SCG Teleconference with Tim Fisher tonight (1 Viewer)

torchomatic · Feb 20, 2013

I think there were quite a few that did. I remember there was a whole thread on it called "a call to action" or something similar, but you're probably right, wouldn't have made any difference.

As I said though it's a shame that the sale was vetoed as the club wouldn't have gone through the mire this season like it has. My point all along is that both sides are being stubborn not just the Club/SISU.

sky blue john said:
I don't know if anyone on here sent letters but i would hardly think even if they had is likely to have made a difference !!!

dongonzalos · Feb 20, 2013

Grendel said:
I think you'll find that's the rebate from rates not rent - subtle difference - carry on though.

That's the first time I have seen you acknowledge the word rebate.

Yes it seems it is in rates.

So 150k a year off their business rates that they were not getting before and have no right to expect.

Seems fair for ACL to make reference to that.

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

dongonzalos said:
That's the first time I have seen you acknowledge the word rebate.

Yes it seems it is in rates.

So 150k a year off their business rates that they were not getting before and have no right to expect.

Seems fair for ACL to make reference to that.

Ha ha! Never said there wasn't a rebate bit that the rent was £400,000. You were fooled into making a thread saying the rent is £150,000. It's £400,000 plus £250,000 match day costs plus £1.3!million outstanding which now equates to 3 years of the new rentable value.

Sounds like a bargain.

olderskyblue · Feb 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
Such a shame that the Council put the brakes on the purchase of the Higgs' slice. I wonder why they did that and what they were hoping to achieve. Still, I'm sure the letters from our fellow forum members helped them make up their mind. Seems like this could have been sorted a while ago.

Didn't the council want a business plan from SISU which included development of the surrounding area etc, which never came? Or is my memory playing tricks....again..

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

dongonzalos said:
That's the first time I have seen you acknowledge the word rebate.

Yes it seems it is in rates.

So 150k a year off their business rates that they were not getting before and have no right to expect.

Seems fair for ACL to make reference to that.

Not if the current rates are too high though? What if the rate rebate only means the club are paying what they should have been all along?

ashbyjan · Feb 20, 2013

Grendel the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent. Mr Fisher said last night that the rent etc had been agreed upon and his three sticking points were 1 more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2 ACLs financial stability and 3 the length of the deal.

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

Reading between the lines, my opinion is that this current council just don't want to sell to SISU full stop.

ACL as a commercial business is failing (i'm sure most would agree with that) - with or without the rent we own them. Some may not agree with that last bit, but they've still had about £800k from the club this year in income, including the escrow.

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Grendel the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent. Mr Fisher said last night that the rent etc had been agreed upon and his three sticking points were 1 more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2 ACLs financial stability and 3 the length of the deal.

Jans spot on there - and that bit about the length of the deal is also very important. One of the reasons this has come to ahead is that there are no break clauses in the current lease, meaning we're over a barrell for 49 years - unless we do something drastic to force the issue, like, oh i dunno, not pay the rent?

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Grendel the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent. Mr Fisher said last night that the rent etc had been agreed upon and his three sticking points were 1 more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2 ACLs financial stability and 3 the length of the deal.

I don't actually disagree as the rate rebate effectively negated the match day costs along with the unspecified percentage of food revenues

Some posters have been saying the rent is £150,000 which it is not.

TheSnoz · Feb 20, 2013

Call me stupid, but if CCFC have paid about £800,000 to play at the Ricoh this year - according to King Harvest - (wherever the money has come from) - isn't that just a tiny bit over the top for a THIRD DIVISION club?

Bennets Afro · Feb 20, 2013

If the rent is 150k plus 10k matchday costs say 24 x 10k = £390k

I'm guessing sisu want £150k all in which is less then the costs of putting a match on there

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

Bennets Afro said:
If the rent is 150k plus 10k matchday costs say 24 x 10k = £390k

I'm guessing sisu want £150k all in which is less then the costs of putting a match on there

The rent is £400k the rent rebate reduced match day costs to £150,000 which them is further offset by food revenues.

skybluesam66 · Feb 20, 2013

sisu are happy to pay the 400k , so long as they get the revenue which is only there because there is a football match on

ie catering and car parking etc

if we were kicked out of the ricoh - that 400k would turn into 0 for acl
Further in then may make it less of an attractive venue eg for the casino - so they also need to be careful not to bite the hand that feeds them

Godiva · Feb 20, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Grendel the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent. Mr Fisher said last night that the rent etc had been agreed upon and his three sticking points were 1 more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2 ACLs financial stability and 3 the length of the deal.

No mentioning of the arrears? Are the club happy to accept the ACL demand?

