Sky Blue Sports and Leisure Limited Being Wound Up? (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
SkyBlueScottie said:
Yes, thats correct, I was thinking more about the way they spun the deal made with Stat Sports, trying to make out we were forward thinking club, investing in the infrastructure however, neglecting to mentrion there was a previous relationship with the company under its former guise.
Click to expand...
I see, that subtlety was lost on me.
 
H

hopesprings

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
Basically amateur hour.

No great conspiracy or reorganisation of the group. Just missed paperwork

Firstly the confirmation statement should have been filed within 14 days of the due date. You get a reminder sent from Companies House to the registered office. Followed by at least one if it remains outstanding. Followed by letter to directors stating the company will be struck off. Seems they ignored all that. Not only that but you can set up email reminders from Companies House so it is hard to miss.

Along with the confirmation statement it is a requirement since 06/04/2016 that people with significant control of a company are listed at Companies House and the company itself keeps a register of such people or entities. It looks to me that whoever was filing the confirmation form, included a statement that SISU had significant control of SBS&L. Either they didn't check with London HQ or didn't care or understand the significance and listed SISU. Previously it has been the case that apparently SBS&L were still investigating who controls the company, something I find in my opinion to be a bit of a nonsense - how can they not know after 2 years of having to list it? I suppose the argument is that there are many investors in the funds that own SBS&L however they have given authority to SISU to act for them - comes back to who is ARVO or Sconset. However proper enquiries should not take nearly 2 years whatever the result. Someone pointed out the "error" in the first control statement and there is a correction removing SISU as the entity with significant control.

Apparently it is not clear that the person referred to as the owner or the company operated under that persons control actually controls to any significant degree SBS&L. Yet they meet managers oversee the budget sign contracts appear in court etc etc .............

Just to be clear, control in this context is not just about the person or entity owns less than 25% of the issued share capital or between 25 to 50% or 50 to 75% or more than 75% it also includes those people or entities that influence the company decisions and under whose instructions the company does or is required to act. Make your own minds up as to what control is where.

So that might also include ARVO who have major debt and a charge over all assets. Seppala has signed documents for ARVO

SISU Capital Ltd lists persons of significant control as Seppala & Coleman
Click to expand...
Presumably IF it was still SISU listed as control they would have to declare actual investors in the fund that was used. Who knows who might be in that list!!!! perhaps that is why they changed it when they realised or got told that they must list the names of investors in the fund...nah I am getting all conspiracy theory again !
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
hopesprings said:
Presumably IF it was still SISU listed as control they would have to declare actual investors in the fund that was used. Who knows who might be in that list!!!! perhaps that is why they changed it when they realised or got told that they must list the names of investors in the fund...nah I am getting all conspiracy theory again !
Click to expand...
I believe they have to declare something to the EFL but names are not published unless the shareholder owns 10%
EFL Official Website Football League clubs focus on the future
Club Ownership

Regulations relating to club ownership were amended so that clubs will now be required to notify The Football League if an individual acquires a club shareholding of 10% or more. This is in addition to the existing requirement to publish this information on their website.

This will also apply to an individual with a significant interest in one club who acquires a stake of 10% or more in another club, at home or abroad.
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't be the first time they have been late with the paperwork. I am sure Les Reid could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them



Not the only one late with paperwork !
Perhaps the CT could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them ( especially bondholders?)

WASPS FINANCE PLC

Company number 09435073


Ricoh Arena Judds Lane, Longford, Coventry, England, CV6 6AQ
Accounts overdue
Next accounts made up to 30 June 2017
due by 31 December 2017

Last accounts made up to 30 June 2016
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
oldfiver said:
Wouldn't be the first time they have been late with the paperwork. I am sure Les Reid could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them



Not the only one late with paperwork !
Perhaps the CT could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them ( especially bondholders?)

WASPS FINANCE PLC

Company number 09435073


Ricoh Arena Judds Lane, Longford, Coventry, England, CV6 6AQ
Accounts overdue
Next accounts made up to 30 June 2017
due by 31 December 2017

Last accounts made up to 30 June 2016
Click to expand...

That will be late possibly because of the bondholder meeting where they're asking them to change the terms (which is today isn't it)?
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
oldfiver said:
Wouldn't be the first time they have been late with the paperwork. I am sure Les Reid could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them



Not the only one late with paperwork !
Perhaps the CT could find out and put everyones minds at ease with a proper explanation from them ( especially bondholders?)

WASPS FINANCE PLC

Company number 09435073


Ricoh Arena Judds Lane, Longford, Coventry, England, CV6 6AQ
Accounts overdue
Next accounts made up to 30 June 2017
due by 31 December 2017

Last accounts made up to 30 June 2016
Click to expand...

Cant file until they get the motions approved at the bondholders meeting because the accounts are not signed off until that is resolved. Somewhat different situation. Neither satisfactory

And Les Reid was suggested because SISU/SBS&L/OTIUM don't talk to the CT

But then you know all that .............. surely

At least they (wasps finance) have a clear statement as to who exercises significant control
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
Cant file until they get the motions approved at the bondholders meeting because the accounts are not signed off until that is resolved.

That may be your summation but no one has put that out to the £35m worth of Bond holders have they?

Somewhat different situation. Neither satisfactory
Yes indeed - one is a error corrected and the other unexplained

I am not saying either is correct just how one is headlined and the other isn't

And I do not read the Observer and have never met Les Reid ( so far as I know )
Click to expand...
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
SkyBlueScottie said:
Well ive just spent 1/2 an hour in a companies house wormhole, I note that Kenny Dalglish was a director or Pro Zone ( in the past) and that in 2016 Pro Zone underwent a name change to Stat Sports...I wonder what sort of deal we got for all of that equipment seeing as we were previously connected with Pro Zone.
Click to expand...
That was a buyout from what looks like Edmond de Rothschild.
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
From what I found these are the ones who bought it oriiginally, it was sold onto Stat Sports about 3years ago.
Makes it look like it's connected to the original deal, of course I may be mistaken.
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
The club received 3.5m in advance of the sale of Prozone from the purchasers. This was subsequently cleared when Prozone was sold. The charge registered was secured on the shares in Prozone
From the 2011 SBS&L accounts
upload_2018-1-19_9-36-23.png

Assuming there were no clawback or retention clauses in the sale contract then when the sale went through the charge should have been cleared at that point. If however there were such clauses I think it is reasonable to expect that to be disclosed as a time limited contingent liability in the accounts - no such disclosure.

It looks like the negligence in filing the confirmation statement two months late and threat of striking off has prompted a review of the statutory records. Something that the directors and auditors should have done every year. I don't know if there were clawbacks in the contract but it just looks like it is something else that wasn't dealt with promptly - just my opinion. Just a simple error? ..... again
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Guidance on persons with significant control (PSC) is here

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/621687/psc-statutory-guidance-companies.pdf

Is SISU or Seppala an investment advisor to SBS&L and therefore excepted? I would have thought that relationship was with the investment funds not SBS&L. But it might be the case

SISU or Seppala it has been reported
- SISU & Seppala referred to as the owner by the media and directors of SBS&L
- If it is SISU then Seppala is a PSC for her company
- Seppala meets the team manager on appointment
- Loans put in to SBS&L from investments controlled by Seppala
- Laura Deering is a director of SBS&L, a SISU employee and works closely with Seppala
- Seppala has led discussions with ACL/CCC in the past
- Seppala has issued a statement to supporters in the past
- has issued comments about media about other parties & court actions
- Seppala has provided witness statements in the court cases brought by ARVO & SBS&L
- SISU have structured the business plan if by nothing else not putting in further investment
- Funds for which Seppala acts have charges on all assets of the SBS&L group
- at least some Documents for ARVO are signed by Seppala, no sales of company or its assets without ARVO agreement as per their registered charge
- Seppala has attended meetings with fans and fan group representatives
-etc

I am sure there must be a good logical reason why SBS&L can not locate its PSC, I just do not as yet understand what it is. Everything seems to point to SISU & Seppala as PSC because of the influence she has over SBS&L and CCFC. I am sure someone will know why it is not
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
Guidance on persons with significant control (PSC) is here

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/621687/psc-statutory-guidance-companies.pdf

Is SISU or Seppala an investment advisor to SBS&L and therefore excepted? I would have thought that relationship was with the investment funds not SBS&L. But it might be the case

SISU or Seppala it has been reported
- SISU & Seppala referred to as the owner by the media and directors of SBS&L
- If it is SISU then Seppala is a PSC for her company
- Seppala meets the team manager on appointment
- Loans put in to SBS&L from investments controlled by Seppala
- Laura Deering is a director of SBS&L, a SISU employee and works closely with Seppala
- Seppala has led discussions with ACL/CCC in the past
- Seppala has issued a statement to supporters in the past
- has issued comments about media about other parties & court actions
- Seppala has provided witness statements in the court cases brought by ARVO & SBS&L
- SISU have structured the business plan if by nothing else not putting in further investment
- Funds for which Seppala acts have charges on all assets of the SBS&L group
- at least some Documents for ARVO are signed by Seppala, no sales of company or its assets without ARVO agreement as per their registered charge
- Seppala has attended meetings with fans and fan group representatives
-etc

I am sure there must be a good logical reason why SBS&L can not locate its PSC, I just do not as yet understand what it is. Everything seems to point to SISU & Seppala as PSC because of the influence she has over SBS&L and CCFC. I am sure someone will know why it is not
Click to expand...
Isn’t the registered office address the same for SBS&L as it is for SISU?
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
skybluetony176 said:
Isn’t the registered office address the same for SBS&L as it is for SISU?
Click to expand...
Yes it is. Not proof on its own but it could be seen as an indicator as to where control is. To add to the other indicators
 
Skyblueweeman

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
I am sure there must be a good logical reason why SBS&L can not locate its PSC, I just do not as yet understand what it is. Everything seems to point to SISU & Seppala as PSC because of the influence she has over SBS&L and CCFC. I am sure someone will know why it is not
Click to expand...

To be fair OSB58, if you don't know, I suspect there's few others who would!
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
We already knew that. Do you actually read threads?
Click to expand...
Where has it been mentioned in this thread? That CT story was only posted 10:30 today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top