Sub
Well-Known Member
No idea thats why i asked lol:thinking about:
:thinking about::thinking about::thinking about::thinking about:
Didn't SISU pay them?
ACL made an operating profit of £255,000, but an overall net loss of £392,299
That sounds like an awful lot of interest and tax ?
So her lying got a better deal for the Ricoh? Surely before Wasps bought it they would have seen the books to see what she was saying didn't add up?
Do you not think many more people could have understood the reason to sell to Wasps if she wasn't giving it the spin at the same time? If she had said "Look, we are fucked here, we have to do something and quick" then surely more people would understand? Rather than bullshitting about it?
Ha ha ha ha - the 250 year lease massively increased the value.
Didn't SISU pay them?
Be careful about using words like 'lying' until you know the detail of the accounts
True, I forgot that it isn't just SISU who do all the threatening to the fans!
So her lying got a better deal for the Ricoh? Surely before Wasps bought it they would have seen the books?
Do you not think many more people could have understood the reason to sell to Wasps if she wasn't giving it the spin at the same time? If she had said "Look, we are fucked here, we have to do something and quick" then surely more people would understand? Rather than bullshitting about it?
What do you know of the accounts then Grendel? Any extraordinary write-offs? If they took any in this one year, it would hit P&L whilst still being able to break even on a trading basis. Couldn't they?
Or don't you know, have half the story and are jumping on this prematurely; just as you did in the Judicial Review when you heralded 'evidence' of the 'smoking gun', only to latterly realise it was the rather myopic opening statement of SISU's QC?
The accounts were for last year :claping hands:
Extraordinary events doesn't impact on result of operations - which is down to a meagre quarter of a million. ACL cannot possibly have been cash-flow positive from operation, but mainly because they received extra cash when the council bailed them out. Didn't they get some $400t extra loan plus £1m for Car Park C?
If the few figures reported tells us anything it's that ACL were a liability to the council (and Higgs) - they had to sell. Sadly they chose not to sell to the club.
So it seems the loan was actually a bail out despite the council categorically stating it wasn't and ACL was in fact losing money despite the council categorically, and repeatedly, stating everything was fantastic!
They read: “The established business, as has been proven over the past eighteen months, can sustain the loss of a sports franchise but now with a four year agreement with CCFC and Wasps permanently relocating to Coventry the future of regular sporting activity at the venue is secured.”
Didn't SISU pay them?
So it seems the loan was actually a bail out despite the council categorically stating it wasn't and ACL was in fact losing money despite the council categorically, and repeatedly, stating everything was fantastic!
Bail out; why? The losses weren't significant compared to the strength of the balance sheet; and the cash position was stronger, wasn't it?
The point I making is in this context the offer of £2 million for half share in a failing business suddenly seems more than reasonable.
Thats the same point I was making (though I'm not sure that it was failing) that you were suggesting was embarrassing excuse making for the council.
The worse acl were doing the more understandable the sale of the ricoh was, this is a massively important thing and completely dwarfs any one comment someone made, so the fact acl lost money makes the council look much better than if acl were making a good profit as lucas suggested.
Didn't that deal happen before Wasps bought it?
They had to sell, yes.
But did they have to sell to Wasps or could they have made the same deal with the club?
What do you know of the accounts then Grendel? Any extraordinary write-offs? If they took any in this one year, it would hit P&L whilst still being able to break even on a trading basis. Couldn't they?
Or don't you know, have half the story and are jumping on this prematurely; just as you did in the Judicial Review when you heralded 'evidence' of the 'smoking gun', only to latterly realise it was the rather myopic opening statement of SISU's QC?
Wasn't the same deal offered to the club. That David conn bloke confirmed it and the club and TF didn't want to take on the debt. Sure that was confirmed.
Why was the cash position stronger?
(Read the thread.)
They had to sell, yes.
But did they have to sell to Wasps or could they have made the same deal with the club?
That was a bluff by Grendull. He later confirmed that SISU deliberately lost the JR to continue distressing ACL. I think they were going to appeal if they did actually win
Wasn't the same deal offered to the club. That David conn bloke confirmed it and the club and TF didn't want to take on the debt. Sure that was confirmed.
Sorry; trying to do too many things here at once. I'm referring to the bit: 'However, the accounts show net cash inflow has increased substantially from £81,584 to £828,522'
I think there is going to be some excited responses from the normal people however I think this is completely misplaced.
I think this makes the council look much better not worse. Had ACL been very profitable then the sale to Wasps would have been alot harder to Justify. It does make it extremely likely that Ann Lucas was lying, however I can completely understand the desire to lie about your financial health when someone is trying to take advantage of your lack of financial health with damage they are causing.
The council can honestly say they've done what they felt was best for the city of Coventry and it's hard to see that they are wrong at this point in time as much as it absolutely sucks as a Coventry city fan. Had Ann Lucus been actually telling the truth I'd have been much much more angry with the council.
Sorry; trying to do too many things here at once. I'm referring to the bit: 'However, the accounts show net cash inflow has increased substantially from £81,584 to £828,522'
Extraordinary events doesn't impact on result of operations - which is down to a meagre quarter of a million. ACL cannot possibly have been cash-flow positive from operation, but mainly because they received extra cash when the council bailed them out. Didn't they get some $400t extra loan plus £1m for Car Park C?
If the few figures reported tells us anything it's that ACL were a liability to the council (and Higgs) - they had to sell. Sadly they chose not to sell to the club.
No it wasn't offered, they were invited to bid on Wasps 50% knowing full well it wasn't possible.
THis was actually a response to you earlier in the thread:
So it seems the loan was actually a bail out despite the council categorically stating it wasn't and ACL was in fact losing money despite the council categorically, and repeatedly, stating everything was fantastic!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?