Moff
Well-Known Member
I hear what you are saying, but the original post was done tongue in cheek for a bite and it got one. Thats all I was trying to say.
Hey Moff.....A straight forward question was posted that didn't warrant that response. I respond to...not attack first, ok!:facepalm:
What's it like living in your Ivory tower?...you condescending prick!
I could explain but I cannot dumb myself down to a level that you would comprehend. Using crayons and big pictures is a bit difficult on the internet.
Please do explain for us unworthies who do not possess your obviously superior intellect.
No, they say (and have handed over documentation to the court) that they agreed with ccc to buy the mortgage from Yorkshire Bank at distressed value and write if off. Then they would buy the Higgs shares which with the mortgage gone would have an increased value (as would the ccc shares).
They even agreed how much the club would have to pay during the 'rent-strike'.
Then ACL chairman became director at Yorkshire Bank.
Hoffman turned up on the scene - again.
And the deal collapsed for whatever reasons.
So they actually said they agreed a plan with ccc to break the bank.
It's been explained just about 100 times in threads that you have participated.
Why would you ask about the debts level again - you know it's purpose is to protect against hostile takeovers. Ask Hoffman how effecitive it is.
Why would you ask about management fee's when you know it's not to pull out money from the club back into the pockets of sisu - you know it's an instrument to distribute cost between the companies in the group.
Why would you ask about interest when you know the sisu loans does not charge interest?
Well the question is about debt. The inference is the higher the debt the worst the potential for the football club.
So, in the premier league last season did the teams in the champions league positions have less debt than all the teams below them? We're Wigan and reading two if the most debt ridden clubs in the league?
It's rather nice actually. Also I don't have to look in the thesaurus to get a word like condescending.
Neither do I Grenduffy...I can spell. Also, I don't look in a magazine to get "Estimated Facts" either!
Yup... a Thesaurus helps you to spell!! And if all else fails, play the "Estimated Facts" card from one post written at the dawn of the internet!!
Oh, Cloughie - your post would have more weight if their hadn't been actualy evidence presented to the court backing the agreement up!
You must have seen this evidence or have a copy of it to make that statement please share ?
Yup... a Thesaurus helps you to spell!! And if all else fails, play the "Estimated Facts" card from one post written at the dawn of the internet!!
Oh, Cloughie - your post would have more weight if their hadn't been actualy evidence presented to the court backing the agreement up!
I don't need to. It was presented to the court. As much as SISU like to take risks, falcifying evidence in a court of law is probably beyond even them.
I don't need to. It was presented to the court. As much as SISU like to take risks, falcifying evidence in a court of law is probably beyond even them.
"Estimated Facts"......I'm always being picked up on my mistakes, my one little pleasure that I can throw back.
Thanks for picking up on my mistake.....MY TURN NOW!.........Your grammar is poor Willie............their/there/they're....you used the wrong one, and ACTUALLY
Fair is fair!! It's too early for there, their and they're!! Yup I missed an L. Head sufficiently hung in shame!!
So you have accepted this as fact ?
i personally will wait for the judge before having a view on this matter.
You must be very nieve since seppala has already been called a liar in a court of law by a judge !!!!!!
So you have accepted this as fact ?
i personally will wait for the judge before having a view on this matter.
You must be very nieve since seppala has already been called a liar in a court of law by a judge !!!!!!
Hi Godiva...It's been explained just about 100 times in threads that you have participated.
Why would you ask about the debts level again - you know it's purpose is to protect against hostile takeovers. Ask Hoffman how effecitive it is.
Why would you ask about management fee's when you know it's not to pull out money from the club back into the pockets of sisu - you know it's an instrument to distribute cost between the companies in the group.
Why would you ask about interest when you know the sisu loans does not charge interest?
Well, that shows how desperate the dick is Willie when all he can complain about is your grammar. :jerkit:
There is no point. You know full well that the debt is not debt accrued through football related matters. Also you should know that the clubs desire to own the management company stems from FFP rules where debt in this division is not related to competitiveness.
Well, that shows how desperate the dick is Willie when all he can complain about is your grammar. :jerkit:
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?