dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
They were prepared to over pay 2 million for something worth nothing, in order to make a charitable donation with their investors money.
Last edited:
I should say so.
So, in the last day or so, we've learned that Seppala threatened liquidation in 2012 unless SISU got the Higgs share. They then entered into negotiations during which they pulled a series of values for that share seemingly from a tombola barrel, culminating in a zero value. Didn't complete the deal on time; and didn't quite manage Due Diligence either. All this at a time when a rent strike sits as backdrop, for which they're taken to High Court.
Then, complain that some time later, a third party - in this shape CCC step in any refinance without telling them.
Is that really it?!?!?!?
C'mon seriously, does anyone here think that a decision like a rent strike won't have been approved by SISU?
They're trying to pretend that they're funding the club and didn't agree to the rent strike, that's laughable.
With only one witness are SISU taking this seriously?
From the 2013 Accounts The funds that SISU control in the 12 months to 31/05/13 (the period that covers this) increased by £312.00 in total. ARVO apparently entirely separate to SISU and its investors invested £5.4m by way of loans. Both the Funds and ARVO started accruing interest on their loans.
In terms of SISU then there wasn't exactly a lot being invested was there £312 (No K or m required) it seems.
I assume as independent lenders ARVO made their own assessment and took suitable security ........
SISU continued to fund the Club ???
So, in the last day or so, we've learned that Seppala threatened liquidation in 2012 unless SISU got the Higgs share. They then entered into negotiations during which they pulled a series of values for that share seemingly from a tombola barrel, culminating in a zero value. Didn't complete the deal on time; and didn't quite manage Due Diligence either. All this at a time when a rent strike sits as backdrop, for which they're taken to High Court.
Then, complain that some time later, a third party - in this shape CCC step in any refinance without telling them.
Is that really it?!?!?!?
If you were Joy would you be confident putting Fisher or Labovich up there?
Are you accusing her of perjury?
I should say so.
So, in the last day or so, we've learned that Seppala threatened liquidation in 2012 unless SISU got the Higgs share. They then entered into negotiations during which they pulled a series of values for that share seemingly from a tombola barrel, culminating in a zero value. Didn't complete the deal on time; and didn't quite manage Due Diligence either. All this at a time when a rent strike sits as backdrop, for which they're taken to High Court.
Then, complain that some time later, a third party - in this shape CCC - step in to refinance without telling them. So, that's bad manners; and we're all as bad as each other?!?
Is that really it?!?!?!?
Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert18sDeering believes Sisu were lead up the garden path while the council / charity did a deal for the bank debt.
No. PWKH made a point of stressing under oath, that he "placed the balloon" under the wipers and did not therefore did not attach it.
Even in the highly, highly unlikely case that Fisher initiated a rent strike without SISU's knowledge, said strike went on for a whole year with no intervention. Are SISU really trying to say that they had no idea this was going on throughout that time, and filed the ARVO debenture out of pure coincidence?
Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert32 secsSisu QC "it's clear Sisu did not withdraw from negotiations" Judge interrupts "I'm not so sure about that" brief discussion and QC continues
No. PWKH made a point of stressing under oath, that he "placed the balloon" under the wipers and did not therefore did not attach it.
That 2 million "donation" has made them sound a bit silly, maybe the judge can force them to make a bit of a donation when they pay the £29k.
Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert32 secsSisu QC "it's clear Sisu did not withdraw from negotiations" Judge interrupts "I'm not so sure about that" brief discussion and QC continues
If you were SISU and one of your employees, without your authorisation or knowledge, had taken such drastic action causing all sorts of knock on issues wouldn't you dismiss them? Fisher is still her so you can only assume Sepalla is happy with his work.
Even in the highly, highly unlikely case that Fisher initiated a rent strike without SISU's knowledge, said strike went on for a whole year with no intervention. Are SISU really trying to say that they had no idea this was going on throughout that time, and filed the ARVO debenture out of pure coincidence?
With only one witness are SISU taking this seriously?
If you were Joy would you be confident putting Fisher or Labovich up there?
That's not what she said, she said that it was a club decision and not something that sisu had approved.
Sorry if I duplicate posts (which I probably will do) but two tweets from today are of interest (they're all very insightful but these two caught my eye)
'@TheSimonGilbert: Deering says Sisu never authorised the non-payment of rent. That was football club decision. Club paid ACL £10k per match after rent ceased'
So what were SISU (now Otium) if they weren't 'the football club'?
And
'@TheSimonGilbert: Sisu QC "it's clear Sisu did not withdraw from negotiations" Judge interrupts "I'm not so sure about that" brief discussion and QC continues'
You go judge
Then what, will they invest in the team. The answer to that is no as they will make money out of the ricoh, so the future will be league 1/2 and maybe in a glory year we will go up to division 2 and that will be as high as we will go with SISU in charge with the Ricoh. Is that the future you want?I dont side with sisu I side with ccfc which is why I still watch my team play. I dont side with acl or cc either. Which is why I dont care what thd outcome is as long as we go back. If that means sisu get the Ricoh on the cheap then fine.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
We're back to the very interesting question:
What is the relation between sisu and arvo?
Does sisu (or JS) have any interest in arvo?
How can you come to the conclusion they didn't approve? If you're accepting they knew about it then didn't act to reverse Fishers actions they are implicitly approving them.
If they didn't approve Joy should have been straight on the phone, said it was all a mistake and get the rent paid ASAP.
Simon Gilbert@TheSimonGilbert32 secsSisu QC "it's clear Sisu did not withdraw from negotiations" Judge interrupts "I'm not so sure about that" brief discussion and QC continues
So you think the Tata Group head would have to know and approve every decision Tetley tea make? Really?
But again that's semantics - fisher is employed by the club not by sisu. And also there is a difference between joy saying ok, and sisu formally agreeing to the strategy through management board approval.
A bit like the accusations that ccc blocked the take over, but it was never formally rejected by Councillors.
I'm not making excuses, but I think you have to be careful of accusing people of lying under oath.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
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?