The 'split' wasn't recent. CCFC Holdings has existed since 1907 and would have held the original share. CCFC Ltd was formed in 1995, but CCFC Holdings has continued to be the trading company and it is difficult to understand why the GS is with CCFC Ltd as ACL believe (and the FL have apparently confirmed). It was suggested earlier the confusion may be about the original name of CCFC Holdings which was CCFC Ltd (The). Who knows, but others claim in 2001 the share was reissued to CCFC Ltd. No idea. As Coundon says though, it is the company reg number that is the important factor, and this must surely be documented.
Either way, I don't think there is anything sinister here.
But the golden share would have existed prior to the formation of the premier league, but what about the FA registration? Surely that is in the original companies name?
The plot thickens,
Maybe on relegation the FL issued it back to ccfc ltd without knowing the name had changed to ccfch , maybe just a simple clerical error.
It is possible i suppose because the name change would have happened under the PL.
I said on another post that I think this also shows the league in a bad light.
You would think the league would have all this info on a database where it would take them 5 minutes to check it.
Wouldn't this have been picked up at some point over the last 11 years though each time we registered a new player?
Wouldn't this have been picked up at some point over the last 11 years though each time we registered a new player?
The plot thickens,
Maybe on relegation the FL issued it back to ccfc ltd without knowing the name had changed to ccfch , maybe just a simple clerical error.
It is possible i suppose because the name change would have happened under the PL.
That's right the name change from CCFC Ltd (The) to CCFC Holdings happened in the mid 90s, around the time of the incorporation of CCFC Ltd. Sounds far-fetched but it could simply be something as simple as a clerical error.
The Football League are a bit up themselves aren't they? 'Golden share', like playing in League One is a trip to Willy Wonka's chocolate factory.
The Football League are a bit up themselves aren't they? 'Golden share', like playing in League One is a trip to Willy Wonka's chocolate factory.
Certainly, in 2009, the accounts of Sky Blue Sports and Leisure (the parent company of the group) show CCFC Ltd as being engaged in "Playing activities of a professional football club" and CCFC (Holdings) as "Holding company providing management and other services to subsidiary undertakings"
I don't have later accounts to hand, but if the golden share was anywhere in 2009 it was with CCFC Ltd. Having read them, I don't remember the descriptions being any different.
since both the FA and the FL say that their records show the shares as being held by that company, I would expect them to work on that basis.
The "operating activities" have very clearly been transferred to (Holdings) very recently. I suspect the latest (unfolded) accounts will show the same descriptions as in 2009, and there was some jiggery-pokery done so they could claim CCFC Ltd is the licence holder and nothing more.
If I'm right, we'll get the book thrown at us.
Joy Seppalla would be Veruca Salt.
[video]http://youtu.be/TRTkCHE1sS4[/video]
The accounts show that CCFC Ltd has been more than a company holding the rental agreememt. Its turnover is from more than paying the rent, indicating that it has been trading players etc from this company.
Unfortunately John 'Augustus Gloop' Clarke has already resigned. No chocolate factory for him.
To be fair, it's not them who call it that. It's simply an individual share in the FL or FA. It's other people who have talked of it as a "golden" share, since it gives a club the right to compete in the League.
when is immaterial, why the FL have not been informed? Is the £60m question.But the 1.3 million pound questions are , When and how did they move them ?
when is immaterial, why the FL have not been informed? Is the £60m question.
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?