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

TheSnoz said:
Call me stupid, but if CCFC have paid about £800,000 to play at the Ricoh this year - according to King Harvest - (wherever the money has come from) - isn't that just a tiny bit over the top for a THIRD DIVISION club?

Well thats just my adding up. £500k in the escrow which ACL have taken out, and £10k per home game of which there have been 23, so £230k. Thats £730k. Plus some extras maybe to bump it up?

PWKH · Feb 20, 2013

Kingharvest wrote that it had been said by Fisher that the Council had vetoed the sale of the shares in ACL owned by the Charity to Sisu. If he has reported this accurately it is a completely untrue statement by Fisher.

As Clerk to the Trustees I handle all the documents between the Charity and any other party on every matter. There was indeed an agreed heads of terms between Sisu and the Charity signed in June of last year. Since writing and signing it Sisu has made absolutely no contact with the Charity. The City Council has not used the veto to stop any deal at any time. Any statement to the contrary is misleading and mischievous.

Fisher has made a large number of statements over recent days which can be taken up by others. When something false is said about the Charity it will be dealt with through this and other means, the Charity reserves all its rights.

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

Bennets Afro said:
If the rent is 150k plus 10k matchday costs say 24 x 10k = £390k

I'm guessing sisu want £150k all in which is less then the costs of putting a match on there

Not according to Tim Fisher. SISU are happy with £400k rent per year.

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

PWKH said:
Kingharvest wrote that it had been said by Fisher that the Council had vetoed the sale of the shares in ACL owned by the Charity to Sisu. If he has reported this accurately it is a completely untrue statement by Fisher.

As Clerk to the Trustees I handle all the documents between the Charity and any other party on every matter. There was indeed an agreed heads of terms between Sisu and the Charity signed in June of last year. Since writing and signing it Sisu has made absolutely no contact with the Charity. The City Council has not used the veto to stop any deal at any time. Any statement to the contrary is misleading and mischievous.

Fisher has made a large number of statements over recent days which can be taken up by others. When something false is said about the Charity it will be dealt with through this and other means, the Charity reserves all its rights.

Its definitely accurately reported, Jan can confirm that as well as he was in the teleconference.

Godiva · Feb 20, 2013

PWKH said:
Kingharvest wrote that it had been said by Fisher that the Council had vetoed the sale of the shares in ACL owned by the Charity to Sisu. If he has reported this accurately it is a completely untrue statement by Fisher.

As Clerk to the Trustees I handle all the documents between the Charity and any other party on every matter. There was indeed an agreed heads of terms between Sisu and the Charity signed in June of last year. Since writing and signing it Sisu has made absolutely no contact with the Charity. The City Council has not used the veto to stop any deal at any time. Any statement to the contrary is misleading and mischievous.

Fisher has made a large number of statements over recent days which can be taken up by others. When something false is said about the Charity it will be dealt with through this and other means, the Charity reserves all its rights.

Thank you for that statement.

As a stakeholder in ACL would Higgs support mediation or arbitration to settle the conflict?

MichaelCCFC · Feb 20, 2013

Kingharvest - thanks for the post and publicising the info from the SCG. Until fairly recently I didn't know the SCG existed and i suspect most fans have never heard of it. Do you have a website? Is there a list of people who attend? Jan doesn't hide his identity so could others on the SCG also be open about who they are?

torchomatic said:
I think there were quite a few that did. I remember there was a whole thread on it called "a call to action" or something similar, but you're probably right, wouldn't have made any difference.

As I said though it's a shame that the sale was vetoed as the club wouldn't have gone through the mire this season like it has. My point all along is that both sides are being stubborn not just the Club/SISU.

Out of interest, has anyone on here ever suggested an epetition. It's very easy to do - maybe something like calling on acl-sisu to agree to binding arbitration?

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

We're working with Dan Walker at the club to publicise the SCG a bit more. Including an update of the SCG page on the CCFC site, which should also include profiles of those people on the group.

Just another point on the rate reduction - this isn't an ACL "gift". The club pursued that themselves through a re-appraisal with valuation office. So that reduction has nothing to do with ACL. Current rates are £198k, but according to them this should be reduced to circa £30k.

So the £400k, minus the unconfirmed and confusing £100k F&B, and the £170k = £130k 'rent'.

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

kingharvest said:
We're working with Dan Walker at the club to publicise the SCG a bit more. Including an update of the SCG page on the CCFC site, which should also include profiles of those people on the group.

Just another point on the rate reduction - this isn't an ACL "gift". The club pursued that themselves through a re-appraisal with valuation office. So that reduction has nothing to do with ACL. Current rates are £198k, but according to them this should be reduced to circa £30k.

So the £400k, minus the unconfirmed and confusing £100k F&B, and the £170k = £130k 'rent'.

So they have been overcharging anyway. Brilliant.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 20, 2013

I would like to see Fisher asked the following:

If, as he asserts in his radio interview, the person who agreed the current rent structure 'needed his head looking at'; what does this say about SISU's Due Diligence, as they become ultimately responsible for the contracts and obligations of the previous administration when they took over the club?

Why, again in the same interview, did he talk about the influence of FFP in such immediate terms, when it was agreed in 2009, and it's terms known some time ago? was there no scenario-planning in place to cover off relegation?

Did he agree Heads of Terms with ACL, only to latterly renege upon such a verbal agreement, and does he agree that this will have a negative influence upon a trustworthy relationship?

He states he is still to have sight of certain revenue streams; but can be confirm or deny ACL's claim they they have offered to go 'open book'? If so, on what basis?

Who instigated the legal letters that prevented the minutes of recent meetings becoming public, as ACL claimed on the radio that they had a desire for them to be so?

Does he regret and/or retract his recent claim on the radio that ACL had 'gone bust' - as this is clearly not the case - and again, can he understand why such a clam would have a deleterious effect on negotiations moving forward?

At what point did SISU first cite the idea of independent arbitration, with a part such as Deloitte's?

PWKH · Feb 20, 2013

Godiva said:
Thank you for that statement.

As a stakeholder in ACL would Higgs support mediation or arbitration to settle the conflict?

It is not for the shareholders to interfere in the running of a company in which they hold shares. All they can do is appoint directors to try to make the company as successful as possible. The shareholder's remedies are either to remove the directors or to sell their shares if they feel it is not going the way they want.

skybluehugh · Feb 20, 2013

kingharvest said:
The SCG held a teleconference with Tim Fisher this evening, with the discussion summarised as follows:

• TF updated us on the current situation regarding the rent dispute - SISU remain totally committed to doing a deal.

• The sticking point is not the rent itself, which was agreed at the well-publicised £400k - However the access to revenues hasn't been agreed

• ACL are reluctant to provide the numbers on food and beverage - SISU need to understand these numbers in order for things to progress

• There is also a disagreement about the length of the lease - it currently stands at 49 years with no break clauses. CCFC would clearly be much more comfortable with break clauses in the lease going forward

• TF has requested mediation, but has heard nothing back as yet from the Council/ACL

• TF advised that figures quoted by the Council/ACL (net rent £150k) are misleading

• TF advised that current business rates are also extremely excessive

• TF welcomes the offer of rent at £400k, but stressed the importance of gaining access to Food and Beverage Revenue which is essential to arrive at workable salary cap, given Financial Fair Play rules

• ACL/Council have exercised a statutory demand and frozen the clubs accounts - This puts the club under enormous pressure and risk which they are managing

• They have put in place structures to pay salaries and PAYE, but clearly it is not a good place to be

• The council say it isn’t a winding up order it’s only a 3rd party debt order, but it puts the club under significant strain

• Moving onto the rumours of a new stadium, this is only 1 option of many that been initially explored - However, and TF was quite clear on this, the club do not want to leave the Ricoh. But they need to do a deal that suits both parties

• In addition, a new stadium is something that takes years to sort out so it’s not something the fans need to even really consider right now

• With regard to purchasing half the stadium – Heads of Terms were agreed with the Higgs Trust but the Council vetoed the deal

• Recruitment of a new manager – 36 quality CVs received, and aiming to filter to shortlist of 4 or 5 this week, with final stage interviews and negotiations happening early next week

• TF re-stated Sisu’s determination and commitment to secure a sustainable future for CCFC, whilst stressing the gravity of the current situation and the need for a resolution.
He asked the fans to continue to get behind the team and to try not to let everything else distract from what could still be a really successful season

Yet another mouth piece for our wonderful owners. If fisher knew how to tell the truth we wouldn't be in this mess

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
I would like to see Fisher asked the following:

If, as he asserts in his radio interview, the person who agreed the current rent structure 'needed his head looking at'; what does this say about SISU's Due Diligence, as they become ultimately responsible for the contracts and obligations of the previous administration when they took over the club?

Why, again in the same interview, did he talk about the influence of FFP in such immediate terms, when it was agreed 2009, and it's terms, known some time ago? was there no scenario-planning in place to cover off relegation?

Did he agree Heads of Terms with ACL, only to latterly renege upon such a verbal agreement, and does he agree that this will have a negative influence upon a trustworthy relationship?

He states he is still to have sight of certain revenue streams; but can be confirm or deny ACL's claim they they have offered to go 'open book'? If so, on what basis?

Who instigated the legal letters that prevented the minutes of recent meetings becoming public, as ACL claimed on the radio that they had a desire for them to be so?

Does he regret and/or retract his recent claim on the radio that ACL had 'gone bust' - as this is clearly not the case - and again, can he understand why such a clam would have a deleterious effect on negotiations moving forward?

At what point did SISU first cite the idea of independent arbitration, with a part such as Deloitte's?

Ah the classic backtrack and delving into the past to avoid the present.

So despite the best efforts of spin the council rent is £400,000 the so called rebate has been forced on the council and the food and beverage sales is an undisclosed percentage.

He answered the due difence question - he was not there.

The club have agreed the rent it is other elements they haven't.

Thought you might come on here throwing brick bats in a bid to disguise the fact that the official statement by ACL regarding the revised offer is about as accurate as fisher claiming the club paid £800,000 in rent last season. Both strictly true but open to mis interpretation.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 20, 2013

Grendel said:
He answered the due difence question - he was not there.

SISU's solicitors were. Or do you think Ray ranson completed Due Diligence as well :facepalm:

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

skybluehugh said:
Yet another mouth piece for our wonderful owners. If fisher knew how to tell the truth we wouldn't be in this mess

Ha ha nice try. Yeah everyone who says something to challenge ACL are sisu plants aren't they? This piece of work by king harvest has answered a lot of questions and is welcomed by all true supporters I'm sure.

Grendel · Feb 20, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
SISU's solicitors were. Or do you think Ray ranson completed Due Diligence as well :facepalm:

It's irrelevant. What is achieved by it? The rent is clearly high even ACL have lowered it.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 20, 2013

Grendel said:
Ah the classic backtrack and delving into the past to avoid the present.

So despite the best efforts of spin the council rent is £400,000 the so called rebate has been forced on the council and the food and beverage sales is an undisclosed percentage.

He answered the due defense question - he was not there.

The club have agreed the rent it is other elements they haven't.

Thought you might come on here throwing brick bats in a bid to disguise the fact that the official statement by ACL regarding the revised offer is about as accurate as fisher claiming the club paid £800,000 in rent last season. Both strictly true but open to mis interpretation.

5 of the points I raise are about the current situation - so don't dismiss them as history.

The other two have a bearing upon SISU's credibility; so they are relevant. That's how businesses and finance work. It's all about credibility. For you and I, it about credit ratings. You fail to pay your bills, and you're not trusted again. In business it's the same - you look at filed accounts, credit ratings and contractual integrity of business partners. The past cannot be shaken off as easily as you might wish - just because it suits!

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

Good questions MMM. If he's at the meeting next week i'll put them to him.

I would guess that although their due diligence wasn't quite as diligent as it could have been, they probably didn't think re-negotiating a deal would be so diffficult. It still begs the question why wait this long to do it though.

I can't answer anything else you've asked, he was clear that he didn't have the detail behind the revenue streams.

The gone bust thing is a weird one isn't it. I meant to bring that up last night but we ran out of time and there was alot to get through. I wonder whether it was an implied statement, as in, they were no longer viable. His choice of words is so volatile though.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 20, 2013

Grendel said:
It's irrelevant. What is achieved by it? The rent is clearly high even ACL have lowered it.

Who authorised a contract is irrelevant - priceless!

Why bother? Why sign mortgage, life assurance or pension? Just pay in what you like, and the other party will pay out what they like. Contracts and Due Diligence irrelevant?!?

Even for you that's priceless......

kingharvest · Feb 20, 2013

skybluehugh said:
Yet another mouth piece for our wonderful owners. If fisher knew how to tell the truth we wouldn't be in this mess

Look - i'm only reporting what happened in the teleconference. Isn't it a good thing that it gets out? I thought people wanted more communication?

torchomatic · Feb 20, 2013

Ah communication. That's when it's not forthcoming people moan and when it happens it's dismissed as spin or lies.

kingharvest said:
Look - i'm only reporting what happened in the teleconference. Isn't it a good thing that it gets out? I thought people wanted more communication?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 20, 2013

And one final one, Grendel, history - though you're happy to bury it - is often a fine litmus-test for future events, queue reference to the London Evening Standard dated 24 October 2007 at the point in time SISU were looking at buying Southampton (having already been laughed out of court at Manchester City, Aston Villa and Derby). Any of this appear familiar behaviour?:

Sisu keeps a determinedly low profile but was catapulted into the limelight two years ago when its chief executive Joy Seppala, a 46-year-old Finnish-American, was accused of lying in a High Court wrangle over bust electricity company TXU. Seppala who is described by rivals as having "balls of steel", was criticised by the trial judge over her "distorted recollection of events" and for being "prone to exaggerate".

:thinking about:

SCG Teleconference with Tim Fisher tonight (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency