hill83
Well-Known Member
Tropical Hotel 30 seconds away from Ibiza Rocks. Total shit tip. Wheatsheaf Del Sol
Acl to comment on Ricoh arena position (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter AFCCOVENTRY
- Start date
Tropical Hotel 30 seconds away from Ibiza Rocks. Total shit tip. Wheatsheaf Del Sol
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Ha ha. Have a good one. Not far from mambo etc mind.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
As has been said before, the £590K is in escrow and the FL are looking at this issue of whether the rent guarantee money from Mike 'n' Geoff should count towards rent received by ACL. If we were getting points docked we'd know about it by now so it's just a case of waiting until the FL make their decision. I wouldn't get too depressed about it...not playing in Cov is enough to concentrate on really.
(FWIW, I think that the FL will eventually say the full £590K needs to be paid. I'm sure ACL are desperate to get their hands on a bit of cash.)
It's intriguing that ACL have come out with such a strongly worded statement today. With Fisher talking peace & reconciliation and rent deals, Ann Lucas's open door & moving on and the CovTel comment mentioning olive branches it did seem that the way was being paved for some kind of progress. I wonder if ACL are reacting or pre-empting to something that hasn't gone public yet?
(FWIW, I think that the FL will eventually say the full £590K needs to be paid. I'm sure ACL are desperate to get their hands on a bit of cash.)
It's intriguing that ACL have come out with such a strongly worded statement today. With Fisher talking peace & reconciliation and rent deals, Ann Lucas's open door & moving on and the CovTel comment mentioning olive branches it did seem that the way was being paved for some kind of progress. I wonder if ACL are reacting or pre-empting to something that hasn't gone public yet?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
We can't even get 'em to sign an online petition, so not much chance you'll get a tenner out of them.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Rob, the deadline was clearly 31st may 2014 and it hasn't been paid so how can you say there won't be points deductions is beyond me.
ACL just want their money that is owed. This isn't siding with ACL it's just a matter of fact they are owed 590k and it hasn't been paid to the deadline.
It's obvious to a blind man sisu are liquidating the club. I expect it before the season starts. I think ACL do also hence the strong statement.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure many people who were owed that amount of money whilst at the same time had the company who owed it to them taking legal action would be waiting with arms open to do business again. Of course we would all love a statement from ACL that says come back, you can have the ground for free and all the revenues but they are business and have to act in a manner they deem suitable.
The flip side is they have left a very clear route to return, pay what you owe, drop the legal action and then things can move forward. Maybe not an ideal scenario for us fans but not an entirely unreasonable one.
Of bigger concern it seems ACL know nothing of the money owed being in escrow. Given that the FL also haven't commented on this the only people who have said there is nothing to worry about are SISU. Surely if the money was sat there ACL would know about it and be clear what the dispute was and the FL could quickly issue a statement saying everything was under control and there is no danger of further action against the club.
The flip side is they have left a very clear route to return, pay what you owe, drop the legal action and then things can move forward. Maybe not an ideal scenario for us fans but not an entirely unreasonable one.
Of bigger concern it seems ACL know nothing of the money owed being in escrow. Given that the FL also haven't commented on this the only people who have said there is nothing to worry about are SISU. Surely if the money was sat there ACL would know about it and be clear what the dispute was and the FL could quickly issue a statement saying everything was under control and there is no danger of further action against the club.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Agree with the rest of your post, but didn't we get deducted points the night before the first game of the season last season?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
This "we're waiting for the FL" is obvious bollocks. Why would the FL need to get involved? The deal was clear, the judge was clear about what was rent or not, it's just the club trying to spin things out for a bit, as always.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Have you seen any solid evidence to show the money is in escrow? If it was the FL could issue a quick statement saying we are holding the money and will make a decision on what is owed. And if there is a dispute surely they need to speak to ACL and sort it out, should take about 5 minutes not weeks. I find it hard to see where the dispute is, the £590K in the CVA was not a rent payment even before you consider the £590K ordered to be paid by the FL is not part of CVA or any other agreement.
It seems very simple to me, SISU were told to pay £590K (not for rent or any other purpose a straight payment) by a certain date and haven't. First we had them saying it would definitely be paid before the deadline, then it was late due to banking issues and now we've got we don't think we have to pay it, doesn't fill me with confidence.
Points can be docked until a few weeks before the end of the season so while I hope we don't get a further deduction I don't think we can conclude from the fact it hasn't happened yet that it won't happen.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Will 100% be followed by a counter statement from SISU saying they are following procedures for clarifying the correct amount etc.....
Snozz_is_god
New Member
I agree with this entirely, I say move Coventry United in there, ok it's not everybody's idea of a solution and I know the gates will be pathetically small to start of with, but it gives the people of Coventry a focus, and it's a acorn and given the right nurturing will grow into a tree.
If an hopefully when CCFC do return either probably as a newco then they can share the ground, why not.
This won't be popular with some folk.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
As always with Sisu, it's crystal clear to everyone but them.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Fuck Coventry United.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
The original CCFC or nothing for me.
covmark
Well-Known Member
Who's going to pay 400k a year rent and matchday costs for cov united?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Who ever suggested that is the deal on offer?
I mean, taking the higher rent offer is a stretch, but ignoring the fact that they are several leagues lower is just silly.
You or I could rent the Ricoh for 23 games at £5k a match - £115k all in. Obviously there'll be a limit on attendance and other uses throughout the year, but if you want a starting point, that's a far better place.
But still, fuck Coventry United.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Cov united are better off staying where they are IMO. Too small a club to be getting involved in stadiums. (Not that I really care about CUFC, just saying)
Snozz_is_god
New Member
blinkered!
Snozz_is_god
New Member
Blinkered!
Snozz_is_god
New Member
Blinkered!
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Snozz_is_god
New Member
The match days cost will be sized accordingly & you know it.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
“Despite suggestions to the contrary, the board of ACL has not entered into any discussions with OEG about returning CCFC to the Ricoh Arena.
“No formal approach has been made or received from OEG and, should an approach be made, there will be no discussions until the outstanding £590,000 is paid in full by OEG.”
Simon could you ask if any informal approach has been made?
“No formal approach has been made or received from OEG and, should an approach be made, there will be no discussions until the outstanding £590,000 is paid in full by OEG.”
Simon could you ask if any informal approach has been made?
That's how I see it. The FL have constantly said they can't/wont get involved in a commercial rental dispute between the 2 warring parties. The £590000 was apparently always payable in return for the Golden Share, and nothing to do with the owed rent. We have never heard of any caveats put in place with the agreed deal. The trouble is that the £590000 payment to ACL from SISU will surely guarantee ACL's survival for the medium term, even if you assume they are struggling to survive, which has never been proved anyway. That surely explains SISU apparent desperation not to hand over a single penny if it can be helped to ACL.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
This is all becoming pathetic now. This constant positioning in the press is fucking ridiculous, and shows clearly that no-one from either persuasion gives a fuck about the fans.
SISU owe ACL that money. Some of which is claimed to have been paid by guarantors. SISU claim to have put the money into an ESCROW account. ACL claim to have not been paid as per the agreement. The FL don't seem overly bothered at this point. All talk but no hard evidence anywhere. We can't even find a copy of this 'agreement' anywhere in the public domain.
ACL should have their 590K - but not a penny more. If 300K has already been paid up then they only need the balance of 290K. To suggest they deserve more due to loss of income is bollocks. The club should not be liable for any loss of ACL's income - seeing as ACL gave the club precisely fuck all of the income that they generated for them.
A simple statement from FL or Liquidator to confirm the situation is all we need. Not more bluster and bullshit.
As for negotiations to return to Ricoh. Anne Lucas is in charge of the council. The council own ACL do they not in conjunction with Higgs. So who the fuck is making the decision here? She said the door is open. Joy needs to stop pissing about and deal direct with her and sort it out and get us back to the Ricoh promptly. The people at ACL need to be put in place by Lucas, and she should be the one calling the shots. (happy to be corrected but this is how it should be IMO)
SISU owe ACL that money. Some of which is claimed to have been paid by guarantors. SISU claim to have put the money into an ESCROW account. ACL claim to have not been paid as per the agreement. The FL don't seem overly bothered at this point. All talk but no hard evidence anywhere. We can't even find a copy of this 'agreement' anywhere in the public domain.
ACL should have their 590K - but not a penny more. If 300K has already been paid up then they only need the balance of 290K. To suggest they deserve more due to loss of income is bollocks. The club should not be liable for any loss of ACL's income - seeing as ACL gave the club precisely fuck all of the income that they generated for them.
A simple statement from FL or Liquidator to confirm the situation is all we need. Not more bluster and bullshit.
As for negotiations to return to Ricoh. Anne Lucas is in charge of the council. The council own ACL do they not in conjunction with Higgs. So who the fuck is making the decision here? She said the door is open. Joy needs to stop pissing about and deal direct with her and sort it out and get us back to the Ricoh promptly. The people at ACL need to be put in place by Lucas, and she should be the one calling the shots. (happy to be corrected but this is how it should be IMO)
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I think ACL have set out clearly their terms for talking to SISU about any sort of return to the Ricoh (long term or short term). I also think it is safe to believe that to date no approach about a return has been made.
The FL insolvency policy would seem to be quite clear that amounts imposed by the FL are required to be paid in full. The £590k or however much it is was a requirement placed on OEG to be paid in return for receiving the golden share. It may seem to have a link to the CVA and the CCFC liquidation but has it? Haven't the FL said that CCFC/OEG will pay a sum equivalent to the amount in the failed CVA - that is not the same as saying pay the CVA. The only contract here is between OEG and the FL. There is no contract between OEG and ACL or the liquidator or CCFC Ltd. If there is no contract then how can if be affected by the actions of the liquidator and if the liquidator not party to the OEG/FL agreement then why should he take it in to account?
If it were part of the liquidation then the £300k would have been taken in to account in respect of all of the debts in any calculations - ie deducted from the £62m total debt not the calculation of £590k that actually never existed as a debt other than in the writings of a failed CVA calculation. Well that's what an insolvency practitioner told me.
The issue here that the FL can not roll over on is how the non payment of the £590k (a condition of the share grant and therefore a football creditor) affects the widely held football creditor rule. If they accept that the sum either doesn't have to be paid or paid in full then they are surely putting the football creditor rule at risk with huge implications for all clubs. They have already relaxed part of the agreement by extending the time can they push it any more than that without risking much more than the wrath of SISU?
The FL insolvency policy would seem to be quite clear that amounts imposed by the FL are required to be paid in full. The £590k or however much it is was a requirement placed on OEG to be paid in return for receiving the golden share. It may seem to have a link to the CVA and the CCFC liquidation but has it? Haven't the FL said that CCFC/OEG will pay a sum equivalent to the amount in the failed CVA - that is not the same as saying pay the CVA. The only contract here is between OEG and the FL. There is no contract between OEG and ACL or the liquidator or CCFC Ltd. If there is no contract then how can if be affected by the actions of the liquidator and if the liquidator not party to the OEG/FL agreement then why should he take it in to account?
If it were part of the liquidation then the £300k would have been taken in to account in respect of all of the debts in any calculations - ie deducted from the £62m total debt not the calculation of £590k that actually never existed as a debt other than in the writings of a failed CVA calculation. Well that's what an insolvency practitioner told me.
The issue here that the FL can not roll over on is how the non payment of the £590k (a condition of the share grant and therefore a football creditor) affects the widely held football creditor rule. If they accept that the sum either doesn't have to be paid or paid in full then they are surely putting the football creditor rule at risk with huge implications for all clubs. They have already relaxed part of the agreement by extending the time can they push it any more than that without risking much more than the wrath of SISU?
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
duffer
Well-Known Member
I'm not generally against ACL, who I think have largely been the wronged party in all of this. However, I can't see this statement as in any way helpful - this looks a lot like closing doors rather than opening them.
The FL have a lot to answer for here - and not for the first time. Having decided not to accept the CVA (an action which I can understand given all of the shenanigans around asset transfers and golden shares), I think ACL gave up the right to that £590k. But the FL, after saying they weren't going to get involved in a dispute between landlord and tenant, then stepped right into the middle of it by insisting that Otium behaved as though there was a CVA. That is beyond understanding, for me. To then let it all slide, is absoultely pathetic. The FL is utterly worthless as an organisation. They should buy a £40 app to organise the fixtures, stick the answering machine on, and then all f*ck off somewhere warm for a year until it's time to run the app again. Things would run much more smoothly.
Regardless, for ACL to then make the payment of the £590k a condition of return doesn't seem quite right to me. Like everything else it should be a subject for negotiation whilst the club returns on a short-term rental deal. If those negotiations fail, then it's up to SISU to build a new stadium, and ACL to get on with their business without CCFC. What's just happened is a massive backwards step, imho, and I'm really disappointed that ACL have felt the need to start another public war of words...
The FL have a lot to answer for here - and not for the first time. Having decided not to accept the CVA (an action which I can understand given all of the shenanigans around asset transfers and golden shares), I think ACL gave up the right to that £590k. But the FL, after saying they weren't going to get involved in a dispute between landlord and tenant, then stepped right into the middle of it by insisting that Otium behaved as though there was a CVA. That is beyond understanding, for me. To then let it all slide, is absoultely pathetic. The FL is utterly worthless as an organisation. They should buy a £40 app to organise the fixtures, stick the answering machine on, and then all f*ck off somewhere warm for a year until it's time to run the app again. Things would run much more smoothly.
Regardless, for ACL to then make the payment of the £590k a condition of return doesn't seem quite right to me. Like everything else it should be a subject for negotiation whilst the club returns on a short-term rental deal. If those negotiations fail, then it's up to SISU to build a new stadium, and ACL to get on with their business without CCFC. What's just happened is a massive backwards step, imho, and I'm really disappointed that ACL have felt the need to start another public war of words...
Last edited:
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
Will SISU Sue? Is the Pope Catholic?
covmark
Well-Known Member
Well, whatever the costs its still a wank idea.
Snozz_is_god
New Member
No different to what SISU have been doing for about a year and a half, everything that come from SISU is unhelpful.
I think it a little disingenuous of you to pick on this statement by ACL. Strongly worded it may be, but it's factual and quite frankly I don't blame them.
ArchieLittle
New Member
IMHO the FL had to promise the £590k would be paid
ACL were considered a "Football creditor" and they MUST be paid, ACL haven't been paid so what next?
I dread to think
If you want to read more
ACL were considered a "Football creditor" and they MUST be paid, ACL haven't been paid so what next?
I dread to think
If you want to read more
Looks like CCFC is heading towards the " End of the End " . SISU don't give a shit . The club is just a pawn in the failed endgame of trying to get the Ricoh on the cheap.
ACL are just as bad. Their statement , IMO , should have been " Come on SISU , give us a bell , lets talk". Instead we get this shit , yet again.
Fucking bunch of wankers the lot of 'em.
I , for one , am fucking boycotting the lot . Sixfields and the Ricoh until these bunch of inept clowns get round a table and bring CCFC home .
NOPM to any of them.
ACL are just as bad. Their statement , IMO , should have been " Come on SISU , give us a bell , lets talk". Instead we get this shit , yet again.
Fucking bunch of wankers the lot of 'em.
I , for one , am fucking boycotting the lot . Sixfields and the Ricoh until these bunch of inept clowns get round a table and bring CCFC home .
NOPM to any of them.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Why didn't the FL just insist on the money being paid last August before handing the Golden Share over?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Coventry United is.
I'm not convinced a fan owned, debt free, CCFC couldn't be made to work just yet.
