fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Higgs had no legal entitlement to the £29k. Would you have paid it?
Higgs had no legal entitlement to the £29k. Would you have paid it?I am still trying to work out why Higgs would prefer to sell to Wasps. Can't have anything to do with messing Higgs about last time and then SISU wasting a 6 figure sum just to get out of paying Higgs 29k can it?
Higgs had no legal entitlement to the £29k. Would you have paid it?
As apposed to a £29k + legal bill? You'd be stupid not to wouldn't you? It's no like SISU gained from it did they?
If they hadn't put in the ridiculous counter claim that forced it from county to crown Court and then turned up with an army of lawyers they may have stood a chance of saving some money of the £29k Higgs were looking for but that's not what happened was it? It ended up costing them considerably more.
OK then, you should give me a grand right now. It is going to cost you more in court bills if you fight it, so just give me the grand please.
OK then, you should give me a grand right now. It is going to cost you more in court bills if you fight it, so just give me the grand please.
How do I owe you a grand when I've never even met you?
Can you think of any reasons why it might not be a great idea to bid for the shares against wasps. Also at the same time announce you want to still build a seperate stadium that removes one of the business from the company you are half bidding for?
There is a skybluetony176 tax on this site so your legal bill is going to be massive, so just pay up
If it was really going to happen, you would fight it wouldn't you if you thought you didn't have to pay it rather than just hand it over or give me half as a gesture.
I'd let you take it to the small claims court. I wouldn't put in a counter offer that meant it went to crown Court. What's your point?
So what TF is saying in this piece is that owning 100% of a stadium that's half the size of the Ricoh, probably won't have hotel rent, probably won't have casino rent, probably won't have exhibition hall revenue, probably won't have rail links, probably won't be in a major motorway junction and therefore be less attractive to the magical 365 day a year income than it's nearest competitor, probably the Ricoh. On top of that it will be more expensive to build than buying a half share of ACL with little chance of a major supermarket getting on board and sharing the development costs like Tescos did at the Ricoh. On top of that your ever dwindling customer base that you've decimated for various reasons don't want it is a better option than owning a half share of ACL. How?
Wanting to build a stadium and being able to build a stadium are two totally different things.
Yep that is exactly why you do. Cold hard business reasons.Or you could look at it from the other way... you buy half of a company that 'potentially' could be successful for at least one of the parties. So you could sell up later down the line for more than you paid for it... providing some finance for your 'new stadium', have something tangible to allow you to sell you share in the club as a whole, or even pick up the share off your partner because it hasn't worked out for them.
What if it cost you more than a grand in legal fees in total? Why would you spend more when you could just pay up? My point is that you said they were stupid not to pay it as their legal fees were higher.
If they won their counter claim you'd have a point but given the speed it was dismissed I can't believe that they weren't advised that it had no chance. So that only ever left 2 options, lose and pay the £ 29k plus all court costs or draw and pay your own now considerable cost as you've dragged it up to crown Court.
So why wouldn't you just pay the £ 29k and save yourself the extra cost's and the negative publicity that surrounded it?
maybe they have offered to drop the JR appeal?
Now there's a caption competition waiting to happen.
It's a point of principle and the court case allowed us the fans to see that it was not just sisu that walked away, that all 3 parties had lost he appetite for a deal. That part largely falls on deaf ears.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
It's a point of principle and the court case allowed us the fans to see that it was not just sisu that walked away, that all 3 parties had lost he appetite for a deal. That part largely falls on deaf ears.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I dont think it was a point of principle but the court made it very clear that there was no appetite to do a deal on any side which is why everyone lost.LOL.
Are we really meant to believe that SISU did it as a point of principle? Please!
I dont think it was a point of principle but the court made it very clear that there was no appetite to do a deal on any side which is why everyone lost.
Absolutely but it should not have changed the outcome and that is what the original post was aimed at.And they had to go to crown Court to do this? They couldn't have got the same result at County Court?
Higgs had no legal entitlement to the £29k. Would you have paid it?
OK then, you should give me a grand right now. It is going to cost you more in court bills if you fight it, so just give me the grand please.
yes but who were the main protagonists in all this SISU were
Actually, in that instance Higgs started the legal action.
There was a solicitor who basically did just that I'll have a look for the details later.
the bid is from CCFC Ltd via the liquidator as I believe. Now how those funds are going to be moved into CCFC ltd has not been made clear but you have to presume the deal includes a level of refinancing of CCFC Ltd by Otium.Has it been made clear who has actually made/put the bid to the liquidator? SISU or SBS&L or Otium or another SISU entity?
the bid is from CCFC Ltd via the liquidator as I believe. Now how those funds are going to be moved into CCFC ltd has not been made clear but you have to presume the deal includes a level of refinancing of CCFC Ltd by Otium.
in which case if it is from Otium I wonder if rather than refinancing CCFC Ltd and having to pay out money that they claim beneficial ownership of the option in the same way they did with the golden share. Perhaps they could argue they acquired the rights to it when they paid out the £1.5m to the liquidator?
Although my understanding has always been that the option could not be transferred or claimed by a third party without the AEHC permission
“Through the liquidator the club has been given an opportunity to purchase the Higgs’ shares in ACL and we have made a very generous offer" so does that mean that Appleton has chosen to offer them beneficial ownership or that he has just said well CCFC Ltd is not yet liquidated and remains part of the club structur so if you choose to you can make a bid?in which case if it is from Otium I wonder if rather than refinancing CCFC Ltd and having to pay out money that they claim beneficial ownership of the option in the same way they did with the golden share. Perhaps they could argue they acquired the rights to it when they paid out the £1.5m to the liquidator?
Although my understanding has always been that the option could not be transferred or claimed by a third party without the AEHC permission
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?