Sisu have ACL valuation !!!!!!!! (1 Viewer)

!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lol!!!
I expect they're truly devastated with themselves, I'm sure they feel like they'll never be able to show their faces on the internet again!!!!

They do already have the ACL evaluation by PWC.

The one they tried to submit yesterday was their own valuation of ACL

Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe because both reports say that ACL isn't worth that much.

Bennets Afro said:

Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe because both reports say that ACL isn't worth that much.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be in their favour? They could put in a low offer and if CCC reject it they can state that their offer is fair and in line with the valuation they have had done. That would put pressure on the council to justify their stance.

I guess it would, but a low offer would be rejected and span as trying to not pay market value.

until we find out next month in the JR what is in that report and the value put on ACL by PWC, we can only keep guessing

Bennets Afro said:

I guess it would, but a low offer would be rejected and span as trying to not pay market value.

Click to expand...

People could try and spin that but the key thing would be if SISU had a valuation done which states ACL is worth, lets say £2m and they offer £2m they can show people the report and have proof they are offering market value.

Bennets Afro said:

I guess it would, but a low offer would be rejected and span as trying to not pay market value.

until we find out next month in the JR what is in that report and the value put on ACL by PWC, we can only keep guessing

Click to expand...

Don't you understand what the JR is about?

It is about whether the funding was unlawful or not. Yesterday was all about SISU trying to expand the case and delay it. They got a total knock back on all counts by the judge who will also be in place at the JR. So it will just be about the loan funding and nothing else. Which is what SISU wanted to start with.

Says to me that they either wanted a long delay, they are worried about the outcome, or both.

Astute said:

Don't you understand what the JR is about?

It is about whether the funding was unlawful or not. Yesterday was all about SISU trying to expand the case and delay it. They got a total knock back on all counts by the judge who will also be in place at the JR. So it will just be about the loan funding and nothing else. Which is what SISU wanted to start with.

Says to me that they either wanted a long delay, they are worried about the outcome, or both.

Click to expand...

You seem a bit of a legal beagle.

Did you used to miss school so you could watch Crown Court every day?

I understand what the JR is about.

Even though they got knocked back on some evidence yesterday, how do you know they never got what they needed?

Bennets Afro said:

I understand what the JR is about.

Even though they got knocked back on some evidence yesterday, how do you know they never got what they needed?

Click to expand...

So you don't understand then.

Why is that then? I understand perfectly

Not sure what the significance of the PWC report is if the CCC are shown to have acted properly in providing the loan. The rules advise getting proper reports done - but it is not mandatory. You can disagree with an experts conclusion if you can put a good case to so do. In taking a report from PWC that points to proper procedure. I think the thrust of SISU's case has to be about procedure and EU approval not the value in a report

The details of that report wont actually change anything in the present. It doesn't provide a current valuation. It is likely to provide a valuation for security purposes which is something very different to a for sale valuation. It is not a report to sell the arena.

After the JR ACL will still be owners of the lease and for the council to remove ACL is going to be costly. SISU wont want the current contracts that are in place because they will want to squeeze better terms and appoint AEG. Will refinancing be required - depends if CCC lose or not even then it wont happen quickly

Strikes me that currently the Ricoh is not for sale and nor is ACL. Certainly if a lucrative deal comes in they would look at it but they don't have to accept it. I think at the moment the current stakeholders are comfortable in owning it. Paying market value would not suit SISU as you have to ask where is there profit in it?

Something else to bear in mind is the CCFC debt. ARVO have a charge over all present and future assets of Otium & SBS&L. That means if Otium trading as CCFC or SBS&L or some company in the SBS&L group owns it then the ARVO debt must end up linked to the stadium (let alone any finance if required to purchase the arena)

In addition personally I would not advise that Otium (ie CCFC) own the stadium because that is where the risk and losses are - I would advise a separate company owns it. Would that separate company charge a rent, probably because it would have a mortgage to pay with no other income source (except perhaps the franchise fee from AEG)

So is a rent deal all that is left? If so is that as anchor tenant? If so the importance of the PWC report in 2012 is?

Great theme tune. It was called "Distant Hills" if I remember rightly.

Grendel said:

You seem a bit of a legal beagle.

Did you used to miss school so you could watch Crown Court every day?

Click to expand...

Grendel said:

You seem a bit of a legal beagle.

Did you used to miss school so you could watch Crown Court every day?

Click to expand...

I have said before that when I was younger I wanted to either be a maths teacher or a solicitor. But I left home at 15 so never got the chance to study. Have defended myself lots of times, although nearly always in the family court. I have never had a decision go against me. Be in the right and tell the truth....or at least look the more likely to tell the truth Always stay calm. And know what the law is to your case. Look for a technicality if there is one and you need one. The SISU way I suppose.

Missed a lot of school. Found it boring. Went for the last 18 months though. 7 O levels grade A and B. Not too bad for a tosser.

Bennets Afro said:

I understand what the JR is about.

Even though they got knocked back on some evidence yesterday, how do you know they never got what they needed?

Click to expand...

And I suppose Joy Slappa submitting a "War & Peace" style document as evidence was part of the plan too.....? 'coz I'm having trouble trying to work out how that has got the outcome they wanted...

Bennets Afro said:

Why is that then? I understand perfectly

Click to expand...

Have you read the post from OSB? Explains it very well. Or do you know something nobody else knows?

Yeah i read it. It explains a lot and is a well written piece

Roll on june the bastard 10th. Get this shit sorted

From what I understand the judge has said he will not be entertaining any valuations from both parties during the JR as they are irrelevant but will mainly concentrate on whether the correct protocols were followed by CCC when they applied for state aid to pay off the mortgage.

So discussing the valuation regarding the upcoming JR is pointless.

sky blue john said:

Lol !!!!!!
What a surprise they tried to submit it as evidence yesterday !!!
I should imagine those who went to private meetings with ML feel pretty foolish now ?
Especially falling for his we need a valuation of ACL!!!

Click to expand...

Most.people knew they had valuations and they said it's worth.nothing. it's the validity we don't know and if they can't be used in court they are pointless.

Nick said:

Most.people knew they had valuations and they said it's worth.nothing. it's the validity we don't know and if they can't be used in court they are pointless.

Click to expand...

I didn't know that they had a valuation saying ACL was worthless. Deering said that SISU valued the ACL share at 0.00 ( ), but Joy was prepared to pay 2 million as Higgs is a charity.

The valuation, whether serious or not, cannot be used in court because it was made at a different time to the ACL loan and is therefore not relevant in this JR.

ACL is obviously worth something or else SISU would have long started on their stadium.

The trouble is that it is hard to find a value - rather like asking "how long is a piece of string?". Too many variables - with or without CCFC? how much do you get for the naming rights? etc..

I think they should value the Higgs share according to what was paid 6,5 m minus 2 per cent depreciation per year ( 50 year lease depreciates at 2 per cent on paper ). Maybe SISU win, maybe not, ( time will tell ) but Higgs is a charity and did expect to be bought out by CCFC during SISU's tenure, so worst case they have honoured in part the agreement in place.

If ACL did get 10m from Ricoh over 10 years ( was mentioned somewhere ), a large part of the price will have been recovered.

martcov said:

I didn't know that they had a valuation saying ACL was worthless. Deering said that SISU valued the ACL share at 0.00 ( ), but Joy was prepared to pay 2 million as Higgs is a charity.

The valuation, whether serious or not, cannot be used in court because it was made at a different time to the ACL loan and is therefore not relevant in this JR.

ACL is obviously worth something or else SISU would have long started on their stadium.

The trouble is that it is hard to find a value - rather like asking "how long is a piece of string?". Too many variables - with or without CCFC? how much do you get for the naming rights? etc..

I think they should value the Higgs share according to what was paid 6,5 m minus 2 per cent depreciation per year ( 50 year lease depreciates at 2 per cent on paper ). Maybe SISU win, maybe not, ( time will tell ) but Higgs is a charity and did expect to be bought out by CCFC during SISU's tenure, so worst case they have honoured in part the agreement in place.

If ACL did get 10m from Ricoh over 10 years ( was mentioned somewhere ), a large part of the price will have been recovered.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter if they are a charity or not. It should go on an up to date valuation, same goes for the club. Works both ways.

Nick said:

Doesn't matter if they are a charity or not. It should go on an up to date valuation, same goes for the club. Works both ways.

Click to expand...

Why? I don't get this attitude. Can we buy the club for an up to date valuation too? I think I've got a fiver lying about somewhere.

It's supreme arrogance to demand a private company gives away an asset below what it wants to simply because you say you need it.

shmmeee said:

Why? I don't get this attitude. Can we buy the club for an up to date valuation too? I think I've got a fiver lying about somewhere.

It's supreme arrogance to demand a private company gives away an asset below what it wants to simply because you say you need it.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying anybody can be forced to do anything just if they are taking the piss it all comes out, the same the other way around for the club.

Either should side should prove they can run the business they want to buy as well.

Nick said:

Doesn't matter if they are a charity or not. It should go on an up to date valuation, same goes for the club. Works both ways.

Click to expand...

Joy said she wouldn't "do a charity down" and we know that she is a devout Christian, but that aside, the point is you cannot make a valuation.

If it were a house, you could compare with other houses in the area or if it were an industrial building you could compare with other like buildings and take into account the economic situation.

The stadium complex is different in that there is no direct comparison and so you have find some way of measuring it's worth e.g. potential turnover.

Then comes the question, with or without CCFC? We know that SISU have CCFC, so it is more valuable to SISU than to other people. A valuation for someone without CCFC is different than the value to SISU. ACL just have to sit there and wait whilst building up the other business.

My point was to take a paper value ( roughly that which was being proposed before talks broke down ) and work from there. Maybe SISU win or maybe Higgs win, but the extra revenue from fans ( if CCFC come home ) and the naming rights for the next 10 years, guarantees that SISU won't lose on the deal.

Very good piece from OSB.

Personally I think all this talk about valuation is irrelevant. Just because SISU say it's worth this or that, so what, if acl stakeholders are not willing to sell it won't be sold!

The valuation discussion is a red herring. Everyone seems to think there HAS to be a sale, but there does not and as we all know, there is NO agreement for a sell/buy.

Perhaps I'm missing something?

Nick said:

I'm not saying anybody can be forced to do anything just if they are taking the piss it all comes out, the same the other way around for the club.

Either should side should prove they can run the business they want to buy as well.

Click to expand...

I can agree with that, especially anyone who pops up after a deal is done and Sisu want out. Apologies if I was off the mark, but I get a sense a few people would have the independent valuation legally binding, as had been said there are a million questions to ask about how valid any valuation will be. But more stuff for us to argue over I guess, so why not?

shmmeee said:

I can agree with that, especially anyone who pops up after a deal is done and Sisu want out. Apologies if I was off the mark, but I get a sense a few people would have the independent valuation legally binding, as had been said there are a million questions to ask about how valid any valuation will be. But more stuff for us to argue over I guess, so why not?

Click to expand...

You can't really force it on them, but I guess it would help the public see a bit more. If SISU really are offering £2mill and it is shows it is worth nil then they look good don't they? If it's worth £4m and ACL want £25 mill then ACL look bad are holding things up. Working vice versa with the club.

Nick said:

You can't really force it on them, but I guess it would help the public see a bit more. If SISU really are offering £2mill and it is shows it is worth nil then they look good don't they? If it's worth £4m and ACL want £25 mill then ACL look bad are holding things up. Working vice versa with the club.

Click to expand...

I look at it this way . If some bloke knocked on the door and said "I'll give you 50k for your house"I'd tell him to piss off . But if some bloke knocked the door and said "I'll give you 250k for your house" I'd snap his hand off and fuckoff into the sunset even though I had no intention of selling my house . Doesn't matter how much the house is worth it's all about what price makes the seller sit up and take notice.

Nick said:

You can't really force it on them, but I guess it would help the public see a bit more. If SISU really are offering £2mill and it is shows it is worth nil then they look good don't they? If it's worth £4m and ACL want £25 mill then ACL look bad are holding things up. Working vice versa with the club.

Click to expand...

Any commissioned valuation will go the way of the person commissioning it. I stick with my point. The Higgs share was bought for 6,5 m. That is fact. Since then it depreciates on paper at 2 per cent. Also fact. Take the paper value as the price - fair to both sides and in line with the deal that almost went through. SISU say its worth less, Higgs more, but no-one really knows. Time will tell, but it is based on a known calculation and SISU will get their outlay back whatever happens by bringing CCFC home.

Nick said:

You can't really force it on them, but I guess it would help the public see a bit more. If SISU really are offering £2mill and it is shows it is worth nil then they look good don't they? If it's worth £4m and ACL want £25 mill then ACL look bad are holding things up. Working vice versa with the club.

Click to expand...

So you think that the sides involved in this dispute could actually agree what they are valuing?