sisu strikes again (1 Viewer)

[torchomatic]

Ha! Yes, I meant sell. Or did I.....

You did write 'give' but I presume you meant 'sell' ??
This individual certainly hasn't helped matters I agree.

 

---

[torchomatic]

A long lease with a guarantee of no interference would be perfect. Mutton had no right to say "you can have it but you can't". Well, he does have the right, but he shouldn't have. The club can't progress if it continues to be tied to the Council.

As for the surrounding land. The Council wanted the club to develop the land around the arena. THere were (surprisingly) arguments about that on here. Personally, developing land is what the Council should be doing, not hamstringing its football team.

I also think that Mutton hasn't helped one iota. However, and I hate to be pedantic - but - the club doesn't need to own the stadium. A long lease, with fair rent levels, and access to revenues is what's needed; and what SISU should be aiming for. Everyone, bar the insane, would support this.

But asking for unferreted access to the freehold and surrounding lands is an ask too far; and so unrealistic as to effectively be a bridge to any feasible compromise

 

[Godiva]

Maybe but then CCC could say if you couldn't afford the rent why didn't you put the club up for sale to someone who could and how can you afford to pay the interest on the loan from AVRO and management fees. There's an argument to be had for sure but SISU will need to be very careful not to drop themselves in it by stating one thing that then trips them up elsewhere.

That argument wouldn't wash in court. But ACL did force sisu to put the club up for sale! It was then bought by ARVO.

The Deloitte report could fairly easily be dismissed I would have thought as it's a snapshot worse case scenario - how much would we get back if ACL went to the wall.

An item or a property can have fluctuating values. The Deloitte report showed ACL were potentially in trouble, and any bank would either refuse remortaging or demand a premium interest rate at the time ccc bought the mortgage. The new arrangement with ACL should have reflected this - it didn't and so it was commercially unfair.

 

[torchomatic]

And what was Mutton doing? If he hadn't have said the "hell will freeze over" comment and done a deal with SISU then the word "Sixfields" wouldn't have ever been mentioned on here. Mutton refused to sell to the current and rightful owners of the club and wanted to sell to someone else. Isn't that not "distressing" the football club? That is why I blame both parties.

Agreed but the question is why have Sisu gone down this route instead of just buying the Higgs share for a reported 6milllion ish , working from within they would have had a lot better chance of gaining the other 50% of the stadium. They are destroying CCFC to try to distress the council/Higgs charity and get a whole lot of real estate for fuckall. Once said land stadium etc is aquired what are they going to do then ?

What do you reckon the chances are that if they do aquire the Ricoh and surrounding land CCFC will still be in the doldrums , being charged rent , management fees , debt interest etc with little investment in the playing side of things.

Personally I think they are the worst people to have owned our club ever. I would even go as far as the worst owners of any league club ever.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Yeah; I'm aware of that FP; but the net position is that it gives state money - following due process - to commercial businesses at lower than commercial rates, provided it fulfills a strategic ambition for local, or national government. If Godiva, or SISU for that matter, asserts that '...the loan to ACL cannot be given on better terms that ACL could get from a bank ... or from another lender like sisu'; I can't see how that holds water, given initiates such as this. There are plenty of such schemes about, I just pulled one out of the air

The New Enterprise scheme may have had prior approval from the EC. This one hasn't.

 

[Astute]

SISU are rarely truthful. I don't believe them when they say they might win the JR. They get flustered easily when questioned. Just like they do when questioned about this new ground.

 

[fernandopartridge]

SISU are rarely truthful. I don't believe them when they say they might win the JR. They get flustered easily when questioned. Just like they do when questioned about this new ground.

How can you disbelieve that somebody has a belief?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The New Enterprise scheme may have had prior approval from the EC. This one hasn't.

You don't know that, as you have no idea what the basis of the loan was. If there is money, set aside for regeneration, that that will have prior EU sanction; and if it's drawn from that pot, I can't see how you can claim that this transaction did not have prior approval. You're guessing.

Besides, I raised the New Enterprise Allowance within the context of proof that finance can - and is - being provided by local and national government at less than commercial rates; in response to Godiva's claim with regards state aid. That's a different debate as to whether money, at whatever rate, is lent with or without prior approval from the EU

 

[chiefdave]

That argument wouldn't wash in court.

Why not? If, as you say, SISU argue the rent wasn't affordable why could CCC not make a defence on the affordability?

An item or a property can have fluctuating values. The Deloitte report showed ACL were potentially in trouble, and any bank would either refuse remortaging or demand a premium interest rate at the time ccc bought the mortgage. The new arrangement with ACL should have reflected this - it didn't and so it was commercially unfair.

Thats subjective though isn't it. SISU can argue no other bank would have offered them the loan but it would be tricky to prove. They would also have to look at the circumstances around the Deloitte valuation. Not saying there's not an arguement to make there just that it doesn't follow that because the arguement can be made it can be proved to the judges satisfaction.

 

[fernandopartridge]

You don't know that, as you have no idea what the basis of the loan was. If there is money, set aside for regeneration, that that will have prior EU sanction; and if it's drawn from that pot, I can't see how you can claim that this transaction did not have prior approval. You're guessing.

Besides, I raised the New Enterprise Allowance within the context of proof that finance can - and is - being provided by local and national government at less than commercial rates; in response to Godiva's claim with regards state aid. That's a different debate as to whether money, at whatever rate, is lent with or without prior approval from the EU

MMM - it wouldn't have got to court if the council could demonstrate that the scheme had prior approval from the EC.

We also know it wasn't 'money set aside for regeneration' because the council themselves said they got it from the government's 'prudential borrowing' scheme.

 

[torchomatic]

What about Mutton? Do you think he was right to tell the current owners they weren't getting anything of the Ricoh while at the same time trying to do a deal with PH4? Who remember, has nothing to do with Coventry City.

SISU are rarely truthful. I don't believe them when they say they might win the JR. They get flustered easily when questioned. Just like they do when questioned about this new ground.

 

[chiefdave]

What about Mutton? Do you think he was right to tell the current owners they weren't getting anything of the Ricoh while at the same time trying to do a deal with PH4? Who remember, has nothing to do with Coventry City.

Mutton was less than helpful to say the least but SISU would, or at least should, have been aware that it was not down to him to decide anything. Any dealings with CCC regarding purchasing the 50% share of ACL, veto of Higgs share sale or freehold would require a full council vote. And of course he is no longer leader of the council so even if SISU had a problem with him that should no longer be an issue.

 

[torchomatic]

He's gone and so of course is nothing to do with it any longer. Yet, he was part of the organisation that SISU are fighting with. It's like saying if Fisher left would all the barriers suddenly fall down and CCC and SISU would live in harmony together? Probably not. It gets to me when the word "distressing" is bandied about that CCC were doing the same thing to our club. And where is PH4, Hoff and Mr Cov now?

Mutton was less than helpful to say the least but SISU would, or at least should, have been aware that it was not down to him to decide anything. Any dealings with CCC regarding purchasing the 50% share of ACL, veto of Higgs share sale or freehold would require a full council vote. And of course he is no longer leader of the council so even if SISU had a problem with him that should no longer be an issue.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

MMM - it wouldn't have got to court if the council could demonstrate that the scheme had prior approval from the EC.

We also know it wasn't 'money set aside for regeneration' because the council themselves said they got it from the government's 'prudential borrowing' scheme.

I think it is going to court because a judge considered it should be aired. That's fair. The nature of SISU's JR is a four-fold case, with this being one of the issues, not the only issue. It may not have any merit, but perhaps the judge considered that given the complexity of the inter-related issues, it should best be scrutinised openly?

With regards the 'prudential borrowing scheme'; Okay - what I meant was that CCC see this site as part of their strategic regeneration, and are partly using this scheme to fund it. By definition: 'The prudential borrowing regime was introduced in April by the Local Government Act 2003, and allows local authorities to borrow without explicit government limits, as long as they are capable of paying the money back'.

It's been used for all sorts of schemes, from building houses to commercial sites since. How can this need EU sanction?

 

[chiefdave]

He's gone and so of course is nothing to do with it any longer. Yet, he was part of the organisation that SISU are fighting with. It's like saying if Fisher left would all the barriers suddenly fall down and CCC and SISU would live in harmony together? Probably not. It gets to me when the word "distressing" is bandied about that CCC were doing the same thing to our club. And where is PH4, Hoff and Mr Cov now?

Not sure you could class that as distressing. If you remove CCFC and the emotion of it being a football club out of the equation as a judge will do with the JR SISU appeared to be actively working to put ACL out of business. CCC were talking to someone who would potentially make a purchase off them. Could come down to who approaced who. If CCC were out actively looking for people to put in bids to buy CCFC it would be a much different situation to someone who is interested in buying the club speaking to the owners of the ground.

 

[DaleM]

And what was Mutton doing? If he hadn't have said the "hell will freeze over" comment and done a deal with SISU then the word "Sixfields" wouldn't have ever been mentioned on here. Mutton refused to sell to the current and rightful owners of the club and wanted to sell to someone else. Isn't that not "distressing" the football club? That is why I blame both parties.

I think the "hell will freeze over" comment came a long time after Sisu took over. Did he maybe see what Sisu were up to ? I agree with you CCFC should own the ground and I don't give a shit if the council lose the JR and if proven Mutton should be vilified.
What bothers me is trying to do the Higgs out of money. They should have took up the Higgs option as soon as possible , when everyone was over the moon that they took us over and "saved" us . There was plenty of hysteria at the time how we were going to get investment etc,buy the ground etc and all that malarky. They did invest to start with but bad decisions have been made in their tenure and to tie everything up in litigation is having a very very bad effect on the fanbase and the team.

So many questions have been left unanswered / lied about. For example I remember Ranson telling us we were debt free . Indeed I seem to remember him saying we were one of the only clubs in the league to be in that situation. Turns out bollocks as to go from debt free to £70million in debt at liquidation time is beyond belief.

 

[torchomatic]

OK. Take the "emotion" out of it. Still out of order though. If SISU were doing exactly the same thing...

Mutton says to Company A, no you can't have a slice of this property that is vital to your business and your customers. We're going to try and sell it to Company B who have absolutely nothing to do with the property.

They Couldn't get people to actively bid on CCFC no, because it's nothing to do with them. But they were actively trying to get someone to bid on something that was vital to the club.

I know you and others don't agree and you never will, but it stinks.

Not sure you could class that as distressing. If you remove CCFC and the emotion of it being a football club out of the equation as a judge will do with the JR SISU appeared to be actively working to put ACL out of business. CCC were talking to someone who would potentially make a purchase off them. Could come down to who approaced who. If CCC were out actively looking for people to put in bids to buy CCFC it would be a much different situation to someone who is interested in buying the club speaking to the owners of the ground.

 

[chiefdave]

Mutton says to Company A, no you can't have a slice of this property that is vital to your business and your customers. We're going to try and sell it to Company B who have absolutely nothing to do with the property.

But neither you or I know if that happened do we? If I was going to buy CCFC I would ask the council and Higgs for meetings to discuss the Ricoh. It doesn't mean that CCC are forcing the issue. That will be key here. If CCC were actively seeking out someone to replace SISU then the arguement is valid. From memory it seemed more like Hoff and Elliot found PK4 and he then met with the council. Should the council turn down meetings with anyone who expresses an interest in purchasing one of their assets?

 

[Ashdown1]

I think the "hell will freeze over" comment came a long time after Sisu took over. Did he maybe see what Sisu were up to ? I agree with you CCFC should own the ground and I don't give a shit if the council lose the JR and if proven Mutton should be vilified.
What bothers me is trying to do the Higgs out of money. They should have took up the Higgs option as soon as possible , when everyone was over the moon that they took us over and "saved" us . There was plenty of hysteria at the time how we were going to get investment etc,buy the ground etc and all that malarky. They did invest to start with but bad decisions have been made in their tenure and to tie everything up in litigation is having a very very bad effect on the fanbase and the team.

So many questions have been left unanswered / lied about. For example I remember Ranson telling us we were debt free . Indeed I seem to remember him saying we were one of the only clubs in the league to be in that situation. Turns out bollocks as to go from debt free to £70million in debt at liquidation time is beyond belief.

Lets not forget that this debt went from about £32 million to £70 million in about 4 months miraculously just as the rent strike took effect. Until SISU can explain a lot of things and stop telling stupid lies it's hard to do anything else but demonize them.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

It is not illegal to refuse to pay rent!






No? Time is a great healer and we all have very short memories. Our (the customers) main desire is to support the club. If sisu win the JR and as a consequence gain control over ACL and bring the team home to the Ricoh we will soon be back in numbers.

Quite a few of us won't return until the fuckers have gone. They have destroyed my bond with the club and I will never give them another penny. I know that as a SISU employee it's hard for you to appreciate this..

 

[fernandopartridge]

Quite a few of us won't return until the fuckers have gone. They have destroyed my bond with the club and I will never give them another penny. I know that as a SISU employee it's hard for you to appreciate this..

How have they not destroyed the bond that 7k at MK Dons or 5k at Arsenal had with the club? Are they all SISU employees as well, sanctimonious Sally?

 

[Godiva]

Oh how have you missed the fact that I am Fisher/Seppala/Duliu/Onye/Brody depending on the point in time. If I am not one of them then at the very least I am a sisu plant. Even if that should not be true, then I am a sisu apologist for sure.

Quite a few of us won't return until the fuckers have gone. They have destroyed my bond with the club and I will never give them another penny. I know that as a SISU employee it's hard for you to appreciate this..

Thanks nlhwc ... I had forgotten that one on my resume.

 

[skybluefred]

Why spend money now when playoffs are now out of sight this season.
Best to wait to the summer.
Anything that happens is sisu fault are't we lucky we have someone to blame.
Have you not realised that crowds of 2,000 does not bring in enough money to invest in a Team. SP been able to bring in two loanees that would be way out of our budget, if purchased.

Have you not realized we would be playing in front of upwards of 15,000 at home at the RICOH.
:blue:

 

[fernandopartridge]

Have you not realized we would be playing in front of upwards of 15,000 at home at the RICOH.
:blue:

Again, after a 10 match unbeaten run last season we managed to scrape 15k at home to Shrewsbury over the festive period.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Coventry have a history of telling people they are too small, just ask Kevin Keegan

B******s

 

[Skyblueweeman]

They pocketed every fee before why would they change.

It was a fair question...what proof do you have that they've pocketed all fees? In the same way anyone cannot deny, no one can confirm, so what a ridiculous statement.

WM

 

[Skyblueweeman]

SISU are rarely truthful. I don't believe them when they say they might win the JR. They get flustered easily when questioned. Just like they do when questioned about this new ground.

Fisher gets flustered and potentially this Labo guy as well. No one has heard JS speak...I suspect she'll fluster a little less than her employees.

WM

 

[kingharvest]

I think it is going to court because a judge considered it should be aired. That's fair. The nature of SISU's JR is a four-fold case, with this being one of the issues, not the only issue. It may not have any merit, but perhaps the judge considered that given the complexity of the inter-related issues, it should best be scrutinised openly?

With regards the 'prudential borrowing scheme'; Okay - what I meant was that CCC see this site as part of their strategic regeneration, and are partly using this scheme to fund it. By definition: 'The prudential borrowing regime was introduced in April by the Local Government Act 2003, and allows local authorities to borrow without explicit government limits, as long as they are capable of paying the money back'.

It's been used for all sorts of schemes, from building houses to commercial sites since. How can this need EU sanction?

My understanding is that there are 3 ways you can transfer state resource to a 'company':

If they receive under €200k over a rolling 3 year period its fine.
If it falls under one of the commissions General Block Exemptions (26 of them) its fine (this includes things like support for start-ups, women in business, etc)
If it can be awarded under a pre-approved scheme its fine - about 5 in England. There is a property development scheme in there so maybe it falls under that. But in which case it has already been notified at the level of the member state.

If it doesn't come under one of those you have to NOTIFY the commission. That is not quite the same as a sanction but of course you still need approval.

The problem is even that description above only really scratches the surface of state aid. There are lots of other things like sectoral restrictions.

 

[fernandopartridge]

My understanding is that there are 3 ways you can transfer state resource to a 'company':

If they receive under €200k over a rolling 3 year period its fine.
If it falls under one of the commissions General Block Exemptions (26 of them) its fine (this includes things like support for start-ups, women in business, etc)
If it can be awarded under a pre-approved scheme its fine - about 5 in England. There is a property development scheme in there so maybe it falls under that. But in which case it has already been notified at the level of the member state.

If it doesn't come under one of those you have to NOTIFY the commission. That is not quite the same as a sanction but of course you still need approval.

The problem is even that description above only really scratches the surface of state aid. There are lots of other things like sectoral restrictions.

They used 'prudential borrowing' i.e. not a defined scheme to support SMEs etc.

 

[kingharvest]

They used 'prudential borrowing' i.e. not a defined scheme to support SMEs etc.

And isn't that scheme supposed to allow for capital expenditure? Does that include paying off a loan?

 

[Astute]

Fisher gets flustered and potentially this Labo guy as well. No one has heard JS speak...I suspect she'll fluster a little less than her employees.

WM

In the same way that anyone can't deny and no one can confirm?

 

[Sterling Archer]

This thread needs more acronyms.

 

[Godiva]

This thread needs more acronyms.

lol

 

[edgy]

CBA with acronyms myself. IMHO.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

And isn't that scheme supposed to allow for capital expenditure? Does that include paying off a loan?

I imagine the route the money took was that it was given to ACL, they paid the loan off, the Council didn't. Although this may raise other valid questions of a similar nature.