A hiatus such as this is not beneficial to a football club obviously.
Unless you're suggesting there's a conspiracy where the courts are in league with SISU then yes, it probably is reasonable.
Unless you're suggesting there's a conspiracy where the courts are in league with SISU then yes, it probably is reasonable.
Unless you're suggesting there's a conspiracy where the courts are in league with SISU then yes, it probably is reasonable.
No offence, but you sound as though you have had a lot of dealings with administration and administrators in your time.
No offence but some people here seem to think all he had to do was stroll through the door, stick a For Sale sign up outside Ryton, and draw up an invoice.
No offence but some people here seem to think all he had to do was stroll through the door, stick a For Sale sign up outside Ryton, and draw up an invoice.
No offence but some people here seem to think all he had to do was stroll through the door, stick a For Sale sign up outside Ryton, and draw up an invoice.
Link don't work dongon.www.insol-europe.org/download/file/562[/url]
I guess SISU and Rubin and Partners have had to cross paths a lot working in the same field.
However they may not have even met this was a big conference.
ever wonder why they only want a three month deal ? ever wonder why for the future of the AEH they need more certainty than that? ever wonder why it is SISU put to one side an apparent £500k cost in their budgets? ever wonder why didnt plan to keep the academy safe at the AEH (could have paid the amount up front before they went in to admin for instance)? ever wonder whether they intended to leave the AEH in any case?
Yes, I have wondered and my take is that nobody knows where the club will be next season - even if there will be a club. I also take it that there are no more funding coming from sisu and haven't been for a while. No money, no means to pay anything upfront.
It would seem however that the club is not CCFC H because it doesnt own any membership of the FL, in which case the academy is not CCFCH in any case. Which means CCFC H can't actually operate as an FA academy. Like it or not when a company is in administration all involved rely on the letter of the law when dealing with each other ...... they have to in order to avoid further liability.
Southampton went into administration at the end of April
They had the same argument as us regarding two different companies with the same result. The FA said the 10 point deduction stands. The two companies were linked.
In a couple of weeks it was announced they were up for sale.
At that time the eventual buyer was not on the scene
Yet in the first week of July the deal was done.
So they were bought within 9 weeks. With the same dispute as ours.
I am just asking why we don't even know if we are up for sale or not. That has been 4 weeks now and some are saying we may or may not have the answer to that question in another 3 weeks?
Does this not seem a little strange to you?
The Southampton buyer had a lot of money, and the ground was included I think.
A little different to our position, Portsmouth's is a little closer to ours, and has taken over a year.
Link don't work dongon.
Personally i would say Southampton is far more similar to ours. Apart from you can't get the full arena.
Which makes it totally different to ours.
Our stadium and finances are totally different to Portsmouth.
In a way likelier to make it easier to buy or harder?
Okay I read all that and I think I understand it, but it still leaves me with the question where is the grant? If the Academy is in Ltd so should the grant be, SISU can't have moved that out of Ltd and if they have is that legal? I get the idea that they're paying for everything out of Holdings and will have taken the money out of Ltd to cover this, but have they spent all that money with no transfer fees or management fees?CCFC H was paying the contract held by CCFC Ltd for use of the AEH Trust facilities. What that means in accounting terms is that for every amount paid to AEH Trust then the debt owed by CCFCLtd to CCFCH is increased in equal amount.
CCFC H are paying on behalf of CCFC Ltd not instead of.
The administrator can not accept more debt and has no income with which to pay the bill. Therefore CCFC Ltd is in breach of the contract for facilities at AEH.
CCFC H has no contract what so ever with AEH. The fact that it made payments on behalf of CCFC Ltd does not create, indicate or prove any contract at all. What it has done over the years is to increase the amount that CCFC Ltd owe CCFC H
Unless there is a new contract acceptable to both sides then CCFC H can not use the AEH facilities
The thing about administrations is that the administrators and the company creditors revert to the legal basis of contract law, for their own protection..... it doesnt matter what might seem practical, or who in the past has paid the money over. The academy contract is between CCFC Ltd and AEH ...... there is no other academy contract
Okay I read all that and I think I understand it, but it still leaves me with the question where is the grant? If the Academy is in Ltd so should the grant be, SISU can't have moved that out of Ltd and if they have is that legal? I get the idea that they're paying for everything out of Holdings and will have taken the money out of Ltd to cover this, but have they spent all that money with no transfer fees or management fees?
the grant is made to the academy .... ccfc ltd owns that it would seem. Where CCFC banks that money is up to CCFC Ltd. It is a group situation so money that is due to CCFC but banked in to CCFC H would reduce the amount that CCFC Ltd owe to CCFC H.
As to whether they have spent the grant plus a sum equivalent to it on the academy we just do not have that information. You would have to assume that the FA monitor the spend to ensure it meets the grant conditions.
The F A have I believe stated that is where they believe the share to be. This is not binding in law.
But the assertion was binding enough for the league to dock us 10 points, if is not so, why did sisu withdraw the appeal, its tantamount to a smoking gun in most peoples view, but "There's none more blind than them who wont see"
There is one big stumbling block that the SISU apologists keep forgetting....SISU have already stated that they dropped a Boll**k by not moving the GS from CCFC ltd. to CCFC (Holdings)...and once again I state that looking for the money set aside for the Academy is highly unlikely to be found in any of the "Said Accounts"....Try looking in the off-shore Cayman Island account!"Allegedly"
@ Bluegloucester...
Thanks for that mate, getting pissed off by posters trying to make out I'm a liar.
@ Bluegloucester...
Thanks for that mate, getting pissed off by posters trying to make out I'm a liar.
@ Bluegloucester...
Thanks for that mate, getting pissed off by posters trying to make out I'm a liar.
You are a liar!!
They're not trying to make it out they are establishing concrete facts
You are a liar!!
They're not trying to make it out they are establishing concrete facts
Well that has buggard them has it not. As I understand it the FL share reverts with Admin. Just another thing Sisu have cocked up on!Sisu have stated that the FL share is in CCFC Ltd in their submission to the High Court applying for judicial review.
Is that like Grenduffy and his "Estimated Facts"?
Lets not forget your 'general understanding' fiasco.
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?