Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (1 Viewer)

lordsummerisle · Apr 3, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
How can any self-respecting business go from:

SISU-officer Ran Ranson stating in the late summer of 2009: 'We're now one of only three clubs in the country that is debt free”

To 2012 - three years on - to SISU stating they need the Higgs share, lest they close the place?!?

Because Ranson is a lying bastard?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Apr 3, 2014

stupot07 said:
Because Ranson was a fool?

Maybe so; but SISU's fool. They can't keep on going on like this. By completing Due Diligence and buying the club, they assume responsibility for the actions, responsibilities, incomes and liabilities of all previous regimes. Any distance they may now wish to place between the current guardians of the club, and their own appointed officer in Ranson is even harder to try and justify. He was their man

ajsccfc · Apr 3, 2014

We were debt-free, in the sense that your uncle pays off your credit card so you're not really in debt but you still need to pay him back. And he's the weird uncle who gets a bit handsy at family parties after a few.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

There was a mechanism that that SISU apparently paid £1m for that gave them the ability to purchase the Charity share any time up to 2015 I believe - the option

Of course it couldn't be actioned as soon as the rent and any other bills were outside of the normal terms for settlement. So apparently they just threw away £1m then ?

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert39sHiggs barrister is having to work hard to get some of the answers he is seeking from Ms Deering.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Apr 3, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
Because Ranson is a lying bastard?

See above. If your assertion is true, and I'm not challenging you on it's integrity, then he's theirs.

In fairness, follow that lineage through to Fisher's claims about the stadium, and frankly Labovich's claims on just about anything; and there's a touch of the Aldridge Priors about it all

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert5sMs Deering insists Sisu still wanted to complete deal for Higgs share in ACL after exclusivity period with Higgs had ended.

lordsummerisle · Apr 3, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Maybe so; but SISU's fool. They can't keep on going on like this. By completing Due Diligence and buying the club, they assume responsibility for the actions, responsibilities, incomes and liabilities of all previous regimes. Any distance they may now wish to place between the current guardians of the club, and their own appointed officer in Ranson is even harder to try and justify. He was their man

The distance that some try to place between Ranson and Sisu is the more laughable.

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert13sHiggs seem to have insisted on proof of funds to continue share negotiations. Deering says Sisu wanted more time for due diligence.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert5sMs Deering insists Sisu still wanted to complete deal for Higgs share in ACL after exclusivity period with Higgs had ended.

So if she accepts that the exclusivity ended then Charity in rights to offer elsewhere

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert34sDeering also says Sisu were not allowed to meet Higgs' advisors to address charity's concerns.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert13sHiggs seem to have insisted on proof of funds to continue share negotiations. Deering says Sisu wanted more time for due diligence.

Haven't had a good record with due diligence it seems, I could be wrong of course

lordsummerisle · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert13sHiggs seem to have insisted on proof of funds to continue share negotiations. Deering says Sisu wanted more time for due diligence.

To be fair, don't think anybody could criticise that.

dongonzalos · Apr 3, 2014

So for the JR so far...

The council will argue they had to step in as they thought the club was going to be liquidated.

SISU agreed a HOT. Then went past the exclusivity period and it is now agreed cannot prove that they carried on with any negotiations after this.

SISU agree that they would have pulled the funding if they did not get the deal.

Higgs were verbally told the council would let SISU know the council were going to bid for the loan. There was no legal obligation to do this and SISU say the council did not.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert34sDeering also says Sisu were not allowed to meet Higgs' advisors to address charity's concerns.

largely irrelevant if the Charity Trustees felt capable of dealing with the matters raised I would have thought up to Charity whether they seek their advisors to be involved or not

James Smith · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert13sHiggs seem to have insisted on proof of funds to continue share negotiations. Deering says Sisu wanted more time for due diligence.

Maybe the Higgs had heard of Jo Dhinsa and wanted to make sure there was some cash this time?

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
To be fair, don't think anybody could criticise that.

In one sense no LS but the purpose of the exclusivity period is to get the due diligence done. They had a time limit that had to be met or an agreed extension. Seems neither happened

Hobo · Apr 3, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
See above. If your assertion is true, and I'm not challenging you on it's integrity, then he's theirs.

In fairness, follow that lineage through to Fisher's claims about the stadium, and frankly Labovich's claims on just about anything; and there's a touch of the Aldridge Priors about it all

SISU and Ranson deserved each other, Aldridge Priors indeed.

There are a few Bertie Bunts Parrots on this forum as well.
;-)

dongonzalos · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert5sMs Deering insists Sisu still wanted to complete deal for Higgs share in ACL after exclusivity period with Higgs had ended.

Am I imagining this but did Mr Fisher not say words to the effect off after looking ACL books they were clearly not a viable business and only worth a couple of million at the most and they decided it wasn't worth buying. Am I imagining that?

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

dongonzalos said:
Am I imagining this but did Mr Fisher not say words to the effect off after looking ACL books they were clearly not a viable business and only worth a couple of million at the most and they decided it wasn't worth buying. Am I imagining that?

i think something like that was said don

lordsummerisle · Apr 3, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
In one sense no LS but the purpose of the exclusivity period is to get the due diligence done. They had a time limit that had to be met or an agreed extension. Seems neither happened

An agreed extension would have been the way to do it I agree.

Expect they didn't want to get burned again after falling for Joe's "Ticking clock" when taking over the club, wouldn't blame them for that.

Also don't blame Higgs for seeking proof of funds before going too far down the road to a sale either.

Hobo · Apr 3, 2014

dongonzalos said:
Am I imagining this but did Mr Fisher not say words to the effect off after looking ACL books they were clearly not a viable business and only worth a couple of million at the most and they decided it wasn't worth buying. Am I imagining that?

No you are not. It is SISU doing all the imaginative thinking.

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert20sA separate deal for Higgs share was discussed between Joy Seppala, Sisu, and Paul Harris, Higgs. Away from negotiations for bank debt.

Moff · Apr 3, 2014

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
I don't think 'Readers Wives' was ever a 'special interest journal' in it's own right, was it? I remember it as a section in one of the magazines of the day - perhaps Mayfair or Knave (!?!); which would give opportunity for some casting fettler from Scunthorpe to showcase his partner's dubious acreage of milky-white, portly skin?

I believe it did get its own journal rights for a time. Well at least a friend told me it did!

Sounds like you have spent some time in Scunthorpe in days past by your detailed description. It wasnt one of those parties where you threw your Rover 'Van den Plas' keys into a bowl was it?

(Sorry for digressing from the court case and pages of arguing everyone)

The Prefect · Apr 3, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
To be fair, don't think anybody could criticise that.

I have worked on a few takeovers in my time and due diligence doesn't take forever and needs to have an agreed finish. You can't open your books to a third party forever. If SISU needed more due diligence they should have put more resources in.

I'm sceptical. Six weeks should have been long enough to look at ACL's books as they're not a particularly complicated business. Asking for more time could be seen as a stalling tactic.

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert9sMiss Deering says offer for charity's share was considerably less than agreed in original discussions due to 'increased risk' to Sisu.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

question - if they only continued funding the club because they wanted the Charity share why are they still "funding it"?

Isn't Ms Deering an employee? In which case what authority for decision making does she have? What authority does she have for issuing funding or negotiating? - no t having a go would just like to know because I understood JS made all the major decisions

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert31sMr Harris previously claimed original deal was £5.5m for charity's share. New deal around £2million.

lordsummerisle · Apr 3, 2014

Moff said:
I believe it did get its own journal rights for a time. Well at least a friend told me it did!

Sounds like you have spent some time in Scunthorpe in days past by your detailed description. It wasnt one of those parties where you threw your Rover 'Van den Plas' keys into a bowl was it?

(Sorry for digressing from the court case and pages of arguing everyone)

Used to call Readers Wives "Naafi Monthly" when I was in the RAF.

They nearly all seemed to have MOD issue curtains(not beef!) and furniture in the background.

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert20sA separate deal for Higgs share was discussed between Joy Seppala, Sisu, and Paul Harris, Higgs. Away from negotiations for bank debt.

so the deal referred to with Yorkshire bank is not connected to the share purchase then ? In which case how does the CCC loan affect the Charity share deal proposed in May/June?

Sub · Apr 3, 2014

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert4 mins
A separate deal for Higgs share was discussed between Joy Seppala, Sisu, and Paul Harris, Higgs. Away from negotiations for bank debt.

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert14 mins
Deering also says Sisu were not allowed to meet Higgs' advisors to address charity's concerns.

is there a contradiction here already ?

Kingokings204 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert31sMr Harris previously claimed original deal was £5.5m for charity's share. New deal around £2million.

Finally the truth people..... Sisu backed down from the agree 5.5m which is a steal anyway and offered 2m hence it fell apart.

Case solved. They are wankers. Deserve everything they get now.

duffer · Apr 3, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
To be fair, don't think anybody could criticise that.

I think you can criticise it if at the same time as asking for an extension to complete due diligence they weren't paying the rent.

This, of course, directly impacted the organisation they wanted to negotiate with. Given that SISU hadn't exactly shown themselves as trustworthy by this point, who can blame the charity for declining to offer more time (if indeed that is what happened).

Nick · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert4 mins

A separate deal for Higgs share was discussed between Joy Seppala, Sisu, and Paul Harris, Higgs. Away from negotiations for bank debt.

Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert14 mins

Deering also says Sisu were not allowed to meet Higgs' advisors to address charity's concerns.

is there a contradiction here already ?

Is Harris an advisor for the Higgs?

oldskyblue58 · Apr 3, 2014

Sub said:
Simon Gilbert‏@TheSimonGilbert31sMr Harris previously claimed original deal was £5.5m for charity's share. New deal around £2million.

There was no deal though only HOT's ....... hadn't done the due diligence so there couldn't be a final price could there?

Higgs vs CCFC Court Row (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

CCFC Finance Director

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency