Golden Share (11 Viewers)

chiefdave · May 24, 2013

CJ_covblaze said:
Breaking: administrator for Coventry City Ltd confirms it DOES have the Golden Share - but says its significance has been 'overstated' #ccfc

does overstated mean is was with Ltd but the FL may not return it there. I don't see how Ltd can have it now as you can't hold the share while in admin, it goes back to the FL

Nick said:
But sisu have the upper hand over other bidders don't they?

Insofar as they are the major creditor and can reject any CVA. coming out of admin means a further points deduction next season. I believe it's higher than the points deduction for going into admin

ccfc92 said:
could ccfc holdings bid for ccfc ltd?

my understanding is that is exactly what their intention is

Senior Vick from Alicante said:
fit and propper test and Sisu surely can't pass this a second time.

apart from rules such as can't have taken a club into admin twice F&P is self certification. Unless there is some law SISU have broken they will pass, I know it sounds crazy but the test is basically worthless

cov_george said:
So if I understand correctly the golden share is with LTD, & player registrations are with Holdings, gonna cost some to get new squad or get those players from holdings

it will be player contracts that are with holdings, registrations are always with the league. the issue we may face is that if the two are separated we may get a further punishment. SISU may assert a legal claim over the players and that could get messy. would also bring up the question of eligibility of players last season if they were under third party ownership.

Steve.B50 said:
That's how I understand it, starts with a blank sheet

You come out of admin with a CVA, that's a pence in the pound offer but I think one club paid 0.2p in the £ so you won't wipe debt totally but you can come out with next to nothing owing. If SISU refuse to accept a CVA you may as well knock it right down.

things should get interesting now. would expect potential buyers, at least some of them, to become public now as they attempt to win over the fans. wonder if, once we find out who they are, ACL will push for PH4 or they will be more flexible.

MatthewWallis · May 24, 2013

The full statement from Mr Appleton:

Since my appointment as Joint Administrator of Coventry City FC Limited, there has been a huge amount of interest surrounding the ownership of the Football League’s ‘Golden Share’.

Following information I have received from various stakeholders, I now believe the registration of the Golden Share lies with Limited.

While that may have appeared self-evident, the bulk of my investigation has been involved with discovering WHY that is the case.

Indeed, there is still information outstanding which, despite repeated pleas and requests, has not been presented. This has hardly helped clarify a confusing state of affairs dating back some 20 years.

Also, Holdings believe they have a beneficial ownership of the Share given the level of investment they have made and the fact the players contracts are in their name, together with many other important elements.

This has seemingly been endorsed by the Football League who have completed all current player registrations in the name of Holdings.

In my opinion, the importance of the ownership of the Share has been exaggerated in the media and on social networks. Of course, it is a significant element but ownership does not necessarily mean control of the club.

Just as important is the location of the players contracts, the right to use the name Coventry City and the right to sell season tickets - all of which Holdings assert is theirs.

Should Holdings maintain their claim to a beneficial ownership of the Share, ultimately only the Court can overturn that.

I am anxious to avoid such a lengthy process given the amount of uncertainty surrounding the Club and am doing everything in my power to alleviate that uncertainty.

A sale process has begun, I have spoken and met with a number of parties who have expressed an interest in the assets Limited possesses and its interest in the Share.

To that end, I have set a deadline of May 31 for indicative offers from those interested parties.

If a suitable purchaser is identified, it will still be subject to the consent of the Football League and will also likely involve discussions between Holdings and that purchaser.

The Football League holds its next Board Meeting on June 5 and I hope something can be resolved before then.

It will need a major amount of goodwill to be shown by a number of parties and whether we succeed or not remains to be seen. But it will not be for the want of trying on my part.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-fc-administrators-statement-4014213

chiefdave · May 24, 2013

CovLis86 said:
Les Reid had had pretty good Information to this point so I'd go with it.

Les Reid has been pretty spot on so far and it seems an odd thing to make up as the administrator will just release a statement saying its not true so I'm thinking this is correct. How many of the 8 turn out to be serious bidders remains to be seen. Of course in a bidding war we could reach a number SISU are happy to accept, agree to a CVA, hand over the player contracts and walk away. Wouldn't that be nice, all we'd have to worry about then would be football!

ccfc92 · May 24, 2013

I think we are fucked

BurbageSkyBlues · May 24, 2013

Could this be why Now we see the rationale behind Sisu making such a promotion of their stadium plans?

The FL will only allow them to have the GS if they demonstrate their status as fit and proper, and they intend to buy ltd and pay the debt to themselves. Basically, they can outbid anyone else, the most they would lose would be debt to ACL plus admin fees. They might accept a reasonable offer (£40M ?) from PH, to clear their 'real' investment, but would he go that high? Otherwise, they kep control of the club. Then they try to distress ACL, whilst playing games away from the arena, and continuing with the stadium build masquerade for as long a it takes to force the hand of ACL into submission.

This is why it is so necessary for the fans to make a firm stance

Ripbuster · May 24, 2013

....MORE BREAKING: #CCFC administrator also sets deadline of next week for bids to buy the company

Well,TF did say it'd be cleared up by June..

corniepaste · May 24, 2013

John_Silletts_Nose said:
we should be so lucky!

Nice

.

sw88 · May 24, 2013

So was all this faffing about just delaying tactics? Delaying admiring where it was in order to plan for a but out of the company in admin by SISU maybe?

Surprised at 8 interested parties :thinking about:

mark82 · May 24, 2013

Steve.B50 said:
That's how I understand it, starts with a blank sheet

We will have debt still in the form of a CVA if it is agreed by creditors.

Bennets Afro · May 24, 2013

It's all posturing from Sisu to bump up the amount they will receive back I think

chiefdave · May 24, 2013

having got excited for 5 mins reading the CT article this is not really anything new is it? you can buy Ltd, who did own the share but you may not get ownership of the share and you won't get ownership of the other assets (player contracts etc) owned by Holdings.

we're still in the position where we need the league to make a clear statement about what happens if someone other than SISU take Ltd out of admin.

Flying Fokker · May 24, 2013

SISU in. No fans.

Flying Fokker · May 24, 2013

chiefdave said:
having got excited for 5 mins reading the CT article this is not really anything new is it? you can buy Ltd, who did own the share but you may not get ownership of the share and you won't get ownership of the other assets (player contracts etc) owned by Holdings.

we're still in the position where we need the league to make a clear statement about what happens if someone other than SISU take Ltd out of admin.

Plater registrations held by the league as mentioned before.

chiefdave · May 24, 2013

Also is this the first time we've had it confirmed that the players contracts, the right to use the name Coventry City and the right to sell tickets (not sure how that works) are all with holdings?

ccfc92 · May 24, 2013

Flying Fokker said:
Plater registrations held by the league as mentioned before.

not according to the administrator

Flying Fokker · May 24, 2013

Who cares about the name? Not many people complained about the notion of Coventry Talbot....

wingy · May 24, 2013

That question of third party ownership ios right in there

SkyBlueUkeman · May 24, 2013

There is categorically no way the Football league would want Sisu anywhere near us again. Just look at the hassle they have caused us and them and football in general.

Its game over for them.

corniepaste · May 24, 2013

ccfc92 said:
that's what i thought, is the debt with LTD?

but surely if LTD is in admin, then we start with a £0 balance? that's the whole point of admin isn't it?

From what I understand the administrator has to make something back, i.e 10p for every pounds of debt. The problem is because he is assigned from sisu, every bidder who isnt wil have to pay more like 90p in the £1.00, and sisu can effectively say I'll give you 50p for the lot and he can say ok ?

Crazy I know, but as a result of this either way the debt will be reduced so less debt is always better, but we may still have sisu as owners saying how they have saved us again.

And then all the pro sisu idiots will pipe up with told you so's !:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

chiefdave · May 24, 2013

Flying Fokker said:
Plater registrations held by the league as mentioned before.

aren't contracts and registrations different things? I'm not sure anymore, losing track! That would make sense tho, think about transfers. You sign a player to a contract then you have to register them before they can play.

how would the league stand legally if they issued the share to, for example, PH4 and put a condition on it that he had to issue identical contracts to those between holdings and the players? Then the football club would have the share and the players, both registration and contracts, SISU would also have contracts and could keep paying the players but they wouldn't be allowed to field them in the FL so what are they going to do with them? They'd end up cancelling the contracts. That would just leave the matter of the name and right to sell tickets. Presumably if we became something like AFC Coventry City for official purposes those problems are resolved, sure a league vote would be needed as technically it would be a different team but given the circumstances I would like to think that would pass through. is that potentially a solution?

wingy · May 24, 2013

chiefdave said:
aren't contracts and registrations different things? I'm not sure anymore, losing track! That would make sense tho, think about transfers. You sign a player to a contract then you have to register them before they can play.

how would the league stand legally if they issued the share to, for example, PH4 and put a condition on it that he had to issue identical contracts to those between holdings and the players? Then the football club would have the share and the players, both registration and contracts, SISU would also have contracts and could keep paying the players but they wouldn't be allowed to field them in the FL so what are they going to do with them? They'd end up cancelling the contracts. That would just leave the matter of the name and right to sell tickets. Presumably if we became something like AFC Coventry City for official purposes those problems are resolved, sure a league vote would be needed as technically it would be a different team but given the circumstances I would like to think that would pass through. is that potentially a solution?

