cc84cov
Well-Known Member
Change in stance due to no European rugby my guess
Change in stance due to no European rugby my guessWhere Sky Blues recruitment plan stands amid Ricoh row
'The rugby club, however, hinted that they would be happy to resume discussions if given assurances about the legal situation.'
So they now only want assurances? Interesting
Need more detail than that? What assurances can the football club provide? The complaint is now out of the hands of the club or its owners.Where Sky Blues recruitment plan stands amid Ricoh row
'The rugby club, however, hinted that they would be happy to resume discussions if given assurances about the legal situation.'
So they now only want assurances? Interesting
Young-ish, thin-ish, beard, very dark hair?FWIW of the pictures I saw from Saturday I couldn't see the person i understand to be PSB
Where Sky Blues recruitment plan stands amid Ricoh row
'The rugby club, however, hinted that they would be happy to resume discussions if given assurances about the legal situation.'
So they now only want assurances? Interesting
If they mean they want the football club to cover any financial implication if the council and / or Wasps are found to be in the wrong there's no way the club should agree to that.
Latest Coventry City developments.
An attempt to clarify some of the information on the latest in the Ricoh Arena saga after Wasps said last week they had pulled the plug on talks over CCFC staying at the stadium.
Strap yourselves in…
Why did talks stop?
CCFC’s owners filed a complaint to the EU Commission in February about the sale of the Ricoh Arena to the rugby club.
Wasps say this breached the pre-condition for talks – that legal action over the Ricoh Arena should stop before talks.
Why have talks only stopped now if the EU complaint was made in February?
Wasps say they were not aware of the complaint when they entered into negotiations “in good faith”. They started after the conclusion of the UK Court case.
Is this legal action?
CCFC / Sisu don’t think seem to think so. Wasps disagree.
The EU Commission defines this as a “legal process”.
If either side isn’t happy with the outcome of this complaint it could be appealed to the General European Court.
So it could end up in court?
Yes – and more than one.
Judgments of the EU General Court can be appealed before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) by the unsuccessful party.
Is this the same legal action?
No. It’s a new process. The UK Court process died in the Supreme Court.
But Wasps believe “the basis of the complaint to the EU is very similar in all matters of substance to the recent court actions” and “seeks remedial action.”
Isn’t this complaint is against the council, not Wasps?
Yes. But Wasps were not the respondent in the UK court case either.
Both actions appear to focus on the same “state aid” argument - that Wasps underpaid for the stadium by £27m and that amounts to state aid.
So why won’t Wasps talk?
The failed court process, and apparently this one, seeks to force Wasps to pay millions more for the Ricoh Arena.
That would put them under severe financial pressure. So it impacts Wasps – whether they’re the direct subject of the action or not.
If the council hasn’t done anything wrong will it cost Wasps money?
Wasps wouldn’t have to pay more for the Ricoh.
But there are costs to defend this.
Wasps says it spent £0.5m defending the UK case – but costs were eventually awarded to them by the Supreme Court.
Can the complaint be withdrawn?
Not in reality. If the Commission establishes that there is a breach of the competition rules, then it must act and it is irrelevant if the complaint is withdrawn or not.
So if it can’t be stopped, how long will this take?
The complaint hasn’t moved to a full investigation yet – it’s being assessed.
If it does, the investigation is likely to take months.
And if the result of that is appealed through the courts it could take years.
So will CCFC play at the Ricoh next season?
Not at the moment – unless Wasps change their stance or the EU Commission drops the case.
CCFC have said they are accelerating their back-up ground share options.
What does all this mean for CCFC’s future?
On May 29 EFL clubs are due to meet and vote on whether to expel CCFC from the Football League.
That’s unless the club can satisfy the EFL board they have somewhere to play next season.
Where can I read more about the EU Commission process?
Here: Antitrust: Overview – Competition - European Commission
FWIW of the pictures I saw from Saturday I couldn't see the person i understand to be PSB
He also peddled it on Twitter ... and got the link to the EC wrong. The one he posted relates to anti-competition regulations (Article 101, including cartels), rather than State Aid (Article 107).We knew all that last week though? He has also missed points out of it.
Where Sky Blues recruitment plan stands amid Ricoh row
'The rugby club, however, hinted that they would be happy to resume discussions if given assurances about the legal situation.'
So they now only want assurances? Interesting
I rekon they will agree to itIf I were sisu I’d agree to it and if the EC rules against CCC and London Wasps just refuse to pay the cash, I’m sure their legal team would find some way of weaselling out of it and depending on when the payments had to be made the franchise’s cash flow could send them straight to admin.
I rekon they will agree to it
I’d have put a years wages against them agreeing to exclude London Wasps from all legal action a week ago. Who knows what they’re all up to.I'd be amazed if they do.
I wouldnt imagine its the sort of move which will attract future investors, putting in a complaint about state aid and and then agreeing to cover the losses that result as a consequence of your complaint.I’d have put a years wages against them agreeing to exclude London Wasps from all legal action a week ago. Who knows what they’re all up to.
As I see it, Wasps have nothing to gain or lose by agreeing a rental agreement with CCFC. The investigation will go ahead regardless of whether an rental is agreed or not. Best to have a rental income whilst the investigation goes ahead than no income at all ?Surely this week we will have some of idea as to where we will be playing! Everyone still hopeful a deal can be done?
So surely they have something to gain?As I see it, Wasps have nothing to gain or lose by agreeing a rental agreement with CCFC. The investigation will go ahead regardless of whether an rental is agreed or not. Best to have a rental income whilst the investigation goes ahead than no income at all ?
So surely they have something to gain?
So surely they have something to gain?
The only variable is if Wasps continue to receive rent and other revenues from CCFC. Nothing else can be changed.What do they have to gain though?
The only variable is if Wasps continue to receive rent and other revenues from CCFC. Nothing else can be changed.
So wasps have told Gilbert that the want any costs covering, no chance sisu will agree to that
Looks like he is building up to something....
So wasps have told Gilbert that the want any costs covering, no chance sisu will agree to that
Do ya rekon sisu might be forced to agreeWe knew last week Wasps had asked for their costs to be covered if it backfires on them.
Do ya rekon sisu might be forced to agree
It would explain why there are so many desperate social media accounts in overdrive making things up.
Thanks for that - be interesting to see how’s he spins it?
Thanks for that - be interesting to see how’s he spins it?
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?