ACL council Higgs (8 Viewers)

dongonzalos · Mar 14, 2013

On here have been called many things...

Tin pot
Can't run a business
Bunch of people who only know how to run a charity
Clueless
No idea what they are doing
Feeding off the football club as a fat cow.
On the verge of administration.

Most of these comments were during a period in which a business with a reputation for kicking ass ruthlessness. A fearsome worldwide reputation in the already feisty world of hedge-fund business were starting a process of starting to destroy ACL bit by bit.

I personally believed it when people said ACL would always be one step behind and SISU would eat them alive.

However is it possible that SISU have actually been completely out manoeuvred. By this tin pot organisation.

Publicly leaking the fact SISU were trying to destabilise them.
Refinancing the loan
Public airing the tactics used by SISU in the meetings
Applying for the third party debt order
Then for administration and leaking that other potential owners are sniffing around.

I fully expect a sting still to be in the tail.

But it seems to be looking that way?

Flying Fokker · Mar 14, 2013

I so hope that this SISU goes. I fear them getting away with it.

Grendel · Mar 14, 2013

The bit that amused me was when the charity bloke was saying sisu were trying to reduce the rent through bullying tactics.

However the fact is they never once have offered a reduction. It's the worst deal in the football league and was always going to finish us off.

Oh well charity certainly begins at home.

Jack Griffin · Mar 14, 2013

He never put it that way. What he said was that SISU proposed the resulit of arbitration should be was that all prior agreements should be torn up and that they are given the stadium (which they didn't build or pay for) & all its revenues for free.

Putting words into someone elses mouth again...

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

Grendel said:
The bit that amused me was when the charity bloke was saying sisu were trying to reduce the rent through bullying tactics.

However the fact is they never once have offered a reduction. It's the worst deal in the football league and was always going to finish us off.

Oh well charity certainly begins at home.

The fact is SISU never asked them for one so it must be presumed they were OK with it until their own blundering got us relegated once more.

chiefdave · Mar 14, 2013

Grendel said:
The bit that amused me was when the charity bloke was saying sisu were trying to reduce the rent through bullying tactics.

However the fact is they never once have offered a reduction. It's the worst deal in the football league and was always going to finish us off.

Oh well charity certainly begins at home.

I found that interesting. Sure it was reported somewhere that the rent strike had come about because ACL had time and time again refused to come to the table to discuss regeneration. If ACL are going to accuse SISU of bullying what exactly do they think they are doing now? People can't on one hand slate SISU claiming they were trying to put ACL into admin to pick them up on the cheap but then on the other say this is a fantastic move by ACL, this is exactly the same!

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

chiefdave said:
I found that interesting. Sure it was reported somewhere that the rent strike had come about because ACL had time and time again refused to come to the table to discuss regeneration. If ACL are going to accuse SISU of bullying what exactly do they think they are doing now? People can't on one hand slate SISU claiming they were trying to put ACL into admin to pick them up on the cheap but then on the other say this is a fantastic move by ACL, this is exactly the same!

Nonsense-how do you know they have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate?

1. The club put this rope around its own neck by selling its ACL share and agreeing £1.3m a year rent.

2. Between SISU's takeover and April 2012, they made not one attempt to talk to ACL about improved terms-it was only once another relegation (self inflicted) was inevitable that suddenly it became of interest.

3. Fisher did not have to resort to racking up a £1 million bill in contract breaking indulgence-he took it on himself and the club has suffered consequently. It never had to come to this.

stupot07 · Mar 14, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Nonsense-how do you know they have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate?

1. The club put this rope around its own neck by selling its ACL share and agreeing £1.3m a year rent.

2. Between SISU's takeover and April 2012, they made not one attempt to talk to ACL about improved terms-it was only once another relegation (self inflicted) was inevitable that suddenly it became of interest.

3. Fisher did not have to resort to racking up a £1 million bill in contract breaking indulgence-he took it on himself and the club has suffered consequently. It never had to come to this.

I really don't see why 2. Is relevant. Circumstances constantly change.

