CCFC, The Ricoh And The European Commission (1 Viewer)

[RPHunt]

Somebody sent me this link that explains a recent European Commission ruling on a local authority plan to lease out a municipal stadium to Chemnitzer FC in Germany.

http://legalknowledgeportal.com/201...-due-for-renovation-can-constitute-state-aid/

The Commission's state aid rules are extremely complex and, although they do contain a general prohibition of state aid, they do leave room for a number of policy objectives with which state aid can be considered compatible.

The report raises some interesting points that are of some relevance to the current situation with the Ricoh and lease/sale to CCFC:

• The Commission points out that although Chemnitzer does not play in international competitions, they could be competing with foreign clubs when attracting international players.
• It is stressed that the stadium is also to be used for amateur and cultural events.
• The rent that Chemnitzer has to pay is in line with the market.

Reading this and some of the links it refers to, leaves me with the feeling that if CCFC are offered a cheap long-term lease or if CCFC are offered the stadium freehold at a knockdown price, then the EC are likely to get involved. This involvement is also possible if the Judicial Review goes ahead.

If the EC do get involved, then there could be long-term ramifications for CCFC and its relationship with and tenure at the Ricoh which have possibly not been thought through by SISU if they do harbour any thoughts of a return.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

they'll just take the EU to court.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Basically those who believe the council done wrong don't believe in state aid unless its for sisus benefit.

 

[wingy]

they'll just take the EU to court.

HA HA,Brilliant.

 

[ecky]

this whole sorry tale could go on for years and years.......with appeal after appeal

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Again, if there's an issue with the Ricoh situation, I cannot see why this is significantly different:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/n...strike-12m-deal-to-expand-sixfields-1-5245529

As SISU complained about state-assistance within the previous ground they were a tenant of; I cannot see how they would equally not concern themselves with the arrangements pertaining to the new stadium they have taken tenancy of.

Unless they're not bothered about state-aid at all, and have a subplot I couldn't possibly figure out; of course...... :thinking about:

 

[skybluetony176]

Basically those who believe the council done wrong don't believe in state aid unless its for sisus benefit.

i'm still trying to work out what is state aid.

for instance the state sends aid to the 3rd world all the time in form of money, medicines, tents etc and to the best off my knowlege there is no bill to be paid by these countries and there is no added interest. so if the state lends money to a business and the business is going to pay this money back with interest, how can be classified as aid?

i'm sure grendull has an explination though

 

[bigfatronssba]

i'm still trying to work out what is state aid.

for instance the state sends aid to the 3rd world all the time in form of money, medicines, tents etc and to the best off my knowlege there is no bill to be paid by these countries and there is no added interest. so if the state lends money to a business and the business is going to pay this money back with interest, how can be classified as aid?

i'm sure grendull has an explination though

My understanding is there is two aspects that sisu have claimed.

They claim public money has been used to undermine their business plan.

They also claim the loan the council made to acl wouldn't have been made by a commercial lender as they claim acl doesn't have the capital to warrant it.

I think that's it anyway.

 

[skybluetony176]

My understanding is there is two aspects that sisu have claimed.

They claim public money has been used to undermine their business plan.

They also claim the loan the council made to acl wouldn't have been made by a commercial lender as they claim acl doesn't have the capital to warrant it.

I think that's it anyway.

sounds like clutching at straws.

A) its a free market economy
B) how are sh1tsu going to prove this when there are companies like Wonga about

 

[Sky Blue Dal]

My understanding is there is two aspects that sisu have claimed.

They claim public money has been used to undermine their business plan.

They also claim the loan the council made to acl wouldn't have been made by a commercial lender as they claim acl doesn't have the capital to warrant it.

I think that's it anyway.

SISU really care about how the public money is being used, but happy to carry on with this charade in high courts. Who the hell is paying for CCC lawyers fee... That's right the the tax payers, the public funds.


Glad I am not paying taxes in Coventry... SISU are taking the people of Coventry for a ride and some of the poster here who carry on supporting there actions can't see it.

 

[RPHunt]

Again, if there's an issue with the Ricoh situation, I cannot see why this is significantly different:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/n...strike-12m-deal-to-expand-sixfields-1-5245529

As SISU complained about state-assistance within the previous ground they were a tenant of; I cannot see how they would equally not concern themselves with the arrangements pertaining to the new stadium they have taken tenancy of.

Unless they're not bothered about state-aid at all, and have a subplot I couldn't possibly figure out; of course...... :thinking about:

Ah, that's where it was worth following some of the links. If only one professional sports club is a tenant then it is more likely to be state aid than if there are two such clubs.

Is there another sub plot here that sees CCFC being used as the second club, by Northampton council and Cardoza, and thus avoiding the state aid rules?

 

[bigfatronssba]

Ah, that's where it was worth following some of the links. If only one professional sports club is a tenant then it is more likely to be state aid than if there are two such clubs.

Is there another sub plot here that sees CCFC being used as the second club, by Northampton council and Cardoza, and thus avoiding the state aid rules?

The Ladies team also play at the Ricoh. Despite the name they are classed as a separate club.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Ah, that's where it was worth following some of the links. If only one professional sports club is a tenant then it is more likely to be state aid than if there are two such clubs.

Is there another sub plot here that sees CCFC being used as the second club, by Northampton council and Cardoza, and thus avoiding the state aid rules?

Thereby excusing Northampton's identical situation and leaving The Arena in the cart? No, never, surely?

Besides; what's the duration of the loan and/or life-expectancy of the improved facility? Surely it couldn't be considered a multi-teamed venue if only shared for a tiny proportion at the front of the lifetime of the development? And the article was published in July, meaning sanction would have been given in June - before it had been shared in any context.

Too many loopholes for those to stand up. I hope!

I have no issue with people complaining about state aid; but SISU using their own funds to pursue one case and ignore another pertinent one appears 'selective' at best; and has to give rise to questions as to whether there's a sub-plot against one party

 

[Nick]

The Ladies team also play at the Ricoh. Despite the name they are classed as a separate club.

Don't they usually play in bedworth?

 

[bigfatronssba]

Don't they usually play in bedworth?

I think they use to, but I'm sure their at the Ricoh now. They've certainly played some games there.