It does say they assert the right to the name ,Ticket selling ETC ,but it looks lik the registrations are in Holdings which is unexpected as will be witht he Academy I assume.

CJ_covblaze · May 24, 2013

Registrations and contracts are different. Registrations have been in Holdings for just over a year. Don't know about the contracts.

corniepaste · May 24, 2013

Flying Fokker said:
Who cares about the name? Not many people complained about the notion of Coventry Talbot....

The name holds all our history, that's why you should give a f%+k about the name!:facepalm:

corniepaste · May 24, 2013

chiefdave said:
aren't contracts and registrations different things? I'm not sure anymore, losing track! That would make sense tho, think about transfers. You sign a player to a contract then you have to register them before they can play.

how would the league stand legally if they issued the share to, for example, PH4 and put a condition on it that he had to issue identical contracts to those between holdings and the players? Then the football club would have the share and the players, both registration and contracts, SISU would also have contracts and could keep paying the players but they wouldn't be allowed to field them in the FL so what are they going to do with them? They'd end up cancelling the contracts. That would just leave the matter of the name and right to sell tickets. Presumably if we became something like AFC Coventry City for official purposes those problems are resolved, sure a league vote would be needed as technically it would be a different team but given the circumstances I would like to think that would pass through. is that potentially a solution?

If the league place the name with LTD, then we can continue in league 1, but if you register a new name, then we would have to start at the bottom. I believe that is a rule of registering a new club, yes, even if we are technically CCFC. Also I can't imagine other other teams in the league saying thats fine, let them back in, especially if it removes on less team to play or invokes 3 points win instantly.

However, when Portsmouth were bought buy their trust, where they re-registered with the league after coming out of admin in the same name ?

psgm1 · May 24, 2013

ccfc92 said:
yessssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hang on I announced this early this afternoon and the clique apologists said this was a NON story?

Could it be I have utterly humiliated them?

When did Les Reid announce this? I announced just after 1 pm.

ANYTHING after them is trying to take unjustified credit for finding this information!

And I believe the admin of this very forum will be able to confirm when PRECISELY I put this information in the public domain!

Ripbuster · May 24, 2013

Do you want a sticker?

letsallsingtogether · May 24, 2013

NAG NAG NAG NAG NAG

psgm1 said:
Hang on I announced this early this afternoon and the clique apologists said this was a NON story?

Told you before nobdy cares what you think :facepalm:
Could it be I have utterly humiliated them?

When did Les Reid announce this? I announced just after 1 pm.

ANYTHING after them is trying to take unjustified credit for finding this information!

And I believe the admin of this very forum will be able to confirm when PRECISELY I put this information in the public domain!

stupot07 · May 24, 2013

ccfc92 said:
that's what i thought, is the debt with LTD?

but surely if LTD is in admin, then we start with a £0 balance? that's the whole point of admin isn't it?

I think so, I meant more about new owners coming in and investing in the squad or funding operating losses, that will be through loans rather than gifting the club money this adding debt to the club.

Flying Fokker · May 24, 2013

corniepaste said:
The name holds all our history, that's why you should give a f%+k about the name!:facepalm:

Well? You not around when City were going to change the name to Coventry Talbot?

Didn't happen but JImmy HIll? Was prepared to raised revenues by changing names.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talbot

letsallsingtogether · May 24, 2013

Ripbuster said:
Do you want a sticker?

Put one on his Gob and Key board :facepalm:

James Smith · May 24, 2013

Finally! **

Colin1883 · May 24, 2013

Full statement on telegraph website

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 24, 2013

ccfc92 said:
not according to the administrator

I remember someone saying before the player registrations are with Ltd but the contracts are with holdings. I'm not sure what the difference or significance of that is.

quinn1971 · May 24, 2013

psgm1 said:
Hang on I announced this early this afternoon and the clique apologists said this was a NON story?

Could it be I have utterly humiliated them?

When did Les Reid announce this? I announced just after 1 pm.

ANYTHING after them is trying to take unjustified credit for finding this information!

And I believe the admin of this very forum will be able to confirm when PRECISELY I put this information in the public domain!

@psgm I haven't been on this forum long but your one poster who's posts I look out for. I dont always agree with how you sometimes come across but can tell you have the same interest in the outcome of this mess as most on here and that is sisu gone.just my opinion but you seem to want to do it on your own. Isn't there a saying strength in numbers ? You might be a one man army but at least your doing something.am I right in thinking that the whole of sisus bid depends on the ground share with walsall ? Ive read alot of posts on here about lets all protest about something isnt this the perfect time to do something.?

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · May 24, 2013

Couldnt wait could you Paul Marston on the Telegraph ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME and by the way youre name is in the public domain

Golden Share (11 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Chief Commentator!

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Banned

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency