Is this at all possible? (1 Viewer)

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

I am not into conspiracy theories but the clubs withdrawal of assets appears to me a worrying development.

So is this possible;

Sisu advise the football league they have no risk of insolvency bit have a dispute over rent payments which they cannot resolve. They wish to transfer club assets back to the holding company leaving the tenancy agreement in CCFC ltd.

To fulfil fixtures they then arrange an alternate ground to fulfil fixtures.

Fpptball league agree to this only if all ties with the Ricoh are actually severed immediately.

So the clubs departs and trades solvent my elsewhere until
Holding company agree to a new rental structure with the landlord.

Is the fixture next week moved to Friday as someone is playing at the ground Saturday?

This is pure conjecture but the moving out seems very strange.

ccfcmad1 · Mar 23, 2013

The same thought about the fixture change crossed my mind a few days ago could be nothing but this is sisu were talking about and after the events of the last few days nothing will surprise me with the clowns

the rumpo kid · Mar 23, 2013

or could the football league deem sisu unfit to run a football club and take action of there own ?

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

the rumpo kid said:
or could the football league deem sisu unfit to run a football club and take action of there own ?

They can't force them out and other than not paying rent there are no other creditors are there?

Delboycov · Mar 23, 2013

Very possible and also very worrying if true...

oldskyblue58 · Mar 23, 2013

I think one problem is that the whole thing centres on the avoidance of paying a legal contractual debt. If the FL are party to that they could also be held liable if it all went wrong. That is not be held liable to £1.4 but to 42 years x 1.3m (...... the club hasnt assets to pay it). Would they take that risk.

I think all the FL have really said so far is we need to fulfill the fixtures this season however that is done, in order to keep the integrity of the competition. The League as yet have not carried out detailed financial investigation in to CCFC and would have needed to (they said friday they were going to not that they had) so in my opinion the scenario you put is unlikely

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
I think one problem is that the whole thing centres on the avoidance of paying a legal contractual debt. If the FL are party to that they could also be held liable if it all went wrong. That is not be held liable to £1.4 but to 42 years x 1.3m (...... the club hasnt assets to pay it). Would they take that risk.

I think all the FL have really said so far is we need to fulfill the fixtures this season however that is done, in order to keep the integrity of the competition. The League as yet have not carried out detailed financial investigation in to CCFC and would have needed to (they said friday they were going to not that they had) so in my opinion the scenario you put is unlikely

I am sure it is unlikely bit why do you think they have made this grandstand move out?

If the league share has not been moved with agreement then they are done for aren't they?

Wm65 · Mar 23, 2013

Regular reader but new poster- someone told me yesterday that Northampton will be using the ricoh for 10 Heineken cup games next season , no idea if true but he is connected in that area, would acl be looking at other ground users?

oldskyblue58 · Mar 23, 2013

I dont know Grendel ....... makes no sense to me. If they stayed then they pay £10k per game in matchday expenses and get the possibility of more than enough income to cover it ..... they go elsewhere and they have to rent a ground, lose matchday incomes they do have and have additional costs like having to bus fans to the new venue. Seems strange. ACL have said they can use the stadium but seems SISU owned CCFC wants to cut all ties with the Ricoh as soon as possible.

edit If the share hasnt been moved then that is going to be a huge problem ...... makes SISU as owners untenable..... if the club survives at all (i doubt league etc would want that to be the result though and things would happen to get the club through )

rupert_bear · Mar 23, 2013

Wm65 said:
Regular reader but new poster- someone told me yesterday that Northampton will be using the ricoh for 10 Heineken cup games next season , no idea if true but he is connected in that area, would acl be looking at other ground users?

I believe Rugby Union will be part and parcel of events at the Ricoh in the future and have said this on here a few times. Northampton sell out their home games most weeks 16000 capacity i believe. I wouldn't rule it out.

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

Wm65 said:
Regular reader but new poster- someone told me yesterday that Northampton will be using the ricoh for 10 Heineken cup games next season , no idea if true but he is connected in that area, would acl be looking at other ground users?

Cue MMM.....,,

Jack Griffin · Mar 23, 2013

Worrying times, but the reality of the club being owned by a hedge fund is beginning to become clear now.

I think the league rules are clear on moving ground and ownership of the golden share having to be notified to them, so as I said in another thread, they presumably were notified and gave permission.

13.6 Each Club shall register its ground with the Executive and no Club shall remove to another ground without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

rupert_bear said:
I believe Rugby Union will be part and parcel of events at the Ricoh in the future and have said this on here a few times. Northampton sell out their home games most weeks 16000 capacity i believe. I wouldn't rule it out.

They play some games at MK Dons. I know some corporate supporters. They were less than enthusiastic. ACL would be really covering themselves in glory. Helped kill the football club, help threaten the local rugby club. Watch out they'll be sticking an ice rink in soon and looking for takers.

skyblusam · Mar 23, 2013

Grendel said:
I am not into conspiracy theories but the clubs withdrawal of assets appears to me a worrying development.

So is this possible;

Sisu advise the football league they have no risk of insolvency bit have a dispute over rent payments which they cannot resolve. They wish to transfer club assets back to the holding company leaving the tenancy agreement in CCFC ltd.

To fulfil fixtures they then arrange an alternate ground to fulfil fixtures.

Fpptball league agree to this only if all ties with the Ricoh are actually severed immediately.

So the clubs departs and trades solvent my elsewhere until
Holding company agree to a new rental structure with the landlord.

Is the fixture next week moved to Friday as someone is playing at the ground Saturday?

This is pure conjecture but the moving out seems very strange.

Good post this as a lot of what your saying is very true. Moving out makes no sense to me at all theres no reason to do it. Even acl have said we can stay there. This is getting more weird day by day. We just need to be told the truth

dgm · Mar 23, 2013

Wm65 said:
Regular reader but new poster- someone told me yesterday that Northampton will be using the ricoh for 10 Heineken cup games next season , no idea if true but he is connected in that area, would acl be looking at other ground users?[/ QUOTE]
They don't have 10 h cup games a season let alone 10 at home so can't see that being true (3 group games 2 knock out rounds then a final)

Big_Ben · Mar 23, 2013

rupert_bear said:
I believe Rugby Union will be part and parcel of events at the Ricoh in the future and have said this on here a few times. Northampton sell out their home games most weeks 16000 capacity i believe. I wouldn't rule it out.

But that assumes that Northampton home fans would be happy to make the journey to the Ricoh for games. The suggestion that City fans could go to Northampton to play out our home games this season has erupted into a whole pile saying that they would not travel.

RegisWinner · Mar 23, 2013

The SISU administrator would be liable for the rent. Hence the move?

Grendel · Mar 23, 2013

RegisWinner said:
The SISU administrator would be liable for the rent. Hence the move?

There is no money to pay the rent. No income, no capital so no rent.

oldskyblue58 · Mar 23, 2013

RegisWinner said:
The SISU administrator would be liable for the rent. Hence the move?

Thats my understanding and is very worrying because there is no income whatsoever to pay it and no prospect of paying it. Therefore the only action the administrator can take is to apply to the court to liquidate the company.

Thats a real big problem if the League share turns out to never have been properly transferred.

Jack Griffin · Mar 23, 2013

If the player contracts are now held with a different company were they recently notified or has the transition taken place slowly over the last few years without anyone noticing?

Likewise for the other club employees. I'm surprised there wasn't a leak considering there are quite a few of them.

LarryGrayson · Mar 23, 2013

two companys with similar names i wudnt care who i was singing for if i was singing a contract so wudnt even notice if it was ccfc or ccfc holdings

oldskyblue58 · Mar 23, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
If the player contracts are now held with a different company were they recently notified or has the transition taken place slowly over the last few years without anyone noticing?

Likewise for the other club employees. I'm surprised there wasn't a leak considering there are quite a few of them.

Trouble I have is that it is implied by the CCFC statements that CCFCH has been the employer for some time..... if that has always been the case then the directors and auditors could have made false statements on the accounts to Company House, HMRC and anyone who has used the accounts..... surely that cant be the case can it. So we are left with time since 19/06/12 when last accounts signed off (it cant be since 31/05/11 because transferring the trade in material to understanding the accounts and should have been disclosed in the auditors report or company accounts). It has been CCFC ltd not CCFC H Limited that have been in discussion with ACL about rent and F&B's (- If ccfch didnt have the lease then that company has no relevance to the discussion). Discussions ceased 29/01/13 so in theory the changes cant have happened before then or the discussions were spurious and not held in good faith by CCFC/TF /SISU. So that looks like the changes only happened since 30/01/13 and the purpose of that was? Was the league share transferred since then? Does the debt predate those transfer and does that mean a transfer of trade/shsre etc prejudices the rights of creditors under the Companies Acts ?

All points to a recent restructure for the purpose of insolvency management to me

just an opinion

Jack Griffin · Mar 23, 2013

Yeah, what I think too. I don't think the courts will look favourably on recent restructuring.

I think it dates no further back than some fairly recent statements by TF about CCFC talking with Football League. Wasn't that about the same time as discussions stopped.. I think that break signalled a change of tactics.

Danceswithhorses · Mar 23, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
All points to a recent restructure for the purpose of insolvency management to me

just an opinion

and therefore illegal ?

Is this at all possible? (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

New Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Jack Griffin

Guest

Member

CCFC Finance Director

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency