Simon Gilbert, has there been an FL response? (2 Viewers)

[Kingokings204]

Simon, what is your impression on the amount? Is it 90k, 290k or 590k owed?

Any response from FL also? I'm awaiting my response still.

Shouldn't to it just be paid and we move into the JR.

 

[No future with SISU]

We never will get back until ACL are bankrupt. The sooner the better.

ACL go bankrupt the lease reverts back to North Coventry Holdings ltd, how will that get us back to the Ricoh, you are talking rubbish as normal.

 

[fernandopartridge]

ACL go bankrupt the lease reverts back to North Coventry Holdings ltd, how will that get us back to the Ricoh, you are talking rubbish as normal.

North Coventry holdings are half of ACL.

 

[Godiva]

ACL go bankrupt the lease reverts back to North Coventry Holdings ltd, how will that get us back to the Ricoh, you are talking rubbish as normal.

I think it would revert to the council.

 

[Kingokings204]

I think it would revert to the council.

And they would lease it to the council? Ok then

 

[Nick]

And they would lease it to the council? Ok then

I think he means the lease would go back to them and would be open to lease out again?

 

[Kingokings204]

I think he means the lease would go back to them and would be open to lease out again?

Yes i know. I'm saying do you think the council would lease it out in any shape or form to sisu?

I doubt it from whats gone on. Ccfc left in limbo

 

[Grendel]

Yes i know. I'm saying do you think the council would lease it out in any shape or form to sisu?

I doubt it from whats gone on. Ccfc left in limbo

It would be placed in the hands of an administrator. I assume they would have to accept the best bid wouldn't they - being responsible to the taxpayer and all.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

I'd just like to point out I have never made tea for Alan Poole.

We have a hot drink vending machine

Is he a milk and sugar man?

He strikes me as a builder's tea type of chap rather than these poncy fruit teas.

 

[torchomatic]

No Evening?

You got the name wrong, only a 33.3% right which is good for you.

 

[Kingokings204]

It would be placed in the hands of an administrator. I assume they would have to accept the best bid wouldn't they - being responsible to the taxpayer and all.

Maybe ACL could appoint their own administrator?

Also wouldn't the council have the final say as they own the freehold?

 

[Godiva]

No Evening?

I think that was the one that was right and gave the 33.3% score.
But council and telegraph should have been with capital 'C' and 'T'.

Only guessing.

 

[blueflint]

It would be placed in the hands of an administrator. I assume they would have to accept the best bid wouldn't they - being responsible to the taxpayer and all.

why they only hold a lease they do not hold freehold council do so it would go back to them to do as they want with it

 

[lordsummerisle]

why they only hold a lease they do not hold freehold council do so it would go back to them to do as they want with it

Which is one of the key points of the JR.

CCC had received the £21million up front for the 50 year lease from ACL, at the time of the CCC loan to ACL it was generally valued(even by themselves) as worth less than the amount being loaned.

Think that the Sisu QC case was that ACL should have been allowed to go into admistration/liquidation and then appoint a new leaseholder, who would also pay them for that lease.

For value to taxpayers getting paid twice for the same lease would have to be considered pretty good I'd have thought.

 

[Sick Boy]

Lmfao !!
I am once lost for words !

Why do you even care about ACL?

 

[Warwickhunt]

The FL have said £590k needs to be paid for one thing.

MM & GR have paid £300k for something.

The argument is whether the one thing is the same as the something, or whether the something is for something else.

The Contract states that if the Football Club fails to pay its rent that MM & GR were garantours for £500k with effect of ACL calling it in
so they have negotiated with MM & GR a £300 k settlement so in effect they have written off £200k at a stroke So CCFC do not Owe
£590k only £90K which is with the football league awaiting a decision

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Which is one of the key points of the JR.

CCC had received the £21million up front for the 50 year lease from ACL, at the time of the CCC loan to ACL it was generally valued(even by themselves) as worth less than the amount being loaned.

Think that the Sisu QC case was that ACL should have been allowed to go into admistration/liquidation and then appoint a new leaseholder, who would also pay them for that lease.

For value to taxpayers getting paid twice for the same lease would have to be considered pretty good I'd have thought.

And 'Post of the Day' goes to....

WM

PS. Other than anything I've wrote.

 

[No future with SISU]

North Coventry holdings are half of ACL.

They own 50% of ACL and they own 100% of the company who had the stadium built and they are 100% owned by the council. They are a different company to ACL. The council must have been getting lessons of SISU.

 

[Kingokings204]

The Contract states that if the Football Club fails to pay its rent that MM & GR were garantours for £500k with effect of ACL calling it in
so they have negotiated with MM & GR a £300 k settlement so in effect they have written off £200k at a stroke So CCFC do not Owe
£590k only £90K which is with the football league awaiting a decision

That isn't correct I wouldn't of thought. I don't want to say your wrong but that sounds just too simple.

 

[shmmeee]

The Contract states that if the Football Club fails to pay its rent that MM & GR were garantours for £500k with effect of ACL calling it in
so they have negotiated with MM & GR a £300 k settlement so in effect they have written off £200k at a stroke So CCFC do not Owe
£590k only £90K which is with the football league awaiting a decision

The contract also states the club will keep the escrow account topped up.

Not sure anyone's following the contract here.

 

[PIPSQUEEK]

The contract also states the club will keep the escrow account topped up.

Not sure anyone's following the contract here.

Was just thinking that myself

 

[skyblueinBaku]

The Contract states that if the Football Club fails to pay its rent that MM & GR were garantours for £500k with effect of ACL calling it in
so they have negotiated with MM & GR a £300 k settlement so in effect they have written off £200k at a stroke So CCFC do not Owe
£590k only £90K which is with the football league awaiting a decision

Doesn't that assume that the £590K the FL requires to be paid is the rent that is owed? I didn't think that was necessarily the case. Did the FL actually say that it was rent money?

 

[Astute]

Why do you even care about ACL?

Why do you care about SISU because they don't give a fuck about our football club or us.

 

[Nick]

Why do you care about SISU because they don't give a fuck about our football club or us.

I don't think anybody does do they?

 

[Astute]

It will be good to see if the FL has balls. They told SISU that THEY had to pay 590k to get the golden share. They didn't say that 590k had to be paid. They kept the golden share.

But I can see them backing down as usual and letting our football club sink lower. They don't care as long as all fixtures are played.

 

[Astute]

I don't think anybody does do they?

Reading recent posts on here I doubt that very much.

 

[Nick]

Reading recent posts on here I doubt that very much.

Which ones?

 

[savosdad]

I wonder how long it will be before some of the Board resign along with FISCHER get out quick lads to miss all the flack

 

[Sick Boy]

Why do you care about SISU because they don't give a fuck about our football club or us.

I care about SISU as much as I care about ACL. Do you believe that ACL care about us and the club?

 

[Godiva]

I don't think anybody does do they?

Except me, of course!

 

[Astute]

I care about SISU as much as I care about ACL. Do you believe that ACL care about us and the club?

CCC built us a place to play. Yes the rent was set too high to start with. Anyone that don't get that bit will have an IQ of -1. But it had to happen that way because of the previous chairmen fucked up so much. There is no way that CCC could fund our club. But some seem to think they should have.

I agree that I can be seen as total anti SISU and on the side of ACL as I point out faults with what SISU are doing to our football club. You can be seen as anti ACL and on the side of SISU as you like to point out faults with ACL.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

CCC built us a place to play. Yes the rent was set too high to start with. Anyone that don't get that bit will have an IQ of -1. But it had to happen that way because of the previous chairmen fucked up so much. There is no way that CCC could fund our club. But some seem to think they should have.

I agree that I can be seen as total anti SISU and on the side of ACL as I point out faults with what SISU are doing to our football club. You can be seen as anti ACL and on the side of SISU as you like to point out faults with ACL.

It didn't have to happen that way, there were many other options.

One of which would have been club going into administration with assets including the option to buy back Highfield Road.

But it was chosen not to present that as an option. Rather, the only option was build the Ricoh, we were told.

 

[chiefdave]

I think he means the lease would go back to them and would be open to lease out again?

Would they have to offer the lease for sale? Couldn't they just bring in a management company to run it for them. They could even setup their own management company, there would conveniently be all ACLs staff looking for jobs, they could create a new company, employ the same people, and keep going without offering the lease to anyone. Would that fall foul of any laws?

If they did offer the lease for sale who's to say SISU will be the only bidder? If AEG are as keen to get into the area as ML keeps saying wouldn't they bid directly, they wouldn't have to pay SISU a share of any profit then.

 

[skybluetony176]

Would they have to offer the lease for sale? Couldn't they just bring in a management company to run it for them. They could even setup their own management company, there would conveniently be all ACLs staff looking for jobs, they could create a new company, employ the same people, and keep going without offering the lease to anyone. Would that fall foul of any laws?

If they did offer the lease for sale who's to say SISU will be the only bidder? If AEG are as keen to get into the area as ML keeps saying wouldn't they bid directly, they wouldn't have to pay SISU a share of any profit then.

They'll probably get AEG in to run the place. I hear they come highly recommended ;-)

 

[ollyservetta]

don't know if its been mentioned but is there any news on the FL asking for an update to the plans to build the new stadium ,I like many others believe its all hot air ,but surely the FL should be keeping an eye on the situation.To add ,I believe that sisu should pay in full and acl payback mm ang gr. got no time for any of them ,but cant understand why sisu, when still trading as a going concern ,can get away with not paying money owed and mm and gr having to fork out .hopefully the FL will expect sisu to pay in full who ever the money is owed to .