Pheonix Companies (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
- Start date
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
would guess that what will happen is that Otium buy CCFC Ltd. They already own CCFC H.
The Football League is persuaded to return the share but to CCFC H (SISU have all the football facilities etc there so FL will see it as the safest way to protect the "integrity of the competition").
CCFC Ltd non related creditors are paid in full (ie ACL, Higgs Charity and and any others), by doing that the creditors would find it hard to say in court they have been hard done by because of the deal.
CCFC Ltd is then liquidated because the only thing it has left is the lease. Liquidation breaks the lease.
TF will "finally listen to the fans" approach ACL to stay at the Ricoh, on a low rent on a long lease (99 years+) and access to all football related income (as a minimum). ACL wont like it but they will have to deal with CCFC.
Do CCFC have to own part of ACL to do this? - actually no.
The Football League is persuaded to return the share but to CCFC H (SISU have all the football facilities etc there so FL will see it as the safest way to protect the "integrity of the competition").
CCFC Ltd non related creditors are paid in full (ie ACL, Higgs Charity and and any others), by doing that the creditors would find it hard to say in court they have been hard done by because of the deal.
CCFC Ltd is then liquidated because the only thing it has left is the lease. Liquidation breaks the lease.
TF will "finally listen to the fans" approach ACL to stay at the Ricoh, on a low rent on a long lease (99 years+) and access to all football related income (as a minimum). ACL wont like it but they will have to deal with CCFC.
Do CCFC have to own part of ACL to do this? - actually no.
Last edited:
O
odysseus
Guest
I agree, this is the most likely outcome. At which point I believe SISU will then be open to offers...
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
can but hope they are odysseus but I am not entirely sure. Part of me still thinks they have bigger ambitions fuelled by their "success" in the administration process
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
no i don't think sisu want to sell us they want to bleed us dry !!!
All the debt will be now in Otium and they will be charging us interest of at least over 1 million a year which will not be sustainable !!!!
All the debt will be now in Otium and they will be charging us interest of at least over 1 million a year which will not be sustainable !!!!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Yes this is exactly what will happen. It was a staged administration and that was the one thing fisher gave away at the forums.
He will say after all the consultation they want to do the right thing and negotiate a new lease.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
It has been staged from last March when the ARVO charge was taken out Grendel ...... only thing that threw a spanner in the works was ACL changing the loan. The rest has been distraction along the planned road
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
would be interested to know what ARVO and TF have earned or will earn from this
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I can't wait for fisher standing Nero style at a Press conference saying "we have listened to the fans and they want to play in Coventry - only ACL am an prevent the supportes wishes from happening"
He'll keep a straight face as well.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Another thought is will TF get this through and then resign with Waggott becoming CEO?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
As a little side question-how does the liquidation of Ltd affect the right of Holdings to claim its history ie honours?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
You can just see it cant you, that smug look on his face, probably do it in front of the Ricoh before he goes in to meet ACL
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Guess they would argue the two companies were inextricably linked and the football side has been in CCFC H since 1907.............
................. now where have I heard that before ?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I suspect the league already have conceded that holdings are entitled to the share.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Waggott has no experience of running a business of this size or nature so would think it unlikely. To be honest if this wangling lands us with super cheap rent and revenue access then it's hard to argue against.
I can tolerate Fisher's smug arrogance if it means the club can prosper.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Share yes but that isn't what I'm on about.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Waggott was CEO at Charlton BSB
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/charlton_athletic/7372274.stm
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Had no idea! Why would Fisher leave after his latest triumph?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
because he will get a pay off and has lost credibility as a front man for a lot of the fans. The public image is important still
Waggott has in the mean time been kept in the background, is a football guy, doing stuff in the community with experience of running a club...............
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Good point. I found it odd when we supposedly appointed Paul Barber as a 'consultant' over the Ricoh issue and he very quickly went to become CEO at Brighton.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Would that be a bad outcome purely looking at it from our club?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
He's seemed more sane than many we've had come through the club in the last 10 years.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Holdings has been in existence since 1907 - jimmy hill era, promotions to the top flight, rebranding to the sky blues, fa cup win
Ltd has been in existence since 1995 - relegation from premier league, relegation from championship
I know which bit of history I would like to keep!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Holdings has been in existence since 1907 - jimmy hill era, promotions to the top flight, rebranding to the sky blues, fa cup win
Ltd has been in existence since 1995 - relegation from premier league, relegation from championship
I know which bit of history I would like to keep!
Do you think we could get our relegations reversed on that basis?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
It terms of hard finance no NW it isnt a bad result from purely the Club's point of view. If it happens. We might yet ground share etc and that makes no sense at all to me.
SISU seem in a position of power but they still have to show some compromise to get a workable deal.
The concerns I have is that I do not think I can trust the owners in what they say but more importantly what they do with the team. They have repeatedly proven poor at the football decisions. I simply have no faith in them getting it right on the pitch. Yes you could say get behind the team give the owners another chance but how many chances do they get. Simply do not trust TF and SISU. Trust takes years to build and seconds to destroy
So financially the scenario above makes sense yes but on a lot of other fronts for me and many other fans the owners remaining does not
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
This is where I differ. I consider the team secondary to the background, as if that's right and workable then the chances of team success increases anyway. My concern with SISU always was they weren't here to invest in the infrastructure, while others were banging on about what a good job they were doing by signing Fox, Dann, Eastwood I was banging on about this being a short term outlook.
Of course a scenario as you describe isn't 'investing' in the infrastructure as you or I know it, but if it were to play out that way I would, genuinely, find that the best thing SISU have done for the club.
It would also make us a more saleable asset too of course, so for those unhappy with them in charge would make it more likely they'd be leaving.
The day we got into bed with SISU was the day many were hailing us finally having some hard nosed businessmen in charge who wouldn't be a soft touch. This is the first time it's been directed somewhere other than at player negotiations.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Its Heart or Head argument really NW
Have always argued the club needs to be set up properly and viable above all. My head says in terms of the club(purely) they are doing the right things financially, cutting costs, putting in control etc
My Heart says I want them gone, I do not trust them or their motives. Not saying anyone else would be better. My heart says I can not trust them because of what has gone on since they took over.
It isnt logical I know but it is how I feel.
Bottom line is it is a football club .... I should be interested first and foremost in the team on the pitch..... I should be able trust the club custodians so I can enjoy unfettered the product on the pitch...... sadly this is not the case for far far too long
Have always argued the club needs to be set up properly and viable above all. My head says in terms of the club(purely) they are doing the right things financially, cutting costs, putting in control etc
My Heart says I want them gone, I do not trust them or their motives. Not saying anyone else would be better. My heart says I can not trust them because of what has gone on since they took over.
It isnt logical I know but it is how I feel.
Bottom line is it is a football club .... I should be interested first and foremost in the team on the pitch..... I should be able trust the club custodians so I can enjoy unfettered the product on the pitch...... sadly this is not the case for far far too long
Last edited:
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Both can apply though can't they? You can not trust their motives (I don't either, by the way) but be pleased if the club is actually restructured in a better way? If in some way their motives intersect with ours and deliver us a more financially viable club, they would have done what McGinnity, Robinson, Ranson and all failed to do.
And then success on the pitch might not (won't) happen next season, but it'd be more likely to happen long term, whoever was in charge.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
I agree 100% with that, the way they go about achieving their objectives is so unsavoury it makes me feel sick, even though I always knew that some pain had to be tolerated for a few years while the club made it to a fiscal break even point.
But I've been posting that was SISUs plan for ages.. in fact they even said it, TF actually said that CCFC Ltd wouldn't accept ACL's final offer as it did not leave the club in at break even finances, that is the point where SISU will consider a sale, because they can recover their money then by getting a better price, trouble is now they will be here for 5-10 years at a lowish level while they tap the club for £1.5M pa interest on their investment.
But they won't build a new stadium, because that extends the time to recover the money to more like 25-30 years. I wouldn't rule out them having planned to buy the Ricoh after 5-8 years of free tenancy..
Well that's what I think the predators' strategy is.
SkyBlueSwiss
New Member
Some people seem able to ignore the immorality of our owners, some quite actively, but some of us cannot accept owners that behave and deal in such a manner. Everyone to their own, but I cannot accept such owners.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
This is how they operate though, there are no surprises.
I suspect you were always against them, which is fine. What confuses me is the ones who are now upset at doing what they celebrated SISU as being capable of doing when they first came. Arguably they should have done this far earlier than now, as this is what they do.
The problem with 'morality' in such things is there are lines everywhere to be drawn, none of them 'right'. But I struggle to think of a moral alternative in those we heard of as interested. Alas, modern football is finance driven, so we probably have a choice of accepting that's the way it is full stop, or stepping away from football as a whole.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
In English football money is king. In German football common sense and fan satisfaction is king. I know what I'd rather have.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Well, yes and no, and obviously there are grey areas.
I'd agree with the general point though.
The question is, are we going to see this as a wake-up call to the ills of English football as a whole, or just demand the next 'investor' to come in, say the right things, pump some money in early on to get the fans onside, but demand a return?
I really hope MK Dons for one aren't inluded on the away only list of games, for example. Others will differ, but I think it sends out toally the wrong message to condone their existence while protesting ours.
Whats it to do with you? You're right up fishers backside.
