Search results

And non taxpayers also not from Coventry.

It clearly wasn't. ACL was the only entity with a right to extend the lease. You couldn't buy a 250 year lease without owning ACL so ACL always had value. Unless you're claiming that ACL was a white elephant regardless of the length of the lease because the two can only possibly go hand in hand...

So what if it's lose. Is your point so invalid that you have to get all petty over a simple spelling mistake as if it somehow validates your point and argues against mine? Grow up FFS. What's it got to do with a company that operates from a tax haven anyway? If they're so bothered about about...

Oh, I agree. However if SISU aren't Otium surely it follows that ARVO aren't SISU.

So the clubs statement is really out then. It's not even SISU who are officially the clubs owners that have brought the action in conjunction with us, it's ARVO. Unless of course there's been a change in ownership.

Who in their right mind would be behind fruitless, pointless legal action that win, loose or draw won't benefit CCFC in any way shape or form? Can't seem why Northampton would be a deciding factor in anyone's thinking on this. In fact I don't understand why you're even bringing up Northampton at...

So you accept that the clubs statement that states that it is the owners taking legal action is bullshit then?

It's a PR term ;)

They must be right if Tim Fisher is a stooge.

Try answering the points in the original post. I can't believe I let you suck me into this nonsense. It's exactly the point I was making. You really shouldn't talk about unity when you can't even acknowledge what's really happening with the club at the hands of the owners. On that note. Goodbye.

So the statement acknowledges that Otium are a claimant then? Or does it make out it it's nothing to do with the club.

I haven't played the man have I? I asked you a list of questions based on observations of your behaviour, some of those observations you've continued to do since I asked the questions. You've replied by calling me a little bitch while making out I only play the man. Why don't you address the...

I've not said it does but it is trying to blur the lines. It's saying that it's nothing to do with the club it's the owners when in fact it is the club. You're the one who gets upset when the lines are blurred between club and owners why do you accept it this way around and not when fans do it...

You're funny. And not in a good way.

No. I mean the one that says that the owners of the club have been granted right to appeal. It's the opening line of the statement. I'm surprised you missed it. Otium have also been granted right to appeal. You are aware of that aren't you? Otium is the operating arm of the club. You are aware...

"Little bitch"? Nice thought out retort. At least I'm my own bitch and not someone else's. Any comment on the club confusing the owners with the club? I know it's a bug bare of yours. I'm surprised you're not all over it already.

That's it Nick. You keep up the good work. Tim is proud of you I'm sure.

Another free gift to SISU's PR team playing the "suddenly back" card. What do you think about the statement on the clubs website where they're trying to make out it's nothing to do with the club despite as you know Otium being listed on the court proceedings? Any comment on the "clubs" (let's...

Predictable nonsense as usual. You're a gift to SISU. Presumably free as well.

So if you think it's pointless given that you believe it will be thrown out it begs the question that ccfc way asked at the top of page 3. Why are you more bothered about the "PR" and the CT than you are about the actions of our owners? Which by your own admission will be fruitless and...