@CovTel_CCFC @CovTelEd No mention in the article about ARVO that the Sky Blue Talk forum had to TELL the telegraph about any of this. Why?
From: @CovTelEd: Because that's not strictly true. @Lesreidpolitics has been working on this investigation for some time.
@CovTelEd @Lesreidpolitics Thats not how it sounded last week. Either way, you really must ask better questions. I suggest contacting....certain members of that forum who know what they're talking about. It can only help the cause
From: @CovTelEd: We know what we're doing. Thanks.
Cock.
@CovTel_CCFC @CovTelEd No mention in the article about ARVO that the Sky Blue Talk forum had to TELL the telegraph about any of this. Why?
From: @CovTelEd: Because that's not strictly true. @Lesreidpolitics has been working on this investigation for some time.
@CovTelEd @Lesreidpolitics Thats not how it sounded last week. Either way, you really must ask better questions. I suggest contacting....certain members of that forum who know what they're talking about. It can only help the cause
From: @CovTelEd: We know what we're doing. Thanks.
Cock.
@CovTel_CCFC @CovTelEd No mention in the article about ARVO that the Sky Blue Talk forum had to TELL the telegraph about any of this. Why?
From: @CovTelEd: Because that's not strictly true. @Lesreidpolitics has been working on this investigation for some time.
@CovTelEd @Lesreidpolitics Thats not how it sounded last week. Either way, you really must ask better questions. I suggest contacting....certain members of that forum who know what they're talking about. It can only help the cause
From: @CovTelEd: We know what we're doing. Thanks.
Cock.
PERVERSE or WHAT?funnily tho the word ARVO in finnish means "benefit, worth". :thinking about::thinking about:do not think there will be much worth or benefit for the cov fans after all these problems are sorted
funnily tho the word ARVO in finnish means "benefit, worth". :thinking about::thinking about:do not think there will be much worth or benefit for the cov fans after all these problems are sorted
PERVERSE or WHAT?
@CovTelEd @CovTel_CCFC @Lesreidpolitics haha-I and many many others beg to differ. It's a fool who feels they can learn nothing from others
From: @CovTelEd: No. It's a fool who sits in a plane and tries to tell the pilot how to fly it.
and with that, he proved my point and i wished him well. The arrogance is almost as glaring as the ignorance. No wonder we all think they're shite.
You're absolutely right Burbage at least its out there for all players ,keep the focus boys ,there will be more in this,the working relationship between prospective parties would surely be untenable if the agreement were made.I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
Burbage hope you don't mind but I think we need all the attention we can get, so I sent your quote above to the Daily Mail asking them to look at the situation raised by SBT and finally printed in the CTI suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
They really are completely untrustworthy and still cunts on here and GMK defend their scheming.
I don't think people are directly defending them, but i think what some people are saying is, unless there is an alternative - what choice is there? Right now, they are the owners. We might not like it, or want them here, and we can try as much as possible to force them to sell. But unless someone is ready to buy, we're all out of options. Some people, who are yet to believe Hoffman is in a position to step in, believe that the club will be liquidated unless they get at least part ownership of the ground.
For some, they can't accept that - and don't want us to start again, and they are also willing to forgive SISU, should appropriate measures be put in place by the council that ensure the sustainability/growth of the football club by SISU.
No need to call em cunts!
No, there is no need for anybody to speak like that. You are correct.
Can you please cite me any, just one, experience you have had where a council have forced the hand of a conglomerate? Just one. Please
I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies - at least it is in the public eye now, albeit somewhat plagiarised. Let's not be distracted by that point, tho - the important matter is what is happening at (to?) the club.
No way are we still losing £500K per month - how can we put pressure on them to substantiate that claim, with evidence?
If the stadium is transferred (in part) to CCFC, then ARVO's mortgage is underpinned - this then leaves SISU to do what they want, in order to mitigate their debts/loans/investments. As we do not trust them, this is worrying - they will be free to use the ownership as leverage to get agreement to their strategies - and if they don't get acceptance from other parties, they could just liquidate the club and walk away, keeping the stadium share in their pockets. I really don't trust them, and I doubt that the council have the expertise to ensure that SISU are duty bound, in law, to prevent this from happening. These are serious players, they have taken on some big cases.
They clearly set up the ARVO debenture as part of the same strategy as withholding the rent, to force ACL to come to the table so that they can get their hands on the stadium. Once they have that, they will be able to do what they want (ie as little as possible) with the football club. If a business is insolvent, is it possible to enforce any agreements made in relation to the upkeep of that business? - personally, think not. This means , all SISU have to do is show that CCFC is insolvent, and they can tear up any agreements that the council has tried to establish with SISU for CCFC.
Not at all Bri- the more hacks we can get interested, the more should be unearthed.Burbage hope you don't mind but I think we need all the attention we can get, so I sent your quote above to the Daily Mail asking them to look at the situation raised by SBT and finally printed in the CT
questions - which of course our "friends at CT" will have thought of because they are certain they know what they are doing.....
If the debt is from ARVO per TF what debt does he mean ? What is going in now or all of it from day 1? Were ARVO always the creditor because the audited accounts make no mention of them up to 2010? Transparency ?
What was the purpose of Sconset who apparently own the shares in the club..... what debt are they owed ? Do they still own us ?
Have SISU and ARVO had previous relationships in other companies (the answer is yes and just a google away .... but apparently according to Mr Reid there is no further evidence)
Why is it that currently the charge that SBS&L had dated March 2011 still appears to exist over all the assets of CCFC Holdings ? Can both SBS&L and ARVO have a first charge over the same assets ?
Funding requirement nearly 3m in close season - well yes that would make sense if annual costs were between 9 and 12m .... but what is the annual funding requirement ? that will put us way over £40m in debt come start of season surely ? What has happened so that the cost savings have made no difference ?
Does the charge by ARVO seperate the assets of the club from its liabilities ? why and what purpose? (- effectively yes it does and wards off any other creditors from taking action against the club )
Why didnt Mr Mutton know of the ARVO charge surely when entering discussions you find out as much as you can about the other side ?
where has the £40m gone ? do they mean the money put into CCFC or the money put in SBS&L ?
What happened to the prozone money (7m) ? has it been used as an inter company loan to CCFC or paid out elsewhere? If so to who?
just a few that came to mind........... reporting what we already know is not enough ..... dig and then dig some more
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?