moleyskyblue
New Member
Acl are back on this mornin with some news of footie league.
Acl back on cwr again (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter moleyskyblue
- Start date
6 Generations
Well-Known Member
Was a time stated?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Strange. Seemed to omit the CVA?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Hopefully even the Football League will now start to get a picture of what's going on.
skybluelee
Well-Known Member
Somebody just needs to bang their fucking heads together and get this sorted. Our first home game is in 3 weeks and there is absolutely no need for us to be playing our home games in a fucking tin shed in Northampton!
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
So you don't see it as a refusal?
Would you have seen it as a refusal if ACL had said that their pre-condition was payment of all rent arrears?
Snozz_is_god
New Member
That's not what he said at all.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
The "ball is in ACL's corner" only because that's the way that Joy wants to play it. There is nothing stopping her going to a meeting.
mark82
Moderator
If it was my business I wouldn't be signing that CVA.
Snozz_is_god
New Member
They have to reject the CVA, if they accept it they no longer have a legal case to pursue and the battle for CCFC will be lost
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I thought that ACL had agreed to a meeting with no preconditions.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
ACL asked FL if they would broker talks on Monday at their meeting. ACL placed no conditions on the talks
JS was contacted Tuesday, needed time to think
JS replied mid day Wednesday said no not unless ACL signed the CVA first
Offer remains on table but will be reviewed after ACL see what happens at the CVA meeting 22/07
In ACL's opinion the ability to hold talks and the CVA are not linked. Whatever happens with CVA the assets of the club are presently in CCFC H and they are operating the Club. If CCFC Ltd liquidated the club would still be there
ACL want CCFC at the Ricoh
Question - why is the signing of the CVA so important ?
JS was contacted Tuesday, needed time to think
JS replied mid day Wednesday said no not unless ACL signed the CVA first
Offer remains on table but will be reviewed after ACL see what happens at the CVA meeting 22/07
In ACL's opinion the ability to hold talks and the CVA are not linked. Whatever happens with CVA the assets of the club are presently in CCFC H and they are operating the Club. If CCFC Ltd liquidated the club would still be there
ACL want CCFC at the Ricoh
Question - why is the signing of the CVA so important ?
Last edited:
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Would you sign ?
That would say that SISU can have everything for a fraction of what they are owed. Signing the CVA would be an agreement at the meeting as a precursor for coming back to the Ricoh. FL get some balls.
Last edited:
mark82
Moderator
You still doing some work for them OSB?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
So is it correct that SISU want something in return for just having discussions.
Not sign the CVA and we will come back to the Ricoh.
They are saying sign the CVA and we will chat to you?
They can then just not get anywhere in the discussions?
Not sign the CVA and we will come back to the Ricoh.
They are saying sign the CVA and we will chat to you?
They can then just not get anywhere in the discussions?
We will perhaps agree with a meeting once you have already given us exactly what we want, once the lease is broken and once you no longer have any leverage, maybe... So sign here please.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Last edited:
Pretty much spot on.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
What is your opinion on that?
jesus-wept
New Member
ACL must not be sign this cva. Once it is that kills dead any investigation into how this debt occurred. PWKH has just said on CWR that Joy Seppella has said she won't okay any joint meeting with ACL and the football league whilst this cva is unsigned, ask yourselves why. Ainsworth is putting pressure on from the Parliament angle and there is pressure from Companies House, our MEP and our two other MPs. have edms in too. SISU will have reasons to kill off any investigation into their affairs and if that cva is signed do you trust Seppalla, Fisher and co will honour any meeting or implement any proposal put to them. As for our continuing transfer embargo, under certain circumstances the FL will allow players to join, they did so last season at Portsmouth a number of times.
I think they want to make sure the lease is dead and burried and not playing any part in potential future talks.
Surely ACL expected that.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
wes_cov
New Member
to avoid Liquidation and investigation, we would have to look at the consequences on Holding if limitied was liquidated, would we receive a -15 deduction thats a risk. surely the non filing of account prior to all this mess would be looked at negatively by the court which would sure raise suspicion that more than poor business practice was involved?
All we can really do is guess
Originally Posted by Godiva
ACL will only commit to the meeting while the CVA is on the table unsigned.
I didn't hear this?
My Question is will this give the FL enough leverage to withhold the golden share/ permission to play at the tinpot stadium
Last edited:
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
It's not stalemate, it's avoidance.
ACL have agreed to a meeting with no pre-conditions.
Joy is avoiding having a meeting by demanding that the CVA be signed before she will consider attending. If it wasn't the CVA, I'm afraid there'd just be another excuse.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Do you think it is right to expect that before you sit round the table. Or should that be part of the negotiations.
