Search results

  1. G

    Legal Argument

    Your last part - could this have been done in friendly way? I suppose it could. But events are normally chained - action and reaction. The sisu-out-campaign last season amplified the hatred against sisu - and I suspect that contaminated any future negotiation. When TF came in and tried to start...
  2. G

    Legal Argument

    I am sorry, I have no intention of patronising anyone. To buy the Higgs shares would require that Higgs and sisu agreed on the valuation. Higgs want £8-10m according tp PWKH (although they are willing to negotiate) and that would require the whole ACL to be around £16-20m worth. At the time...
  3. G

    Legal Argument

    ... and had ACL accepted the clubs initial request for a lower rent - then (to quote you) administration, and any points deduction would have been an irrelevance. Then we could have concentrated on the play-offs, couldn't we?
  4. G

    CCFC Ltd (in admin) Directors Liability

    Good question. When did they create ARVO? Some have said repeatedly since last summer that the rent strike is not about rent amount, but about gaining control of the stadium. (I didn't really believe it then, but could see it as a remote possibility). If it has been sisu's plan all along, I...
  5. G

    Legal Argument

    If points deduction is enforced (if!) then it will be on the basis that ccfc ltd is in administration, and the effective date is yesterday. So points deduction should be done this season. But it is still possible that the club won't be penalized - don't underestimate sisu's lawyers. They know...
  6. G

    Legal Argument

    Had the ACL case gone ahead points deduction would be certain. As of now points deduction is only a possibility. Likely to happen, but not a sure thing - we don't know exactly how sisu/the club will argue their case or how it will be received by FL.
  7. G

    Legal Argument

    Sort of - they argue that it is not the club that is in administration, but a different branch of the group.
  8. G

    Legal Argument

    No, they have ensured points deduction will happen this season (if at all) as the administration was effective as of yesterday. Had they not done so but instead contested todays court case, then the points deduction would likely be effective next season. And if sisu didn't agree with any terms...
  9. G

    different view

    The half-rent saving is only half true. First look at the combined profit and loss between ccfc and ACL - the overall result is negative, there are not enough income to make both profitable at the same time. Second look at the profit of ACL - it's about £500k when ccfc pays full rent. With the...
  10. G

    different view

    I think you find your answer in the fact that TF stated ACL were in financial trouble. If Higgs said they wanted £8-10m for their half-part of a financial distressed company, then negotiations were bound to break. There's no way an investor (let alone a hedge fund!) would valuate ACL at...
  11. G

    different view

    No, they agreed heads of terms - a roadmap of negotiations that would ultimately lead to buying the shares if they could agree on conditions.
  12. G

    Big, bigger the biggest balls....who dares wins.

    Actually they have done something right - they have started to get the finances under control. Not from day one when they let Ranson lay the foundation to the current mess, but from two years ago when they took control themself. Their first move then was a disaster - appointing Ken Dulieu - but...
  13. G

    different view

    In my dream the stadium is operated by the club and all income from it benefits the club.
  14. G

    Playing elsewhere ! Who says so ?

    Why do you think it is a contingency plan? I think it is plan A.
  15. G

    different view

    If they wanted out they wouldn't have made their latest move. They would just let the administration proces go along. They wouldn't have made sure the team can play at Wallsall. They are going nowhere.
  16. G

    different view

    In short: Doing what is necessary.
  17. G

    Big, bigger the biggest balls....who dares wins.

    No Otis, this latest turn show that the club have owners willing to fight for it. Pax, good post. ACL may go back to the club and offer them to continue playing there at a price ccfc is willing/able to pay, but that won't be the end of it. The club need to own the stadium - not the bricks...
  18. G

    Playing elsewhere ! Who says so ?

    No, ACL's priority no 1 is to force sisu out. This is personal now - have been for some time. There are no consideration for the fans. Their action would ensure a 10pt deduction and maybe even a further 15pt penalty if sisu didn't leave quietly accepting any offer from the buyers ACL have...
  19. G

    Reading all this and have not got a clue?

    Who thought sisu were cornered and only had the option of leaving in disgrace? Here's a copy of my previous post: Ok, so now we know what sisu will do. But does it show their intentions? Maybe - if(!) sisu can stay in control, this is what I guess their strategy is: Over the next few...
Top