I'd like to make sure I get this... (1 Viewer)

[bishbosh]

I'd just like to get this whole sorry saga straight in my head. There just seems so much wrong with what has happened to Coventry City that I want to make sure I'm not missing anything; because I can't figure out how people are getting away with what they're doing.

SISU kept failing to log accounts, refused to pay rent at the Ricoh and eventually the club went into admin. SISU created companies to hold assets from different parts of the club and played hide and seek with the Golden Share. They also refuse to talk to the Ricoh's owners and alienated the fans.

In administration some bloke comes along to look into bids to buy the club.This bloke then decides the best bidder for the club is an offshoot of the company that put the club into admin, surely there is something wrong there straight away.

So the owners of CCFC are Otium entertainment which is another name for SISU.

Forgive my naivety but shouldn't 'new' owners get the thing they purchased out of trouble and not make things worse? How was SISU/Otium the best/preferred bid? Preston Haskell must have offered to buy and rebrand the club as some sort of child slavery business.

I'm sure there must be rules and procedures regarding club ownership, administration, buyouts and liquidation. Who makes those rules? Who enforces them and ensures the system works? Or are there just punitive outcomes for clubs rather than questions of what and why things happened? Did anybody learn from the Pompey affair and act upon that learning?

 

---

[Skybluepiglet]

What about the "fit & proper" person to run club rulings.

How can NOT playing in Cov ever be fitting or proper.

 

[The Penguin]

Yep, that's pretty much covered it. Add in ACL returning serve with some delightful intransigence of their own, and it all adds up to one big clusterfuck.

As to your last point, the Football League does. However they enforce their rules as they see fit, and as such they aren't really rules at all, just things they can point to and say, "Look! We can run the game, we don't need legislated regulation, honest!"

 

[The Penguin]

What about the "fit & proper" person to run club rulings.

How can NOT playing in Cov ever be fitting or proper.

It's self-certified.

So basically you can just say "yep, I'm fit and proper innit" and you're away.

 

[diggerdaley]

True sky blue will explain it all in a minute or two.

 

[SuperCov]

In administration some bloke comes along to look into bids to buy the club.This bloke then decides the best bidder for the club is an offshoot of the company that put the club into admin, surely there is something wrong there straight away.

I think you'll find that's 'standard business practice'. Owners will set up a new company to take over the existing one. It happens a lot.

Yep, that's pretty much covered it. Add in ACL returning serve with some delightful intransigence of their own, and it all adds up to one big clusterfuck.

I love that word. I must start using it more often. It does sum up the situation well though.

 

[blueflint]

i always assumed that a director who took a business into admin could not be a director of another company for a set number of years obviously i was and am wrong.its immoral that a director can run the same company under a different name

 

[WFC]

People get away with it because the football league is corrupt, incompetent, lacking in integrity and unfit to run the game.

They say they are not all powerful and cannot force companies acting within the law ( and I'm not convinced that a full investigation would prove that's the case with your owners) to do anything, but what they can do but consistently fail to do is act in the best interests of the game, to enforce their own competition rules and put rules in place to protect the integrity of the sport, clubs and the communities they represent instead of playing lip service to the concepts of fair play.

I believe some great man once said evil triumphs when good men fail to act. I'm afraid the games "good men" aren't that good to start with and always fail to act when under the slightest pressure choosing instead to protect their own interests.

 

[Gint11]

Now Otium need to file their accounts and the embargo will be lifted?

 

[The Penguin]

Now Otium need to file their accounts and the embargo will be lifted?

No, I think Holdings needs to.

And even then, nothing can happen until the administration process is complete.

 

[SuperCov]

i always assumed that a director who took a business into admin could not be a director of another company for a set number of years obviously i was and am wrong.its immoral that a director can run the same company under a different name

I think you're right, a company I used to work for went into admin but their son became the new director of the new company. However, I have also heard where someone has made new company after new company time and time again to take over the failing company. I wonder if you setup the company before the current one goes into admin has anything to do with it? :/