Ian1779
Well-Known Member
They are accountable for plenty of this mess as I have said previously. The difference is I don't hold them to blame exclusively.
It seems to me that with you its everyone else's fault you never accuse or hold Sisu accountable for anything ?
Don't think you can make quite as direct a comparison - but I get the point.
Am I right in saying that the FL refused a groundshare at the Butts? What was the reasoning behind that, as that's in Cov?
Might have made this all a bit easier.
They are accountable for plenty of this mess as I have said previously. The difference is I don't hold them to blame exclusively.
Doesn't ring true when your trying to play down that they have threatened to liquidate the club !!
So where is the quote that says ' we are threatening to liquidate the club'?
Its common knowledge that TF reported it to the CET.
And also if i'm not mistaken Joy has threatened it during a meeting or two with Acl, CCC.
So i hardly think its a one off ill advised blunder !!
Do a search in the CET.
Its common knowledge that TF reported it to the CET.
And also if i'm not mistaken Joy has threatened it during a meeting or two with Acl, CCC.
So i hardly think its a one off ill advised blunder !!
Do a search in the CET.
I don't know why, but I'm thinking 'Hunt for Red October'?
(Coming soon, the sequel, 'Hunt for the Golden Share').
With regard to the mention of liquidation, it wasn't a "poorly chosen phrase", it was a direct threat posed by Fisher and SISU in the press and also in meetings when the roadmap was proposed. I'd agree though that I can't see the logic of liquidating something that you can sell, even if not for very much. (I appreciate others differ - the point being, I think, that liquidation shows how ruthless you are to other businesses that you might have to deal with in the future).
As for the suggestion here that ACL have somehow double-charged for the £590k, I think OSB has nailed that. The £590k doesn't relate directly to the rent, or the escrow, and it hasn't yet been paid by anybody.
How do rumours like this start, I wonder, and who are they designed to benefit...
I have - i can see it mentioned, but no actual direct quote that says - 'we are going to liquidate club'
so my question would be ........... considering every tom dick and harry knew about the Escrow and the guarantees given by GR/MM why didn't the administrator know and account for it? Especially when the accounts for all the group companies mention the Escrow account
GR and MM didn't pay the rent though if they paid anything it was to top up the Escrow account. It might seem like playing with words but you have to look at the legal contracts in place. GR & MM had no legal liability to pay the rent. They were guarantors to the rental deposit Escrow account.
Does your friend know how much was actually paid by GR or MM?
So where is the quote that says ' we are threatening to liquidate the club'?
So where is the quote that says ' we are threatening to liquidate the club'?
As for it being mentioned in meetings, I wouldn't know, I wasn't present.
It's funny how people put absolute faith in comments made in meetings ( were these coments actually minuted?) and then don't seem that bothered that no one thought to minute a meeting where £14m was spent bailing out ACL.
Tim said "We are at a tipping point and insolvent liquidation cannot be reasonably avoided."
That was March last year and is taken from the Guardian.
Http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/mar/11/coventry-city-admimistration-ricoh-arena
So how is that a threat of 'we are going to liquidate the club'?
Describing the possible consequences is very different to threatening to do it yourself.
Lol still trying to ignore it !!
So how is that a threat of 'we are going to liquidate the club'?
Describing the possible consequences is very different to threatening to do it yourself.
Come off it - who do you think was threatening liquidate the club when he made this statement?
I'm sorry but describing something that could occur as a result of the club's poor financial health is not the same as saying you will do it yourself.
I'm sorry but describing something that could occur as a result of the club's poor financial health is not the same as saying you will do it yourself.
I'm sorry but describing something that could occur as a result of the club's poor financial health is not the same as saying you will do it yourself.
From what i am led to believe, as the CVA was rejected, ACL were entitled to no money.
The deal with the FL was to compensate for the missing rent arrears so ACL were not out of pocket as part of receiving the Golden Share.
If the said rent arrears had already been settled by Robinson, whether that is partially or in full, then it has been settled and no money is outstanding to ACL. So why tell the FA that it is still owed and why chase the club for a debt that has already been paid???
Come off it - who do you think was threatening liquidate the club when he made this statement?
I'm sorry too Ian, because you're kidding yourself here. It's not hearsay, and it's not an external agent; SISU threaten to pull the plug in the roadmap meetings, Fisher threatens insolvent liquidation in the press. No other party here is threatening to liquidate the club, or indeed even has the power to do so at that point in time.
Even the owners don't have to liquidate (or threaten it), there are a range of other options available to them - re-negotiate in good faith or sell up, being the most obvious ones.
It's a threat to liquidate, and it comes from SISU - there's really no other way to read it.
So you don't believe a single word Fisher says normally - but this one, you're all into it to the letter.
My point is that there was no direct statement - saying 'we will liquidate club' - it was said foolishly in my opinion, in some way to provoke a reaction from the other parties involved.
For everyone to then jump on it like it was gospel is merely scaremongering.
That's a false argument. I listen to what Fisher says, and then pull it apart if it doesn't stand up (e.g. funding the new stadium).
This was a direct statement by the only party here capable of liquidating the club, SISU. They're not saying someone else might liquidate the club, as you implied, they were threatening to pull the plug. For anyone associated with the club to ignore it, particularly (say) a major creditor, would be ludicrous.
How is it a false argument? I agree with you that the argument for a new stadium doesn't really stand up - but I would apply the same logic to the idea that they will consciously liquidate a club. They have virtually no assets. The golden share would not be counted in the calculations, so it is an unlikely event as a new stadium IMO.
To Grendel & Ian.
I didn't believe fisher & co when he said CCFC was moving to sixfields !!!
You don't believe him when he says he's going to build a new stadium - but you do believe when he says he's going to liquidate the club.
I guess it depends which one suits your argument.
It's a false argument as duffer can't argue the point. He's boxed himself into a corner and will get out of it by eventually patronising you and dismissing your posts as irrelevant.
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?