Eviction notice (2 Viewers)

ericagradus · Dec 5, 2022

oldskyblue58 said:
Just thoughts - but the statements so far basically tell you what each party wants you to hear

I think the starting point is the ACL administration prepack result was always going to be what it turned out to be. Everyone knew it really

The timing for our owners wasn't great the 85% sale didn't happen soon enough possibly because of the exclusivity clause with Storey. Then they made a weak showing front of the judge on 17th it seems.

When offered the licence pre the ACL disposal our owners could have thought a couple of things i suppose (a) that signing before the administration result weakens their position to challenge on the 17th November or (b) they would be able to use CCFC brand to twist the landlords arm for a better deal.

As i highlighted earlier a lease can be transferred, there is no right to do so other than by mutual agreement for a licence. We had a licence, the transfer for whatever reason was not signed off. Even if it was changed to May 2023 and all other terms the same (were they?) not signing created jeopardy for CCFC

I do read it that had our owners signed prior to prepack then the existing licence & term would have been transferred attached to the head lease to the new entity in the Frasers group that owns the head lease. For whatever reason that agreement to transfer was not signed. Part of me thinks that the owners needed to at least try to get a better deal, part of me says yet again it was a misjudgement.

Frasers have now come back and said there is a deal till May. After which a new licence will have to be arranged. Basically, it says we know the history and you will not be messing us about. That gives the two sides an opportunity to get to know each other, but of course leaves an element of risk for both sides. To make the Stadium worthwhile Frasers needs CCFC there, CCFC cannot afford to move to Birmingham, Northampton, Walsall etc.

Trouble is everyman and his dog knows the CCFC finances are dire and they are up against an entity whose bank balance was barely scratched by the purchase of the stadium

A lot of posturing going on, but i think it is clear that CCFC now has less influence over the finances of the stadium, whilst wasps were there CCFC knew the money they brought in was make or break, its not the case anymore

As for the money CCFC put in to keep games on and relay the pitch, that is all unsecured creditors of what is left of ACL, the club is not getting it back

Bottom line a deal will get done, not perhaps the one our owners expected but CCFC will remain at the stadium in my opinion

Perfect summary. However, what I can't get my head wrapped around is that CCFC left themselves exposed to being a position where they did not have any security of tenure. As Ashley was always going to hold us to ransom on new terms, as they know we can't afford to relocate to another stadium not just for monatory reasons.

However, as soon as the Landlord went into administration, if we only had a licence, we didn't have a right to stay at the stadium? The only way we would get a right, was if a lease was signed in the admin pre pack? Binding any new owner. But could we even have a lease as we don't have exclusive possession??

jordan210 · Dec 5, 2022

PUSB-We_are_going_up · Dec 5, 2022

Might have to change my user name, how does “PUSB-We_Are_Leaving_Cov_Again” sound

chiefdave · Dec 5, 2022

If Frasers were prepared to offer the same license with the same terms and the same length then two questions spring to mind.

1) Do they really need the club to sign anything, can it not just stay in place as is?

2) Why is that offer no longer on the table? the clubs statement says "To confirm, Coventry City are happy to continue under terms of the current licence which we already have in place to play at the Arena" so is it not a bit strange for Frasers to say we were happy with that a few weeks ago but now you can't have it? Easy PR win to call the clubs bluff, if and when the club refuse there's no comeback on Frasers or Ashley if he were to launch a takeover bid

wingy · Dec 5, 2022

theferret said:
This place is making less sense by the day. Apparently, SISU are now to blame for not signing an agreement with a 3rd party before it even owned the place, when they had designs on owning it themselves and while a takeover of the club was being negotiated? Who the fuck does that?

Not that ferret . Just the naivety/appearance of going through those motions.
They should and do know these games
It was always how they go.

wingy · Dec 5, 2022

theferret said:
This place is making less sense by the day. Apparently, SISU are now to blame for not signing an agreement with a 3rd party before it even owned the place, when they had designs on owning it themselves and while a takeover of the club was being negotiated? Who the fuck does that?

