Gary Hoffman’s long-distance attempt to meet Coventry City’s chief Tim Fisher (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sub
- Start date
Seyeclops666
New Member
Oh nice, very nice - well said Sir!!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
They will pull the JR request at the point where it begins to cost decent money. Like with most of SISU's tactics
Exactly.
Despite the nonsense spouted by another poster, a judicial review is a very cheap way to delay or obstruct a decision. This has been recognised by the government and there are new measures being introduced to stop the widespread abuse of the judicial review system.
I do hope when SISU's request is thrown out, the judge gives a summary (with sound bites) that will come back to haunt SISU.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
People who do very little will often staunchly attack those who do a lot.
It says more about them than it does about the person they jealously attack
It says more about them than it does about the person they jealously attack
davebart
Active Member
Are you sure you don't mean damp squits?
Personally I wouldn't take legal advice from someone who doesn't check their english. but I suppose legal experts rely on their secretaries to get the wording right on contracts.
plus the amount of time you spend on here must be costing someone a fortune.
BBSB
New Member
Actually you are both wrong it should be "damp squibs"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-The-top-10-misquoted-phrases-in-Britain.html
TheRoyalScam
Well-Known Member
APOLOGY-Oops didn't mean to like this post-wasn't concentrating-sorry
I think you can 'un-like' posts that you've inadvertantly 'liked'. IIRC the buttons at the bottom right of the post.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Exactly last week he was disabled with a carer looking after him, today he is a lawyer who spends half the day on SBT.
Obviously he could be a disabled lawyer with a carer but I highly unlikely he'd have the time for SBT if doing his Job properly.
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
What a load of bollocks. There isn't one point you make that isn't claptrap, to use Thatcher's favourite put-down.
TheRoyalScam
Well-Known Member
What I do know is that you've completely misunderstood the situation.
This particular JR is unusual: it implies that CCC have somehow broken EU fair competition laws by refinancing a company (ACL) that was itself in the process of being distressed by the company bringing the JR.
In other words SISU are saying 'You've scuppered our chance of distressing ACL so we can get it on the cheap, so we'll do what we do best and take you to court, citing some obscure EU ruling in an attempt to obfuscate the real facts.'
What's to prove that their 'pretty good QC and barristers' have told them they think they see a winner? They might have told them they haven't got a chance. After all, they'll still get paid win or lose, and the whole matter seems to me to be posturing and poor PR by SISU. What's the betting that they withdraw at the last moment? What's in it for SISU even if they win the JR?
What you have done is make this thread come off topic with your usual misunderstanding of the history and facts, together with your blind faith in SISU.
I suspect you are a SISU plant - I'm certain you couldn't argue your way out of a paper bag.
I'mARealWizard
New Member
Nick
Administrator
IF GH is serious then I think he should approach the football league with his offer.
Although the way I see it is like refusing to pay high rent on your house and moving away and then getting a loan to come back and pay the high rent again?
At the end of the day it will be a debt they need to pay back, surely it is like refusing to pay for a tenner a pint in a bar and your mate offering to buy you a few as long as you pay him back after? Defeats the object surely?
Although the way I see it is like refusing to pay high rent on your house and moving away and then getting a loan to come back and pay the high rent again?
At the end of the day it will be a debt they need to pay back, surely it is like refusing to pay for a tenner a pint in a bar and your mate offering to buy you a few as long as you pay him back after? Defeats the object surely?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I think GH knows that SISU/TF unlikely to accept. Our owners it would seem are perfectly capable of finding the funds if they wanted to. As you say Nick this is just a loan, and do SISU need loans from GH & Co - No
I tend to think this was an exercise to prove to others including the FL that there were deals that could have been done. As it is portrayed it shows TF as being intransigent and not wanting to do a deal the Ricoh. Which is important because TF has been telling FL that ACL wont deal with SISU and therefore this whole situation is ACL's fault. Coming back from holiday was also a clever move because it has been portrayed as TF refusing to meet someone who was willing to make a deal work at the Ricoh.