Jack Griffin · Mar 14, 2013

chiefdave said:
I found that interesting. Sure it was reported somewhere that the rent strike had come about because ACL had time and time again refused to come to the table to discuss regeneration. If ACL are going to accuse SISU of bullying what exactly do they think they are doing now? People can't on one hand slate SISU claiming they were trying to put ACL into admin to pick them up on the cheap but then on the other say this is a fantastic move by ACL, this is exactly the same!

A. Where was that said, never seen it myself!
B. ACL say SISU were not prepared to invest in the club. (PWKH on Shane O'Connors show this morning)

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

stupot07 said:
I really don't see why 2. Is relevant. Circumstances constantly change.

According to Grendel we have been ripped off from day one-so would it not be in any club's interest to address it as soon as possible? Circumstances changed purely as a result of the board's own mistakes.

luwalla · Mar 14, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Nonsense-how do you know they have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate?

1. The club put this rope around its own neck by selling its ACL share and agreeing £1.3m a year rent.

2. Between SISU's takeover and April 2012, they made not one attempt to talk to ACL about improved terms-it was only once another relegation (self inflicted) was inevitable that suddenly it became of interest.

3. Fisher did not have to resort to racking up a £1 million bill in contract breaking indulgence-he took it on himself and the club has suffered consequently. It never had to come to this.

haha you start your reply by telling someone they are talking nonsense & "how do they know ACL have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate? ".. and then you go on to say to say "Between SISU's takeover and April 2012, they made not one attempt to talk to ACL about improved terms" .. so you know that for a fact do you?.. in which case lets see some evidence ? or are you actually talking nonsense yourself , and just totally made that up

also, The club put might have put this rope around its own neck by selling its ACL share and agreeing £1.3m a year rent... but SISU didnt do that, the previous owners did.. so it doesnt really have any bearing on the whole SISU vs ACL argument

for me , i think both parties are as bad as each other in this case.. they obviously have a dislike for each other & are never going to be able to move forward and do business, so god only knows what the best outcome is ..

would SISU put us into liquidation , rather than administration, out of spite .. maybe ? .. in which case, have ACL done us a favour by calling for Administration.. maybe

stupot07 · Mar 14, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
According to Grendel we have been ripped off from day one-so would it not be in any club's interest to address it as soon as possible? Circumstances changed purely as a result of the board's own mistakes.

The rent is too high and always has been too high, Sisu should have dealt with it earlier no one can argue that. However we were relegated in part because we were spending well beyond our means and costs needed cutting, in our case it was the wage bill and not employing a proper manager.

The problem is fans want them to act business like and honour contracts, yet also want them to spend their own money on funding player purchases and losses. Apart from football clubs, what other businesses are happy to fund year on year on year losses?

If Sisu were to now pay up the £1.4m arrears and continue to pay £1.28m rent per annum. Would fans be happy for them to slash the wage bill by £2.7m to fund those costs?

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

luwalla said:
haha you start your reply by telling someone they are talking nonsense & "how do they know ACL have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate? ".. and then you go on to say to say "Between SISU's takeover and April 2012, they made not one attempt to talk to ACL about improved terms" .. so you know that for a fact do you?.. in which case lets see some evidence ? or are you actually talking nonsense yourself , and just totally made that up

also, The club put might have put this rope around its own neck by selling its ACL share and agreeing £1.3m a year rent... but SISU didnt do that, the previous owners did.. so it doesnt really have any bearing on the whole SISU vs ACL argument

for me , i think both parties are as bad as each other in this case.. they obviously have a dislike for each other & are never going to be able to move forward and do business, so god only knows what the best outcome is ..

would SISU put us into liquidation , rather than administration, out of spite .. maybe ? .. in which case, have ACL done us a favour by calling for Administration.. maybe

My source for that is PWKH and has been accepted by the likes of Torch.

CJparker · Mar 14, 2013

stupot07 said:
The rent is too high and always has been too high, Sisu should have dealt with it earlier no one can argue that. However we were relegated in part because we were spending well beyond our means and costs needed cutting, in our case it was the wage bill and not employing a proper manager.

The problem is fans want them to act business like and honour contracts, yet also want them to spend their own money on funding player purchases and losses. Apart from football clubs, what other businesses are happy to fund year on year on year losses?

If Sisu were to now pay up the £1.4m arrears and continue to pay £1.28m rent per annum. Would fans be happy for them to slash the wage bill by £2.7m to fund those costs?

Good post Stu, but you forget one vital thing...football is not like any other business, it does involve spending money hand over fist - you need deep pockets and keep up the required level of funding. SISU should have known better but it seems they fell for Uncle Ray's charms and never really understood what they had got themselves into until it was too late. By then, they had been left holding the baby with no knowledge of how to run a football club. All their failings stem from buying the club without doing their homework first.

Frankly, if, as an owner of a football club, you are not prepared to spend big constantly, you should not be running a football club.

Nonleagueherewecome · Mar 14, 2013

What's that quote about the quickest way to lose a fortune?

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

stupot07 said:
The rent is too high and always has been too high, Sisu should have dealt with it earlier no one can argue that. However we were relegated in part because we were spending well beyond our means and costs needed cutting, in our case it was the wage bill and not employing a proper manager.

The problem is fans want them to act business like and honour contracts, yet also want them to spend their own money on funding player purchases and losses. Apart from football clubs, what other businesses are happy to fund year on year on year losses?

If Sisu were to now pay up the £1.4m arrears and continue to pay £1.28m rent per annum. Would fans be happy for them to slash the wage bill by £2.7m to fund those costs?

I don't dispute it's too high and ACL's massive reduction in the offer is admission on their part. There are virtually no clubs in the Football League who make a profit-take our own neighbours up the M69, who seem to be able to make losses as big as they like and get away with it. Had a competent manager been employed we likely wouldn't have got relegated.

Jack Griffin · Mar 14, 2013

Great post Stu, I want a reasonable agreement too, I don't think many (if any people) consider the £1.2M rent as acceptable going forward. But there is no agreement & frankly I belive that is down to SISU, as soon as any stage of negotiations is complete, SISU do a volte face, that isn't negotiation, it is prevarication through apparent negotiation..

luwalla · Mar 14, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
My source for that is PWKH and has been accepted by the likes of Torch.

so no proof then.. just repeating what you were told ?

luwalla · Mar 14, 2013

stupot07 said:
The rent is too high and always has been too high, Sisu should have dealt with it earlier no one can argue that. However we were relegated in part because we were spending well beyond our means and costs needed cutting, in our case it was the wage bill and not employing a proper manager.

The problem is fans want them to act business like and honour contracts, yet also want them to spend their own money on funding player purchases and losses. Apart from football clubs, what other businesses are happy to fund year on year on year losses?

If Sisu were to now pay up the £1.4m arrears and continue to pay £1.28m rent per annum. Would fans be happy for them to slash the wage bill by £2.7m to fund those costs?

totally agree.. spot on!

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

luwalla said:
so no proof then.. just repeating what you were told ?

It's good enough for the likes of Torch-what exactly do you want?

Tonylinc · Mar 14, 2013

Nonleagueherewecome said:
What's that quote about the quickest way to lose a fortune?

Think it goes something like....How do you make a small fortune from football? Start off with a large fortune.

Nonleagueherewecome · Mar 14, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
It's good enough for the likes of Torch-what exactly do you want?

The moon on a stick? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERDUbAv8Qz0

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 14, 2013

Nonleagueherewecome said:
The moon on a stick? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERDUbAv8Qz0

A little bit hard to bite into.

dongonzalos · Mar 14, 2013

So what's the sting in the scorpions tail going to be?

wingy · Mar 14, 2013

stupot07 said:
The rent is too high and always has been too high, Sisu should have dealt with it earlier no one can argue that. However we were relegated in part because we were spending well beyond our means and costs needed cutting, in our case it was the wage bill and not employing a proper manager.

The problem is fans want them to act business like and honour contracts, yet also want them to spend their own money on funding player purchases and losses. Apart from football clubs, what other businesses are happy to fund year on year on year losses?

If Sisu were to now pay up the £1.4m arrears and continue to pay £1.28m rent per annum. Would fans be happy for them to slash the wage bill by £2.7m to fund those costs?

Personally I would'nt have had any issue with Sisu gaining a rent reduction/purchase of Stadium /Gaining of income streams /Demand the Stadium Gratis...........If they had raised and enforced this issue upon takeover of our club .It was the most prominent issue facing the club at that point.
The fact they did not suggests their current strategy has been about a get out of Jailcard for their Ineptitude and am convinced this has nothing to do with benefitting the Club or us fans .If they had been willing to invest the level of rent they hav'nt paid this season last season we may have remained in the division above with Circa £5M. more to spend be it on rent or wages.

Jack Griffin · Mar 14, 2013

Frankly is SISU had gone straight in & bought the 1/2 share of the arena for the same amount of money they paid out in rent over the last 6 years & then as part owners organised refinancing of ACL and negotiated a large rent reductilon while biding their time in the Championship till they'd reorganised other finance isues then I might be saying SISU done good... but they did nothing of the sort, the took a punt on promotion, failed and are now trying to get someone else to pay for their incompedence.

CJparker · Mar 14, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
Frankly is SISU had gone straight in & bought the 1/2 share of the arena for the same amount of money they paid out in rent over the last 6 years & then as part owners organised refinancing of ACL and negotiated a large rent reductilon while biding their time in the Championship till they'd reorganised other finance isues then I might be saying SISU done good... but they did nothing of the sort, the took a punt on promotion, failed and are now trying to get someone else to pay for their incompedence.

Yes, exactly

Mucca Mad Boys · Mar 14, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
Frankly is SISU had gone straight in & bought the 1/2 share of the arena for the same amount of money they paid out in rent over the last 6 years & then as part owners organised refinancing of ACL and negotiated a large rent reductilon while biding their time in the Championship till they'd reorganised other finance isues then I might be saying SISU done good... but they did nothing of the sort, the took a punt on promotion, failed and are now trying to get someone else to pay for their incompedence.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Fact is, it wasn't as big a problem then, than it is now.

Circumstances change.

torchomatic · Mar 14, 2013

The same way people seem to know what Fisher and SISU are saying and up to most of the time.

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Nonsense-how do you know they have 'time and again' refused to renegotiate?

Jack Griffin · Mar 14, 2013

The finances were always the problem, none of what I said is a novel strategy for a new owner of a businesses ..

coundonskyblue · Mar 14, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Fact is, it wasn't as big a problem then, than it is now.

Circumstances change.

Losing between £4-6M a year wasn't a problem?

Big problem if you ask me, why didn't they do something to address it?

Mucca Mad Boys · Mar 14, 2013

coundonskyblue said:
Losing between £4-6M a year wasn't a problem?

Big problem if you ask me, why didn't they do something to address it?

Of course it was a big problem! But SISU started off spending reasonably big to hit the jackpot, failed, but after throwing money at the problem, the debt was more manageable, we had players to sell, TV money and more money in general, but now, we have less money, who can we sell? Rent becomes 3-4x important.

stupot07 · Mar 14, 2013

coundonskyblue said:
Losing between £4-6M a year wasn't a problem?

Big problem if you ask me, why didn't they do something to address it?

They did Ken Deleui slashed the wage budget and employed a cheap option manager

coundonskyblue · Mar 14, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
Of course it was a big problem! But SISU started off spending reasonably big to hit the jackpot, failed, but after throwing money at the problem, the debt was more manageable, we had players to sell, TV money and more money in general, but now, we have less money, who can we sell? Rent becomes 3-4x important.

So that shows they have no plan or vision then?

The rent has always been high, any prudent business would have conducted negotiations on this straight away, regardless of how high income was.

Bottom line is in 2007/08 Sisu were the good guys, and could have used that to get a good deal for the club.

dongonzalos · Mar 14, 2013

Grendel said:
The bit that amused me was when the charity bloke was saying sisu were trying to reduce the rent through bullying tactics.

However the fact is they never once have offered a reduction. It's the worst deal in the football league and was always going to finish us off.

Oh well charity certainly begins at home.

Was this in response to the OP?

ACL council Higgs (8 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency