Look, the original mortgage ACL had at Yorkshire bank had some £15m left to be paid. The CCC bought that debt at some £14m. So now ACL owe CCC £14m-£15m.
Sisu have - to my knowledge - never said the mortgage was only at £5m - they have said the real value of the mortgage should be around £2m to £5m.
In other words - sisu claim ACL are mortgaged to the hilt and then some more.
You sound so pleased with this, do you know anyone in particular who is benefitting from the extortionate administration charges levied against said club?
I don't think anyone has yet explained the management fee's in detail.
But nobody seem to have any proof the fee's have ever been actually paid, but rather used as a tool to shift assets within the group.
The only thing that gives me any comfort in all this mess is the inevitable outcome: The club and ACL will ultimately be united under the same umbrella and for the first time in almost two decades will find itself on a solid financial foundation.
And it really doesn't matter whoever owns the umbrella.
Yes, me too.
But from what little has been said and printed it looks like all payments from FL to the club has been paid to holdings registered bank account. In addition all player contracts seems to be registered with holdings company registration number. Then there's the claim that the club have put in 'a note' with the FL register.
If that is the case, then FL may decide there's 'reasonable doubt' and that the club is actually ccfc holdings.
Then again, they could also decide the club is a combination of holdings and limited, but that could lead anywhere and the 'case' could run for quite some time.
Agreed to go forward this will have to happen. There will be some losers but ultimately the club will be better off for it.
Just so long as it isn't SISU.I don't think anyone has yet explained the management fee's in detail.
But nobody seem to have any proof the fee's have ever been actually paid, but rather used as a tool to shift assets within the group.
The only thing that gives me any comfort in all this mess is the inevitable outcome: The club and ACL will ultimately be united under the same umbrella and for the first time in almost two decades will find itself on a solid financial foundation.
And it really doesn't matter whoever owns the umbrella.
Yeah, if the charity is screwed so be it.
I don't think anyone has yet explained the management fee's in detail.
But nobody seem to have any proof the fee's have ever been actually paid, but rather used as a tool to shift assets within the group.
The only thing that gives me any comfort in all this mess is the inevitable outcome: The club and ACL will ultimately be united under the same umbrella and for the first time in almost two decades will find itself on a solid financial foundation.
And it really doesn't matter whoever owns the umbrella.
What wonderful spin, you dismiss the multi million pound charges out of hand { £60 million debt levied against the club is £60 million debt, no?} and follow that up with 'It doesn't matter which umbrella everything is held'......................very good, but if anyone believes that a hedge fund holding all the cards is good for any football club then they are verging on desperate !
You have to remember that Grendel doesn't appear to care about the Charity set up to help deprived Coventry children.Yeah, if the charity is screwed so be it.
I would object to the club taking money from a childrens charity.A curious question. If the club could get it for nothing who on earth would object?
Guess your morals don't extend to supporting charities, still I'm not surprised.
I'm sure the late Sir Higgs and his dad who left all his money to set this charity supporting underprivileged children in Coventry up would be delighted to know that Grendel proposes to deprive them of their money. This charity that built us somewhere very good where the academy could train and bailed our club out when we were looking likely to go into administration before, is the one you're talking about denying them their money. And you talk about people not supporting the club............!
:facepalm:
You have to remember that Grendel doesn't appear to care about the Charity set up to help deprived Coventry children.
Hilarious, how do you earn a living now the panto season is over?
Do you have a very short memory?Hilarious, how do you earn a living now the panto season is over?
Source: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/30568-Mediation-arbitration?p=434359&viewfull=1#post434359I am not as I have stated before employed by ACL, I work in a shop and live down south, the daily commute to the Ricoh would kill me. 2+ hours a day on Virgin Trains doesn't bear thinking about.All these ACL employees sticking together
Source: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/30568-Mediation-arbitration?p=434430&viewfull=1#post434430Nope but I have the day off!Shop shut for bank holiday is it?and it's sunny to boot.
How the hell do you sleep at night?....But, there you go, some have no morals, Grenduffy being one of them!
I actually meant to reply to Godiva.
He says he thinks the golden share is in holdings.
I wonder why the club dropped its battle against a 10 point deduction if the club were not in administration.
No I have a very good memory but tend to dump dull and irrelevant information to the archive section of my brain.
If someone pays the price they invested so be it. If not it is the failure to invest sensibly. That cannot be blamed on any purchaser and the longer they wait the greater the risk of the value diminishing further. The council could so their share at a low value which should help protect the charities share.
You have to remember that Grendel doesn't appear to care about the Charity set up to help deprived Coventry children.
Hang on a minute...if a charity actually has these vast sums of money - & if they were using it to benefit deprived kids in Coventry...is it wise to risk it's money by "investing" it the way it has? Or would it help more by spending it on those very children???
Hang on a minute...if a charity actually has these vast sums of money - & if they were using it to benefit deprived kids in Coventry...is it wise to risk it's money by "investing" it the way it has? Or would it help more by spending it on those very children???
Exactly if we were in the premier league would they sell at cost price? No and they shouldn't. Nature of speculative investment. Win some lose some.
No I have a very good memory but tend to dump dull and irrelevant information to the archive section of my brain.
Hang on a minute...if a charity actually has these vast sums of money - & if they were using it to benefit deprived kids in Coventry...is it wise to risk it's money by "investing" it the way it has? Or would it help more by spending it on those very children???
You're very much akin to a "Junkie" Grenduffy, you want you're "Fix" and don't mind who you hurt, or walk over, to get it!....much the same as SISU:thinking about:
Yes, me too.
But from what little has been said and printed it looks like all payments from FL to the club has been paid to holdings registered bank account. In addition all player contracts seems to be registered with holdings company registration number. Then there's the claim that the club have put in 'a note' with the FL register.
If that is the case, then FL may decide there's 'reasonable doubt' and that the club is actually ccfc holdings.
Then again, they could also decide the club is a combination of holdings and limited, but that could lead anywhere and the 'case' could run for quite some time.
Along with any facts that don't suit your argument
Are you talking to yourself again?
You have to remember that Grendel doesn't appear to care about the Charity set up to help deprived Coventry children.
It's not surprising that payments were made to Holdings and not Ltd. the last set of Sky Blue Sports and Leisure accounts that was filed (SBS&L are the parent company) was quite categorical. Ltd is described as having the purpose of running a professional football club, whilst Holdings is described as providing management services to Ltd. it's quite reasonable for part of those services to be collecting and making payments, managing contracts etc., so leaving Ltd to concentrate on running the club.
Exactly if we were in the premier league would they sell at cost price? No and they shouldn't. Nature of speculative investment. Win some lose some.
There is indeed no harm in asking. The purchase price paid by the Charity is well known: £6.5m. The formula within the Option Agreement is commercial in confidence, both parties, the AEHC and CCFC are bound by the Agreement not to disclose the detail. I don't think it would be out of order if I said that 75% of the price would be based on the original purchase price plus interest and the remaining 25% on the value of ACL. Further than that I cannot go.
Well when he asked that If the club could get the stadium for nothing who on earth would object, he obviously couldn't see that a charity and the Coventry Taxpayer would.Ooh, I have to say that is pretty desperate. They should have given the money to the "deprived" 8 years ago and not bothered with us. I hope all the people who work for Higgs do it for nothing. After all they wouldn't want to take food from the mouths of those kids, would they?
But. Seriously. That was a ridiculous statement to make.
See for yourself how much the charity cost to run, the accounts are here http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends67/0000509367_ac_20110405_e_c.pdf
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?