Without it what is ACL's bargaining chip?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
The battle to keep the Sky Blues in Coventry will reach the Minister for Sport today.
Coventry North East MP Bob Ainsworth will meet with Hugh Robertson MP and urge him to apply pressure on the Football League to respond to unanswered questions surrounding the ratification of the club’s move to Northampton for at least the next three years.
He is seeking answers around the location of player contract registrations and details of any plans to return to Coventry .
“I want the minister to raise these two issues with the Football League because he is currently looking at football governance in response to a select committee report,” said the MP.
“If the Football League will not provide proper structure, and stick to their own rules, then some action needs to be taken.”
Mr Ainsworth also put two further early day motions (EDM) before Parliament yesterday , raising questions about the company structure of Coventry City FC.
He questioned the role of company secretary Adam Bradley as well as asking the government to review the law in relation to company secretaries.
Previously in an EDM Mr Ainsworth questioned whether there had been “a conspiracy to defraud” over how assets had been moved at the club – a claim the club’s owners have denied.
In the latest document he states: “Mr Adam Bradley of Taylor Vinters was company secretary of CCFC Holdings Ltd, CCFC Ltd and other entities in the group from 20 December 2010 to 26 June 2013.
“However, that he says he never gave any advice during that period on insolvency or administration and indeed was surprised when Coventry City Football Club (CCFC) Ltd was put into administration and has had no discussions about this with any directors or other stakeholders nor attended a board meeting during his time as company secretary.”
According to the documents, Mr Bradley “did not have contact with key personnel at CCFC and in particular, never spoke to or took instructions from Joy Seppala, never spoke to Mark Labovitch, had limited dealings with Tim Fisher.”
Responding to the EDM, Mr Bradley said: “The role of a company secretary, for most UK private companies at least, is very much more limited than most people imagine.
“Parliament has provided that UK private companies are no longer required to have a company secretary. Mr Ainsworth does raise a legitimate question at the end of his motion as regards this statutory position, which is still held by many individuals in the UK.”
A second EDM called on accountants BDO to sign off CCFC’s overdue accounts.
Tim Fisher, Chief Executive of Coventry City FC said: “As we said just a few days ago, if Mr Ainsworth has concerns, and clearly he does, we would be happy to hear from him outside the confines of Parliament and to clear up the inaccuracies in what he says.”
Petition by iPetitions
Coventry North East MP Bob Ainsworth will meet with Hugh Robertson MP and urge him to apply pressure on the Football League to respond to unanswered questions surrounding the ratification of the club’s move to Northampton for at least the next three years.
He is seeking answers around the location of player contract registrations and details of any plans to return to Coventry .
“I want the minister to raise these two issues with the Football League because he is currently looking at football governance in response to a select committee report,” said the MP.
“If the Football League will not provide proper structure, and stick to their own rules, then some action needs to be taken.”
Mr Ainsworth also put two further early day motions (EDM) before Parliament yesterday , raising questions about the company structure of Coventry City FC.
He questioned the role of company secretary Adam Bradley as well as asking the government to review the law in relation to company secretaries.
Previously in an EDM Mr Ainsworth questioned whether there had been “a conspiracy to defraud” over how assets had been moved at the club – a claim the club’s owners have denied.
In the latest document he states: “Mr Adam Bradley of Taylor Vinters was company secretary of CCFC Holdings Ltd, CCFC Ltd and other entities in the group from 20 December 2010 to 26 June 2013.
“However, that he says he never gave any advice during that period on insolvency or administration and indeed was surprised when Coventry City Football Club (CCFC) Ltd was put into administration and has had no discussions about this with any directors or other stakeholders nor attended a board meeting during his time as company secretary.”
According to the documents, Mr Bradley “did not have contact with key personnel at CCFC and in particular, never spoke to or took instructions from Joy Seppala, never spoke to Mark Labovitch, had limited dealings with Tim Fisher.”
Responding to the EDM, Mr Bradley said: “The role of a company secretary, for most UK private companies at least, is very much more limited than most people imagine.
“Parliament has provided that UK private companies are no longer required to have a company secretary. Mr Ainsworth does raise a legitimate question at the end of his motion as regards this statutory position, which is still held by many individuals in the UK.”
A second EDM called on accountants BDO to sign off CCFC’s overdue accounts.
Tim Fisher, Chief Executive of Coventry City FC said: “As we said just a few days ago, if Mr Ainsworth has concerns, and clearly he does, we would be happy to hear from him outside the confines of Parliament and to clear up the inaccuracies in what he says.”
Petition by iPetitions
