The sisu fans weren't moaning about the rent either until sisu stopped paying it.Strange that
Seppalla and co had no problem with it either until they secured relegation and the associated revenue drop.
The sisu fans weren't moaning about the rent either until sisu stopped paying it.Strange that
Ah ok so your resistance to the low rent or ACL absorption into the club is purely due to existing owners is it?
So new owners demanding cheap rent, ACL revenues, a seat on ACL board etc that you will support will you?
There are no sisu fans just CCFC fans and I've been moaning about it since day one.
As I posted before I'm not going to support a new owner making unreasonable rent demands if it means that ACL ends up in administration because they're getting less in than the payments going out, you can't run a business like that it will go bust. However I would hope that an agreement could be reached where the rent was reduced as income from other ACL sources made it possible - as happened when the council bought the mortgage. As to a seat on the board that might make sense and eventually a new owner would buy the lease so they would get all the ACL income streams. SISU owning any part of ACL is not acceptable to me.
There are no sisu fans just CCFC fans and I've been moaning about it since day one.
Fair enough..but surely you can see that sisu have messed up running the club big time and whilst acl and the council are far from blameless.sisu have to go.nothing positive can come out of them staying at the club.As been said above they didn't moan about paying it in the championship where we would still be had they not started the conveyor belt of manager's.Take the rent issue out of the argument and what have sisu done that's beneficial to the club ?
Did you miss the bitHow is that supporting the club? To take full advantage of the whole arena the club needs a long lease low rent and total ownership of ACL. It needs this also as cheap as possible whatever the cost to ACL.
I don't agree that this should be at any cost to ACL though.eventually a new owner would buy the lease so they would get all the ACL income streams?
Did you miss the bit
I don't agree that this should be at any cost to ACL though.
How is that supporting the club? To take full advantage of the whole arena the club needs a long lease low rent and total ownership of ACL. It needs this also as cheap as possible whatever the cost to ACL.
I didn't say I would back the council against new owners I have never done so.The rent is the argument though and a lot of posters side with the council and ACL saying it is their business and they can profit from it. Sisu need to be extracted from the discussion. If people really believe that and will back the council against new owners as James smith has already stated he would we have no future.
I didn't say I would back the council against new owners I have never done so.
So now you want to deprive a charity of millions that it basically (as I understand it) saved the club with when we were at the brink before by buying the 50% shareholding in ACL.I do. If we have new popular owners the fans should demand ACL as part of the deal and gen the club has a chance. I couldn't care less if they went to the wall. Why should I care?
It needs this also as cheap as possible whatever the cost to ACL.
So, you would be quite happy for the Higgs Charity to not recover one penny of the money they put in to support the club? This about sums up the grasping attitude of the current owners - thankfully, most other fans have a more generous nature when considering their own welfare against that of deprived children.
You have said you want ACL to get a fair deal out of any future arrangement. There are also old posts where you argue that you would be against any arrangement that in your view favours the club over taxpayers.
The Higgs charity do not own ACL.
That's correct they own 50% of it.The Higgs charity do not own ACL.
They own half of it and buying their share is our easiest way of gaining at least half ownership of the company.
Given the way ACL have been treated by SISU I suspect it'll be a cold day in hell before they sell it to SISU. Who knows though I may be wrong.
Owning the Higgs share does not I believe give you access to 100% ACL. ACL needs to be wound up and established as a new entity under CCFC. If fans would not even support that under a Hoffman Elliot ownership body we really are stuffed and frankly deserve to be.
So, you would be quite happy for the Higgs Charity to not recover one penny of the money they put in to support the club? This about sums up the grasping attitude of the current owners - thankfully, most other fans have a more generous nature when considering their own welfare against that of deprived children.
Yeah I was aware of that, does that mean they have to sell?CCFC Ltd has first refusal until some point in 2015-I suspect the charity didn't reckon on not having given it back by that time.
Yeah I was aware of that, does that mean they have to sell?
I'm slightly concerned we could still be in Admin at that point given the way things are going.
Now the FL point I wasn't aware of, so now I'm really concerned about it.FL rules prevent you from starting two consecutive seasons in administration (you get thrown out of the league if that happens) so that's unlikely. I'm not sure on the technicalities of the deal so can't say either way.
Why do you argue with him, you'll get no sense or any kind of balanced view. Ultimately if you don't agree with him he'll resort to telling you he goes more than you so you don't count. The guy is an infant, ignore him.
not quire accurate I think BSB ,club had first refusal at set formula to ascertain asking price ,however I'm sure its emerged that anyone can actually purchase this 50% with CCC approval of course.:thinking about:CCFC Ltd has first refusal until some point in 2015-I suspect the charity didn't reckon on not having given it back by that time.
Owning the Higgs share does not I believe give you access to 100% ACL. ACL needs to be wound up and established as a new entity under CCFC. If fans would not even support that under a Hoffman Elliot ownership body we really are stuffed and frankly deserve to be.
not quire accurate I think BSB ,club had first refusal at set formula to ascertain asking price ,however I'm sure its emerged that anyone can actually purchase this 50% with CCC approval of course.:thinking about:
Whilst I'm sure PWKH wouldn't sue a poster on here for what is obviously a light hearted comment, it should be noted that a former director of CCFC did have his lawyers send a letter to someone on another site who refered to him as a rogue.Happy to be corrected Wingy, though I was sure that the club had first refusal outright until 2015. We need that £££££££££ £££££ PWKH to clear it up.
I completely agree. I don't usually get into arguments with this kind, but I felt I had to point out what a mean and grasping individual he was. I notice that he has edited his initial response to avoid looking a complete and utter idiot.
not quire accurate I think BSB ,club had first refusal at set formula to ascertain asking price ,however I'm sure its emerged that anyone can actually purchase this 50% with CCC approval of course.:thinking about:
To answer your question directly, Grendel. I would expect ACL to offer a better deal on the rent and revenue to a new owner. I would fully support this as SISU have shown themselves to be unfit owners on so many occasions. A new start is what we need.
Whilst I'm sure PWKH wouldn't sue a poster on here for what is obviously a light hearted comment, it should be noted that a former director of CCFC did have his lawyers send a letter to someone on another site who refered to him as a rogue.
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?