Got to ask what's happened in the interim?

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2022

chiefdave said:
If Frasers were prepared to offer the same license with the same terms and the same length then two questions spring to mind.

1) Do they really need the club to sign anything, can it not just stay in place as is?

2) Why is that offer no longer on the table? the clubs statement says "To confirm, Coventry City are happy to continue under terms of the current licence which we already have in place to play at the Arena" so is it not a bit strange for Frasers to say we were happy with that a few weeks ago but now you can't have it? Easy PR win to call the clubs bluff, if and when the club refuse there's no comeback on Frasers or Ashley if he were to launch a takeover bid

As always with these statements something won’t be said. Like you say makes no sense to offer it then withdraw it unless Sisu I’ve said they won’t sign cos they want changes. Question 1 is very very valid.

theferret · Dec 5, 2022

Grendel said:
They’ve had designs for 15 years and if it was the other way round she’d be doing the same. She’s a joke never had any desire or means to buy it. She’s like one of those weirdos who visits houses for sale but can’t afford them

Don't care about all that. It's done. Bottom line is there was no way that agreement was being signed pre-completion. To suggest otherwise is batshit.

You have Ashley and his cronies threatening to evict us with just days notice and there are clowns applauding this because the last 15 years blah blah

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2022

theferret said:
Don't care about all that. It's done. Bottom line is there was no way that agreement was being signed pre-completion. To suggest otherwise is batshit.

You have Ashley and his cronies threatening to evict us with just days notice and there are clowns applauding this because the last 15 years blah blah

Who is applauding this?

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 5, 2022

Grendel said:
They’ve had designs for 15 years and if it was the other way round she’d be doing the same. She’s a joke never had any desire or means to buy it. She’s like one of those weirdos who visits houses for sale but can’t afford them

This is not my territory, but...

Court time was just to confirm the Frasers deal in all reality, King turning up at court was grandstanding. Mirror deal was contingent on Frasers buying CBS (so therefore signing it makes no odds if you then buy CBS off them, or they pull out of deal)?
We've had time since Frasers bought it for something to be signed?

Anyway, not like SISU to be caught up in a he said / she said...

olderskyblue · Dec 5, 2022

theferret said:
This place is making less sense by the day. Apparently, SISU are now to blame for not signing an agreement with a 3rd party before it even owned the place, when they had designs on owning it themselves and while a takeover of the club was being negotiated? Who the fuck does that?

Then joys next statement on this should highlight that. And, she should also say that she stated, if FG won the bid to buy the stadium, that she would then sign it, but that’s when the new license was offered…

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2022

Paxman II said:
So CCFC played hard ball by not signing a revised licence to may. Rightly so. However, what will the terms be after May? I expect frasers want a far higher rent arrangement. Nothing wrong with that tbh. Afterall we got a cheap rate from a busted WASPS.

We will have to suck it up. Negoitiate well and get on with it!

No, they refused to sign a deal until 2031 apparently.

wingy · Dec 5, 2022

shmmeee said:
As always with these statements something won’t be said. Like you say makes no sense to offer it then withdraw it unless Sisu I’ve said they won’t sign cos they want changes. Question 1 is very very valid.

Obviously answer would be it died through admin,and it appears we sought something other than before . Technicalities such as absence of clauses around other team playing there present a material difference I'd have thought?
ACL may have needed something altering there?

theferret · Dec 5, 2022

shmmeee said:
Who is applauding this?

On twitter there are a few.

There are plenty on here refusing to condemn what is an incredibly aggressive and destabilising action. People should be furious, it is an outrageous step they have taken, but it's all yeah but, no but, Seppala, handbags blah blah. Fuck sake.

olderskyblue · Dec 5, 2022

chiefdave said:
If Frasers were prepared to offer the same license with the same terms and the same length then two questions spring to mind.

1) Do they really need the club to sign anything, can it not just stay in place as is?

2) Why is that offer no longer on the table? the clubs statement says "To confirm, Coventry City are happy to continue under terms of the current licence which we already have in place to play at the Arena" so is it not a bit strange for Frasers to say we were happy with that a few weeks ago but now you can't have it? Easy PR win to call the clubs bluff, if and when the club refuse there's no comeback on Frasers or Ashley if he were to launch a takeover bid

2)

In the statement

“a number of requests raised by CCFC”

if they were asking for additional things, then why wouldn’t you want time to assess them, costs etc?

be interesting to know what they were though.

oldskyblue58 · Dec 5, 2022

chiefdave said:
If Frasers were prepared to offer the same license with the same terms and the same length then two questions spring to mind.

1) Do they really need the club to sign anything, can it not just stay in place as is?

2) Why is that offer no longer on the table? the clubs statement says "To confirm, Coventry City are happy to continue under terms of the current licence which we already have in place to play at the Arena" so is it not a bit strange for Frasers to say we were happy with that a few weeks ago but now you can't have it? Easy PR win to call the clubs bluff, if and when the club refuse there's no comeback on Frasers or Ashley if he were to launch a takeover bid

But the licence is no longer ACL property it is now held in a new company. Therefore for it to be legally valid and binding it has to be signed by both parties

I think there is a lot we are not being told by both sides in their posturing. Have to agree it doesnt make a lot of sense other than both calling each others bluff

slowpoke · Dec 5, 2022

Funny thing today is the day scholars are being dished out to the U/16s for next year, perhaps there is a future ahead.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 5, 2022

slowpoke said:
Funny thing today is the day scholars are being dished out to the U/16s for next year, perhaps there is a future ahead.

They'll be the first team by February

Evo1883 · Dec 5, 2022

Liquid Gold said:
I'm so shocked MR is still putting up with this shit.

What is his motivation to not move on to a better paid job at somewhere that isn't a clown show?

Maybe he genuinely does love it here and doesn't want to leave his job again ?

Evo1883 · Dec 5, 2022

Mike ashley and the frasers group are coventry city's future owners , I'm positive that's the case

Just a case of when

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 5, 2022

Evo1883 said:
Maybe he genuinely does love it here and doesn't want to leave his job again ?

I'd think that's partly it - has been able to implement a style of play, can do longer term planning than most managers, is less likely to be sacked... I'd also think it's a balance of him nit being fashionable, so the right jb to tempt him not coming along.

Certain things can't be fun, though!

Danceswithhorses · Dec 5, 2022

theferret said:
You have Ashley and his cronies threatening to evict us with just days notice and there are clowns applauding this because the last 15 years blah blah

Really ??
No one on here is applauding our possible imminent eviction.
Some are just annoyed that this appears to be yet another own goal by SISU who have hardly covered themselves with credit over their time as stewards of CCFC.
We seemingly just lurch from crisis to crisis under their ownership.

chiefdave · Dec 5, 2022

olderskyblue said:
2)

In the statement

“a number of requests raised by CCFC”

if they were asking for additional things, then why wouldn’t you want time to assess them, costs etc?

be interesting to know what they were though.

so that's where you call their bluff. CCFC are saying they will sign the same deal, for the same length of time. Frasers are saying that's not on offer. But that on the table, call their bluff.

slowpoke · Dec 5, 2022

jordan210 said:

Deleted member 5849 said:
They'll be the first team by February

Good I’ll put his board up,

Brylowes · Dec 5, 2022

Grendel said:
I am trying to stay out of this but it appears from what I see there are claims and counter claims of what has been offered

Its claimed by the Fraser Group as part of the pre-purchase arrangement they mirrored the lease the club originally had but the club did not sign it. It doesn't matter if the FG did not own at the time its a pre purchase arrangement. They did not sign as they wanted extra arrangements and rights.

So as it was not signed FG issue a short term lease for the remainder of the season at existing terms.

It would seem likely that Sisu would not sign a pre agreement as they decided they wanted to block the sale with the King £25 m offer.

Who even signs it? Who owns CCFC now? Where is King?

There is a problem here. The sharks have entered the ocean and they mean business. Sappala is someone who does not take being told what to do and being backed into a corner very well. That is what she now is being faced with.

Frankly she cannot play the victim as she always wanted to be in the position Ashley is but never had the resources, courage or means to do it - now she has investors with returns looking less and less likely to be achieved. No ground and only players as assets to yield returns.

It was always coming. No ground, no plan and outwitted at every turn. The club and the fans will pay the price - we always do but her catastrophic tenure has to end - it just has to

Great post!!!

skybluetony176 · Dec 5, 2022

Nick said:
Here's a mad conspiracy

The eviction notice gives sisu a way out of the Doug king thing.

Opens the door for Fraser's

You really couldn’t rule that possibility out.

wingy · Dec 5, 2022

chiefdave said:
so that's where you call their bluff. CCFC are saying they will sign the same deal, for the same length of time. Frasers are saying that's not on offer. But that on the table, call their bluff.

Was the offer withdrawn one minute after the courts judgement?.Or over the last two week?
Cos I don't know anymore otherwise I don't understand?

slowpoke · Dec 5, 2022

skybluetony176 said:
You really couldn’t rule that possibility out.

I’m sure there are things brewing and in the wind, I was told ages ago which I put on here be ready for a happy Xmas, might even put a glass of wine and a mince pie out this year.

Ashdown · Dec 5, 2022

Grendel said:
They’ve had designs for 15 years and if it was the other way round she’d be doing the same. She’s a joke never had any desire or means to buy it. She’s like one of those weirdos who visits houses for sale but can’t afford them

Sadly probably a very wealthy joke though.

djr8369 · Dec 5, 2022

Evo1883 said:
The only way this club doesn't collapse now is if sisu sell to ashley , we can't survive long term ground shares again and administration would see sisu get fuck all return anyway ..

It's time to finally do the right thing and just go ffs , agree to take the vik money or whatever and just fuck off we need a fresh start

Their best option is to sell the squad in Jan and hand MA a bonfire for a pittance.

clint van damme · Dec 5, 2022

slowpoke said:
I’m sure there are things brewing and in the wind, I was told ages ago which I put on here be ready for a happy Xmas, might even put a glass of wine and a mince pie out this year.

Christmas? We've got a home game in 12 days and another a few days after that.

As things stand we don't know where they'll be played.

Evo1883 · Dec 5, 2022

This remind sme of the final scene in Zulu , where Michael Cane is shouting at the Zulus " what are you waiting for , COME ON !!!! " and the South African Boer says " Haven't you had enough, It's over were dead "

City fans to sisu

OldBedrocker · Dec 5, 2022

olderskyblue said:
Re read the fg statement Nick. It clearly states that a contract mirroring the existing was offered. CCFC must have raised additional things they wanted, hence the next part of fg statement.

Exactly how I read it.

oldfiver · Dec 5, 2022

chiefdave said:
If Frasers were prepared to offer the same license with the same terms and the same length then two questions spring to mind.

1) Do they really need the club to sign anything, can it not just stay in place as is?

2) Why is that offer no longer on the table? the clubs statement says "To confirm, Coventry City are happy to continue under terms of the current licence which we already have in place to play at the Arena" so is it not a bit strange for Frasers to say we were happy with that a few weeks ago but now you can't have it? Easy PR win to call the clubs bluff, if and when the club refuse there's no comeback on Frasers or Ashley if he were to launch a takeover bid

Are they saying they were offering another licence that could be cancelled at the drop of the hat? Or a proper tenancy,?

Brighton Sky Blue · Dec 5, 2022

jordan210 said:

Eviction notice (2 Viewers)

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency