Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

CCFC Ltd or Holding Company (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Big_Ben
  • Start date Mar 13, 2013
Forums New posts
B

Big_Ben

Well-Known Member
  • Mar 13, 2013
  • #1
So many comments, ranging from the erudite to the ridiculous, from gloomy optimism to outright fantasy.
There's a point that's left me more than a little confused about the latest move by ACL to push for administration (as opposed to liquidation), and it's about the status of the company which is threatened with administration.
A post a few days ago (days, weeks, years - it seems to have been going on forever) was made about CCFC Ltd being the limited entity that ran the day to day operation of the football club, including the contract with ACL for the Ricoh, and this entity was virtually penniless anyway as all of the valuable stuff is held by CCFC Holdings Ltd - the football league registration, the players' registrations, etc, etc.
So, I'm presuming that the ACL action has to be against CCFC Ltd as that is who the ACL contract is with, whilst CCFC Holdings Ltd are not part of the action, and as such will still keep hold of the key cards regarding the league status and players if any bidder can be found to buy whatever it is that the administrator, if it gets that far, can actually sell.

Ranters and smart arses need not respond, I've read most of that ad infinitum, but I would be grateful if someone could clarify this for me.

Thanks.
 
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
  • Mar 13, 2013
  • #2
How do we know if we qualify as a smart arse or a ranter?

Or have I just answered my own question?

Good question though.
 
K

kirby485

New Member
  • Mar 13, 2013
  • #3
This would be an incredible loop hole to use if it meant keeping hold of players, however I fear there would then be the issue of third party ownership, as the players should be linked to the club as one entity.

It will be interesting to see all the dirt of past and present be brought up, so we can see how we got to where we are now!
 
V

VegetableSamosa

New Member
  • Mar 14, 2013
  • #4
Coming from people I know in the Council, it is against the Holdings company and the Football arm will not be effected. SISU are apparently quite adept at splitting their business and moving funds and debts between different companies under the same name. However, we do stand to lose playing at the Ricoh.
 
D

dadgad

Well-Known Member
  • Mar 14, 2013
  • #5
Big_Ben said:
So many comments, ranging from the erudite to the ridiculous, from gloomy optimism to outright fantasy.
There's a point that's left me more than a little confused about the latest move by ACL to push for administration (as opposed to liquidation), and it's about the status of the company which is threatened with administration.
A post a few days ago (days, weeks, years - it seems to have been going on forever) was made about CCFC Ltd being the limited entity that ran the day to day operation of the football club, including the contract with ACL for the Ricoh, and this entity was virtually penniless anyway as all of the valuable stuff is held by CCFC Holdings Ltd - the football league registration, the players' registrations, etc, etc.
So, I'm presuming that the ACL action has to be against CCFC Ltd as that is who the ACL contract is with, whilst CCFC Holdings Ltd are not part of the action, and as such will still keep hold of the key cards regarding the league status and players if any bidder can be found to buy whatever it is that the administrator, if it gets that far, can actually sell.

Ranters and smart arses need not respond, I've read most of that ad infinitum, but I would be grateful if someone could clarify this for me.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I think that someone referred to this difference (one company split into two) as a hedge against Admin. Southampton tried this, but it did not work. The Football League
stepped in and lumped the two together. Therefore, in terms of a precedent, I think the same outcome here.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
  • Mar 14, 2013
  • #6
VegetableSamosa said:
Coming from people I know in the Council, it is against the Holdings company and the Football arm will not be effected. SISU are apparently quite adept at splitting their business and moving funds and debts between different companies under the same name. However, we do stand to lose playing at the Ricoh.
Click to expand...

we will still get any points deduction, it will be the same scenario as Southampton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?