they are the people who own the debt of Ccfc
they are the people who own the debt of Ccfc
And its one andonly tangible asset.
they are the people who own the debt of Ccfc
Now you see Arvo own the debt, and I'm thinking it's actually not them under admin. It's coventry City FC limited. I'm not sure what their real situation is.
A non operating subsidiary will generally just exist for balance sheet movements but not trade.
I presume that the holding company is non-trading/non-operational, as that is the umbrella for the various active companies - all under the CCFC umbrella. There has to be one entity as the umbrella entity, which does not in itself have to trade - I guess that it is this entity which has been placed into admin.
The consequence is likely to be the points pentalty.
But if the company doesn't trade, it doesn't have any agreements with ACL. So whats the point?
The company that dealt with ACL then surely can't be classed as a non operating subsidiary?
However, in April 2009, the Football League set its own precedence when they ruled that Southampton Football Club should be deducted points after their Holdings Company collapsed. The League's logic at the time was that "the company (in administration) and the football club are inextricably linked as one economic entity". In a statement the League said of the Saints' financial position:
"The holding company has no income of its own; all revenue and expenditure is derived from the operation of Southampton Football Club and the associated stadium company. The holding company is solvent in its own right. It only becomes insolvent when account is taken of the position of Southampton football club and the other group companies."
On that occasion, it took the Football League a total of 23 days to reach a decision on Southampton's finances, sending in a team of forensic accountants to determine whether they should be deducted points, with Southampton claiming the two companies were operationally independent. The League ruled otherwise, and invoked the 10 point penalty. It would not be a great surprise if they have to tread down the same path again with the Sky Blues.
The clue is in the statement it says that CCFC Holdings is paying players etc....... that wasnt the case before.
CCFC limited own the lease and licence at the Ricoh ....... SISU have shifted everything including the trade out of that company in to CCFCH to leave CCFC only owning lease at the Ricoh. Then put CCFC Limited into administration. Broke the lease.
Is that likely to stand up in court?
The clue is in the statement it says that CCFC Holdings is paying players etc....... that wasnt the case before.
CCFC limited own the lease and licence at the Ricoh ....... SISU have shifted everything including the trade out of that company in to CCFCH to leave CCFC only owning lease at the Ricoh. Then put CCFC Limited into administration. Broke the lease.
If you are right - and that is a big if....then we really are leaving the Ricoh!
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?