Overall it is all still a PR battle if you ask me
I tend to think this was an exercise to prove to others including the FL that there were deals that could have been done. As it is portrayed it shows TF as being intransigent and not wanting to do a deal the Ricoh. Which is important because TF has been telling FL that ACL wont deal with SISU and therefore this whole situation is ACL's fault. Coming back from holiday was also a clever move because it has been portrayed as TF refusing to meet someone who was willing to make a deal work at the Ricoh.
Overall it is all still a PR battle if you ask me
Last edited:
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I don't fancy getting damp squits http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Squits
duffer
Well-Known Member
Absolutely.
For what it's worth, as part of a community action I've had cause to discuss JRs with a real, actual solicitor with regard to planning permission and nuisance issues. He said, at a minimum, expect a five-figure biil (not £109.99 btw!) to get it to court.
You could do the pre-planning and submit the initial case bundle (the legal paperwork) with a bit of good will and some hard work for a lot less than that, but once it gets to instructing barristers costs start to rocket.
The council, of course, have their own legal department. So until and unless it gets to an actual court case this I don't think this will cost them too much.
As an aside, the sort of cases RPHunt is mentions, immigration in particular, tend to qualify for legal aid so there's no real cost to the complainant. As he rightly says, the Government is looking at ways to reduce those sorts of cases in particular.
imho, the Judge will bounce SISU's case at the first hurdle, but even if he doesn't, then what?
Even if SISU went all of the way through court, and it was found that CCC had made the wrong decision, it still doesn't get SISU the Ricoh. All it means is that ACL would have to find an alternate mortgage provider/financier. That doesn't of necessity have to be SISU, and in fact it's hard to see that ACL would want to take that option!
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I feel sorry for his family, being left in Spain whilst Daddy heads back to the UK.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I don't drive, but if I did I'd join you doing that - could do a Top Gear style race. Which reminds me I must get my hair cut, I do not suit a bandana.
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
There are some very good points raised on here as I read through. TBF true sky blue has raised quite a few valid arguments but I tend to agree with the over view that OSB outlines in a couple of post.
I'm not quite sure where SISU are headed with this JR process but then again we are not fully aware of all the facts.
As for the Hoffman saga. Many on here when it was first muted backed it to the hilt and accused Fisher of being somewhat of a dick to refuse etc etc. I insisted it was wrong and was not a sensible offer for SISU to accept and was among the few. Now it seems many of you have come to realise this.
I only mention this because before you run your mouth think carefully first. Stick with what you believe not change your mind days later.
SISU/Fisher may not be the flavour of the month but I do wish everyone would try and see how both sides have acted consistently badly and both are somewhat culpable for this entire sorry predicament.
As for someone saying ACL's accounts were only affected 9% by the absence of the football club my be correct I don't know but you can't dismiss the damage the footfall has on the other business interest that have to make their money and with the footfall gone that will have a dramatic affect for ACL. If I were a lease holder there I would probably want out or compensating.
There is not a sporting team anywhere big enough to fill the shoes left by the Sky Blues at the Ricoh...a thought that must worry ACL a lot.
How these two sides have failed to find a way forward is beyond me other than to say the Sky Blues need it all to stack up for them or renting a stadium becomes pointless.
I'm not quite sure where SISU are headed with this JR process but then again we are not fully aware of all the facts.
As for the Hoffman saga. Many on here when it was first muted backed it to the hilt and accused Fisher of being somewhat of a dick to refuse etc etc. I insisted it was wrong and was not a sensible offer for SISU to accept and was among the few. Now it seems many of you have come to realise this.
I only mention this because before you run your mouth think carefully first. Stick with what you believe not change your mind days later.
SISU/Fisher may not be the flavour of the month but I do wish everyone would try and see how both sides have acted consistently badly and both are somewhat culpable for this entire sorry predicament.
As for someone saying ACL's accounts were only affected 9% by the absence of the football club my be correct I don't know but you can't dismiss the damage the footfall has on the other business interest that have to make their money and with the footfall gone that will have a dramatic affect for ACL. If I were a lease holder there I would probably want out or compensating.
There is not a sporting team anywhere big enough to fill the shoes left by the Sky Blues at the Ricoh...a thought that must worry ACL a lot.
How these two sides have failed to find a way forward is beyond me other than to say the Sky Blues need it all to stack up for them or renting a stadium becomes pointless.
wes_cov
New Member
Thats the thing SISU can't plead poverty when they are raising things like this as well as the "getting exclusivity" on 2 sites also can't be cheapif this is all just bluster to try to get the RA it's an expesive way to go about it but equally all these costs will just get racked up against the existing debts
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
i spoke to somebody the other day ,a big business figure in coventry ,who told me RICOH are looking to pull out of the arena deal (naming rights)as all the negative talk is under their name and not ACL / council etc .
either way that is a 1 million a year deal for ACL ,alot of money,and will not be the only deal they lose over the football club moving
It, currently, costs just £60 to lodge a request for a judicial review.
If you employ a lawyer to prepare the request, then their charges will obviously depend on how much work they do to refine the case. Dumping a couple of thousand pages at the court is hardly refinement.
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
Craig looking at it a slightly funnier way...
I'm ACL so I say to the football team , "hey you can use the stadium for free" paying just match day fees etc. It's a bit like Tesco saying hey buy one get one free.
Have you ever done deals where you have secured money because it was better to get plenty rather than nothing?
I deal with companies everyday that use this tactic for the greater good. With the football club the whole Ricoh arena is viable including the sponsorship name remaining but without them, so much becomes dead in the water and the end game gets harder for ACL. I do feel ACL hit their comfort zone with assumption of 1.2m rent each year would be rolling in unquestioned? That was naïve no matter who owned the football club. You wouldn't believe Haskell would have put up with it either had that been the case.
ACL should look to speculate to accumulate for the greater good.
Still would never let SISU get any ownership though!
I'm ACL so I say to the football team , "hey you can use the stadium for free" paying just match day fees etc. It's a bit like Tesco saying hey buy one get one free.
Have you ever done deals where you have secured money because it was better to get plenty rather than nothing?
I deal with companies everyday that use this tactic for the greater good. With the football club the whole Ricoh arena is viable including the sponsorship name remaining but without them, so much becomes dead in the water and the end game gets harder for ACL. I do feel ACL hit their comfort zone with assumption of 1.2m rent each year would be rolling in unquestioned? That was naïve no matter who owned the football club. You wouldn't believe Haskell would have put up with it either had that been the case.
ACL should look to speculate to accumulate for the greater good.
Still would never let SISU get any ownership though!
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Maybe he came back because Nuneaton was hotter than Spain at the weekend?
Got to be a headline somewhere along the lines of "Britain basking in summer heat, hotter than Barcelona" somewhere?
Got to be a headline somewhere along the lines of "Britain basking in summer heat, hotter than Barcelona" somewhere?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Interesting that. Remind me how much rent do Premier League Swansea pay and how much did they contribute to the stadium construction?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I believe that the construction was funded by Swansea Council and I 'think' that the team pay a peppercorn rent. Anyone who criticises this now that they have hit the big time and could pay the a reasonable rent (even at cost) is shouted down loudly. The stadium finances have come under scrutiny and a PWC report for the Welsh Audit Office in 2011 (which I can't find online) stated that the way it is financed is unsustainable.
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/C...tory-12754243-detail/story.html#axzz2Z8FAOl3HPWC report via thisissouthwales.co.uk said:
What a shame we never took the oportunity to buy the charity share when we had the oportunity (and I think we still do).
Last edited:
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
That's even worse than the Cameron/idiot on this thread faux pas with squid! Although without the all-out-dopeyness of thinking that a squid being damp is in any way unusual or problematic...
