a one month schedule to comply. Then CCC may appeal, but I think the sisu QC making a big fuss about individual...

Threshold is £200.000 I believe. Anyway - here's a 60 slide PowerPoint presentation on the subject: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31700/11-1040-state-aid-guide.pdf

Not that simple really. First - everyone can complain about state aid - not restricted to those directly involved. Secondly - sisu offered to buy out the loan, they are a financial unit so in direct competition with YB. They may claim public money was used to starve them off a profit.

Liverpool legend?

No it doesn't, but if public money is to be spent on commercial enterprises then an application procedure must be followed and granted by the EU commission. Clearly that did not happen as it takes many months and would require a hearing of all parties - including sisu/ccfc. If such an...

The stadium itself is a community asset - ACL is not.

They didn't - the interest rate would be considerably higher. When public money is used in commercial ways it MUST be with the intend of making a profit equal to any comparable private enterprises. The ccc loan should have been on normal interests to follow EU legislation. Beside that - when a...

As I see it - If sisu were told all deals were off before the council took over the loan there was a real threat that sisu would put the club in administration/liquidation immediately. That would make it impossible for the council to provide the loan and also have YB to pull out completely. ACL...