Coventry City Football Club Limited (1 Viewer)

Sky Blues · Aug 2, 2013

Ian at 200% has done a very timely article on the situation at Coventry City which includes a copy of an interesting document dated April 2008 (after the Sisu takeover) which is claimed to be setting out the responsibilities of each company in the network of companies running the football club. I'm guessing it is something OSB and maybe Squirrel have mentioned before, but it is still worth a look to see it set out there in black and white. Here is a taste:

Coventry City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd
Company holding all assets except players and football-related management
Management of ACL day-to-day relations
Land development issues: Ricoh, Ryton
Employment of all non-football staff

Coventry City Football Club Ltd
Football operations on and off the field
Employment of all football staff
Holding of "golden share"
Player registrations

Of course 2008 was a long time ago and things may have changed since then, but if this is correct I'd love to know when the players were transferred from one to the other...

Anyway go and take a look at the full document for yourselves here: http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=23866

deanocity3 · Aug 2, 2013

some were probably moved last week

WiganSkyBlue · Aug 2, 2013

And liquidation will now force a more forensic examination. This is by no means finished and SISU in all their entities, along with directors and shadow directors, may well not welcome this. Oh, and maybe Appleton's shortcomings (if any) may also be exposed.

But after all is said and done, a very sad day for CCFC's loyal supporters.

oldskyblue58 · Aug 2, 2013

not seen that document before SB, looks like internal minutes of meetings to me, which i have some real concerns about.

But yes I have expressed an opinion on such things in the past based on the accounts published

If these documents are true (and i do not know if they are) then there are questions

- is it clear that the owners/directors knew exactly where the golden share was in 2008 after takeover and due diligence?
- is it clear that the owners knew where the player contracts should be? (ie with the share)
- if they knew that then how could they register players to another company?
- if the FL knew this how can they accept players registered to another company?
- if the administrator has seen this why is he not taking action to redress the situation that exists currently?
- in which case if all the above were wrong is the administration process valid?

Things may have changed but they can not have changed without written permission of the Football League. Has that been given?
if the owners/directors knew where the share was then to try register all players elsewhere was a clear breach of the rules wasnt it?

Cant see the owners/directors of the club being happy these documents are about if they are actual minutes of meetings

Sky Blues · Aug 2, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
not seen that document before SB, looks like internal minutes of meetings to me, which i have some real concerns about.

But yes I have expressed an opinion on such things in the past based on the accounts published

If these documents are true (and i do not know if they are) then there are questions

- is it clear that the owners/directors knew exactly where the golden share was in 2008 after takeover and due diligence?
- is it clear that the owners knew where the player contracts should be? (ie with the share)
- if they knew that then how could they register players to another company?
- if the FL knew this how can they accept players registered to another company?
- if the administrator has seen this why is he not taking action to redress the situation that exists currently?
- in which case if all the above were wrong is the administration process valid?

Things may have changed but they can not have changed without written permission of the Football League. Has that been given?
if the owners/directors knew where the share was then to try register all players elsewhere was a clear breach of the rules wasnt it?

Cant see the owners/directors of the club being happy these documents are about if they are actual minutes of meetings

Apologies OSB, I haven't been keeping close enough track on which documents you have and haven't seen - I just kind of assumed you would have seen it!

stupot07 · Aug 2, 2013

2008 was a long time ago in football, only Wood and Bell were here at that time, so it could quite easily be new signing were signed to holdings rather than the sinister movement of assets. We've had a large turnover of players and staff during that time.

oldskyblue58 · Aug 2, 2013

thats not the point though stupot07 if the directors/owners knew where the share was then they knew they couldnt register them anywhere else didnt they? The share couldnt have changed without written authority from the FL so the situation that was in 2008 existed in 2013 didnt it?

which means the players should have been detailed as assets in the administration doesnt it?

would need investigating if true

Sky Blues · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
2008 was a long time ago in football, only Wood and Bell were here at that time, so it could quite easily be new signing were signed to holdings rather than the sinister movement of assets. We've had a large turnover of players and staff during that time.

I did say it was a long time ago. I am intrigued by OSB's thoughts on the matter and I'd like to know what has happened... Will we ever find out?

Warwickhunt · Aug 2, 2013

Pandora's Box has just been opened! The FL are crapping it now

Skybluesquirrel · Aug 2, 2013

Thats quite a find. Its looks like an internal document. Unfortunately, Ive not had access to anything that isn't in the public domain.

This document looks like it confirms what I (and OSB - and others) have deduced from official records - that CCFC Ltd was and is the football club. It would appear to undermine Fisher and Appleton's arguments that suggest Holdings is.

In my opinion, it would suggest that the accounts up to May 2011 were prepared in accordance with the wishes of the Board members at that meeting.

There may have been a meeting at a later date where this was changed - who knows. TF has implied that his 'version' was the wishes of the board when the second company was formed, which this document certainly suggests otherwise.

The Penguin · Aug 2, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Cant see the owners/directors of the club being happy these documents are about if they are actual minutes of meetings

Assuming that they are, perhaps they were leaked by someone who wanted this information out in the public domain?

I dunno, just seems a bit too coincidental that they are revealed on the day of Limited's liquidation.

If they're fake though, someone's gone to an awful lot of trouble (and should probably get a life).

italiahorse · Aug 2, 2013

Surely if permission was not given by FL then the players should be still with the Golden share.
Why and when did they change over. Before or after administration?
If after, then surely that is illegal and also Ltd could have been bought fairly as it would include a football team

dadgad · Aug 2, 2013

Warwickhunt said:
Pandora's Box has just been opened! The FL are crapping it now

Hasn't this scenario always been a likely consequence of them not sticking to their own guidelines.
Everybody could see that this was likely to unravel big time. Why not them?
This stinks and they have been complicit. They only have themselves to blame.

oldskyblue58 · Aug 2, 2013

italiahorse said:
Surely if permission was not given by FL then the players should be still with the Golden share.
Why and when did they change over. Before or after administration?
If after, then surely that is illegal and also Ltd could have been bought fairly as it would include a football team

thats the point does the whole current administration process rely on an administrative error by the FL? was that error deliberate by ccfc? only a proper investigation could tell that i would guess

paulcalf · Aug 2, 2013

The latest submitted accounts show the same information about what ltd is & what holdings are responsible for. At some point after the last accounts were submitted, something dodgy happened with players registrations & holdings. The FL probably cocked up which meant Sisu could bully them & claim to be the club. Hence this mess!

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4 Beta

hutch1972 · Aug 2, 2013

paulcalf said:
The latest submitted accounts show the same information about what ltd is & what holdings are responsible for. At some point after the last accounts were submitted, something dodgy happened with players registrations & holdings. The FL probably cocked up which meant Sisu could bully them & claim to be the club. Hence this mess!

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4 Beta

There is no doubt whatsoever that sisu had the plan all along of clearing lots of debt by transferring most assets to holdings and at the very least put ltd in admin. The fact that it will most probably be liquidated is neither here or there to them.

stupot07 · Aug 2, 2013

paulcalf said:
The latest submitted accounts show the same information about what ltd is & what holdings are responsible for. At some point after the last accounts were submitted, something dodgy happened with players registrations & holdings. The FL probably cocked up which meant Sisu could bully them & claim to be the club. Hence this mess!

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Baring in mind the last accounts were 2010/11...how can the entire squad only be worth £400k as an asset value?

The Penguin · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
Baring in mind the last accounts were 2010/11...how can the entire squad only be worth £400k as an asset value?

How many of those players were part of the squad that took us down?

That might explain why they were worthless

oldskyblue58 · Aug 2, 2013

If those minutes are correct does that not back the argument that the accounts were prepared by BDO on the correct basis up to 2011 (signed off 19/06/12) ) ? How does that sit with the TF argument that the financials were a mess for years and that CCFC H had always been the football club? Doesnt seem to ring true does it ?

In which case no transfer of players to ccfc h had taken place by 31/05/11 I would assume ?

If that is right what happened to the assets on the balance sheet 31/05/11?

There appears to be a lot of questions that have never been answered

torchomatic · Aug 2, 2013

Or next week!

deanocity3 said:
some were probably moved last week

Ripbuster · Aug 2, 2013

There will be more to come I'm sure...CCFC next transfer will probably be P.Shredder,he tears defences to pieces,evidently..:wave:

Nonleagueherewecome · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
Baring in mind the last accounts were 2010/11...how can the entire squad only be worth £400k as an asset value?

If you're saying that not all of the squad were registered to the same company, then some of our players were not eligible for selection. I'm not sure what the penalty is in the FL as no club has been dodgy enough to do it (and get caught), whereas it happens often in non-league. In non-league, the penalty is to forfeit any points gained whilst those players were in the squad (even un-used subs) with the opposition being awarded 3 points (if they didn't win). I see no reason why the FL penalty shouldn't be the same. This would be a bigger can of worms than the FL can handle-it would probably mess up last years relegations and promotions! No wonder they're playing the Officer Barbrady role so desperately... http://www.hark.com/clips/wszpqzwsys-nothing-to-see

stupot07 · Aug 2, 2013

Nonleagueherewecome said:
If you're saying that not all of the squad were registered to the same company, then some of our players were not eligible for selection. I'm not sure what the penalty is in the FL as no club has been dodgy enough to do it (and get caught), whereas it happens often in non-league. In non-league, the penalty is to forfeit any points gained whilst those players were in the squad (even un-used subs) with the opposition being awarded 3 points (if they didn't win). I see no reason why the FL penalty shouldn't be the same. This would be a bigger can of worms than the FL can handle-it would probably mess up last years relegations and promotions! No wonder they're playing the Officer Barbrady role so desperately... http://www.hark.com/clips/wszpqzwsys-nothing-to-see

How can the FL punish them for that, when they are the ones that allowed it?

Nonleagueherewecome · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
How can the FL punish them for that, when they are the ones that allowed it?

a) Did they?
b) If so, quite..

But if they didn't, I'm sure there would be a lot of other clubs up in arms about it. Especially if someone went down thanks to points lost against a team fielding ineligible players.

stupot07 · Aug 2, 2013

Nonleagueherewecome said:
a) Did they?
b) If so, quite..

But if they didn't, I'm sure there would be a lot of other clubs up in arms about it. Especially if someone went down thanks to points lost against a team fielding ineligible players.

Lets hope they kick the club out of the league.

Skybluesquirrel · Aug 2, 2013

Third party ownership is against FL rules.

Transfers can only take place during the transfer window. That gave them between 20 June 2012 - the date Fisher signed the accounts and the 31 August to get them all signed accross.

stupot07 · Aug 2, 2013

Skybluesquirrel said:
Third party ownership is against FL rules.

Transfers can only take place during the transfer window. That gave them between 20 June 2012 - the date Fisher signed the accounts and the 31 August to get them all signed accross.

You mean 2011, the last set of accounts were 2010/11

Skybluesquirrel · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
How can the FL punish them for that, when they are the ones that allowed it?

FIFA hate English football. Transfer windows are imposed by FIFA.

Skybluesquirrel · Aug 2, 2013

stupot07 said:
You mean 2011, the last set of accounts were 2010/11

Directors have a responsibility to report any significant changes to trading activity between the year end and the date they sign the accounts off.

Sky Blues · Aug 3, 2013

Does this thread need a bump?

deanocity3 · Aug 3, 2013

deanocity3 said:
some were probably moved last week

I only said it as a joke, but I may have proved correct

CarpyCov84 · Aug 3, 2013

Has anyone tweeted les Reid etc about this document ???

CarpyCov84 · Aug 3, 2013

Just cheaked his twitter he's taking about it now saying what we all are basically we knew LTD had the share and player activity etc...

Jack Griffin · Aug 3, 2013

Skybluesquirrel said:
Directors have a responsibility to report any significant changes to trading activity between the year end and the date they sign the accounts off.

The changes were certainly highly significant with respect to the contractual relationship of ACL to CCFC. I don't believe CCFC told ACL anything about them & that may be sufficient cause for them to sue for damages.

Coventry City Football Club Limited (1 Viewer)

Active Member

New Member

Member

CCFC Finance Director

Active Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency