Search results

But why bring Wasps up on a thread about an article in a local paper that accurately sums up the feelings of CCFC fans on the way the current owners have run the club? It's a separate subject surely? All it does is distract from the actual point of the article. Was that the point of mentioning...

You see. Even that's nonsense. Whether you meant it to or not I don't know but what you've said comes across to me is that because they didn't/don't report on Wasp how you would like it to be done they've somehow forfeited the right to report opinion on the management of CCFC. What was said is...

Nick, did you really get up at five in the morning just for this? Make sure Tim is sitting down when you put in your overtime for this week ;)

I can't help but get the feeling that SISU might have dropped the legals by now if people didn't keep insisting on them doing it before negotiations on something can move on. The Butts for example. If they drop the legals a deal for the Butts can be done. Why would they then drop the legals...

Either way I didn't suggest it did magically appear. Nice of you to join the dance by the way. Can I step back in now or do you want to wait for the next song?

So the length of the lease wasn't negotiable for the club? Is that what you're suggesting?

Not suggested anything remotely like that if you read all my posts on this thread. Just the opposite in fact.

Do we actually owe anyone anything now other than companies in Joys control? What would be the benefit (not that there was any first time around) of going into admin again? Surely if it was a debt shredding exercise SISU could do that without admin? It's not like we have any long term contracts...

Two can play that game. So now you are accusing the council of deliberately inflating ACL's value to the benefit of a local charity? I've always said that ACL had value. I pointed out earlier in this very thread that the lease was never an issue because they can be renegotiated. My position...

So you agree that it wasn't worthless then? There was always the option to negotiate an extended lease wasn't there? So the value was always there wasn't it? Even when you were insisting it was worthless and jumping down the throats of anyone who said different? I've never seen someone...

The power of negotiation's hey. Shame our owners wouldn't enter into negotiations isn't it?

So when Wasps bought ACL the council had already furnished ACL with a 250 year lease? It was sitting on ACL's books was it?

Don't believe so. The sale of ACL and the lease extension are separate transactions as far as I'm aware. Pretty sure OSB has done a timescale on this in the past. ACL sold in September, lease extension sold the following January IIRC.

If it gets to that point.

It's not about being naive it's about what the paper trail says and the paper trail says that on the day ACL was sold it didn't own a 250 year lease on the Ricoh. It was only going to be added if the sale of ACL was completed so no it wasn't included. That's why it's a separate transaction...

Whether it was agreed or not is irrelevant. It wasn't in ACL when it was sold. The fact that a 250 year lease was possible to agree is a negotiation. The thing our owners refused to do preferring to play silly buggers in the court. It would have been cheaper to negotiate wouldn't you agree...

The regulation you talk about IIRC is specifically about the disposal of freehold on brown and greenfield for development. All the council have done is sold it's share in a loss making company and extended a lease on an existing development. Can't see it Dave. On that basis JR2 to my layman eyes...

From memory ACL was sold in September the lease extension was signed of the following January. It may well have been agreed in principle earlier in fact you'd think that would have been part of Wasps due diligence but the extension was worthless unless you owned the current lease holder first...

Wasps purchased ACL without ACL owning a 250 year lease and as Dave points out was loss making and in debt. That's what Grendull (and others) was calling a worthless ugly concrete white elephant that no one would be interested in and SISU are the only show in town during and quite possibly...

Yes they did. Although that does depend on which version of Grendull fact you believe.