Isn't it stange how I pointed that out to Fisher and Brookfield at one of the forums and they denied it.
Isn't it stange how I pointed that out to Fisher and Brookfield at one of the forums and they denied it.
In fairness CJ you were supposed to have one question and you took up 15 mins of the forum..
It puts the "Limited has nothing of value" comments to shit then doesn't it?
Look at the value of the player registrations in that document.
It is far more likely that the bulk of registrations is with Holdings and perhaps one or two are with Limited.
Not if that one player registration happens to be Malaga or Chris Dunn...
thats pretty much what tim fisher said at the forum i went too.. he said something along the lines of , he said the paperwork is all over the place.. some staff are under ccfc holdings.. some under limited.. and some under totally diffrent company names. he went on to say that while most players are registered under holdings , there were even a couple that had been actually been registered by limited.
and at 400k, that just sems to confirm what he said.. 400k is not very much in registered fees for players..
It said 'book value' and estimated to realise as uncertain. It does not mean that £466,000 is the value of the players
the thing is that would suggest something of a policy rather than a bookkeeping mess !! WTF has been going on here ,thenn the mention of other players being held through other vehicles ,third party ownership looks a possibility.
I have it on good authority that the author if the blog has links with Mr Guilfoyle / ACL.
Do not underestimate the level of cloak and dagger, childish tactics being deployed by ALL sides in this sorry fiasco.
Well, I wouldn't be surprised but I will need some hard evidence before I trust that to be true.
The 2011 accounts of Ltd signed off in June 2012 show Player Registrations as Intangible Assets with a Net Book Value of £1.8m - accounts signed off by Fisher and the auditors as giving "a true and fair view of the state of the company's affairs". The 2011 accounts of Holdings , signed off on the same day, show NO player registrations under Intangible Assets. Can't be any clearer than that can it?
As a matter of interest, Holdings accounts do show CCFC Ltd as a subsidiary with its activities stated to be "Playing Activities of a professional Football Club" !
It did cross my mind .
On your other points Godiva ,litigation all over It .PFA ETC third party ownership everywhere you look.
It was all explained by Brookfield at the forums ... you can find audio of the forums on youtube.
Still sounds open to challenge to me ,however often its trailed doesn't necessarily make It the case. Seems arguments based around beneficial ownership in one Sphere ,contradicts a position in another .IE;- Legals over FL ??:thinking about:
I have it on good authority that the author of the blog has links with Mr Guilfoyle / ACL.
Do not underestimate the level of cloak and dagger, childish tactics being deployed by ALL sides in this sorry fiasco.
Its pretty clear to me that ACL tried to distress the football club by trying to put it into Admin, believing that the players came under the ltd Company.
Would you care to publish your authority?
I have absolutely no links with either and challenge you to publish and be damned.
I have it on good authority that the author of the blog has links with Mr Guilfoyle / ACL.
Do not underestimate the level of cloak and dagger, childish tactics being deployed by ALL sides in this sorry fiasco.
By virtue of your own words you should name your source and be able to name FLB .:thinking about:
It was all explained by Brookfield at the forums ... you can find audio of the forums on youtube.
I'll show you mine, if you show me yours.
Someone who claims to present an objective legal analysis of a subject loses all credibility if they are not willing to be open and honest themselves.
Bias and subjectivity are implied by the anonymity.
I'll show you mine, if you show me yours.
Someone who claims to present an objective legal analysis of a subject loses all credibility if they are not willing to be open and honest themselves.
Bias and subjectivity are implied by the anonymity.
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?