Wasps pull out... (2 Viewers)

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

I don't think anyone has answered the question (other than David O'Day calling me clueless!!) of how Wasps and CCC are not inextricably linked in the EC "investigation". They are two sides of the same coin. My understanding is that the *transaction* is what might be deemed by the Commission to be contrary to the EU state aid laws. And given the possible outcomes in the event of that eventuality, Wasps may well be financially liable for the shortfall. How could SISU's legal advisers not know that might be possible when saying they should complain about CCC to the EC.

Anyone?
Bueller?

ceetee · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
I don't think anyone has answered the question (other than David O'Day calling me clueless!!) of how Wasps and CCC are not inextricably linked in the EC "investigation". They are two sides of the same coin. My understanding is that the *transaction* is what might be deemed by the Commission to be contrary to the EU state aid laws. And given the possible outcomes in the event of that eventuality, Wasps may well be financially liable for the shortfall. How could SISU's legal advisers not know that might be possible when saying they should complain about CCC to the EC.

Anyone?
Bueller?

Well perhaps my thinking is naive but I would have thought that provided Wasps entered into the deal in good faith and paid an agreed market value for what they bought, then they are in the clear

If Wasps conspired with the council to stitch up SISU and CCFC to take ACL and the lease on at a fire sale price, which was less than market value, then both parties deserve whatever outcome the EC decides.
Perhaps the truth is somewhere between, but what are Wasps afraid of, other than pressure from the council?

Nick · May 17, 2019

ceetee said:
Well perhaps my thinking is naive but I would have thought that provided Wasps entered into the deal in good faith and paid an agreed market value for what they bought, then they are in the clear

If Wasps conspired with the council to stitch up SISU and CCFC to take ACL and the lease on at a fire sale price, which was less than market value, then both parties deserve whatever outcome the EC decides.
Perhaps the truth is somewhere between, but what are Wasps afraid of, other than pressure from the council?

It would be naive to think that Wasps Lawyers wouldn't check it all over first.

David O'Day · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
I don't think anyone has answered the question (other than David O'Day calling me clueless!!) of how Wasps and CCC are not inextricably linked in the EC "investigation". They are two sides of the same coin. My understanding is that the *transaction* is what might be deemed by the Commission to be contrary to the EU state aid laws. And given the possible outcomes in the event of that eventuality, Wasps may well be financially liable for the shortfall. How could SISU's legal advisers not know that might be possible when saying they should complain about CCC to the EC.

Anyone?
Bueller?

When did I even reply to you

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Liquid Gold · May 17, 2019

What has happened in previous state aid cases? My instinct says as long as there’s no proof of collusion London wasps would be ok. Probably why they’re so worried.

Nick · May 17, 2019

Liquid Gold said:
What has happened in previous state aid cases? My instinct says as long as there’s no proof of collusion London wasps would be ok. Probably why they’re so worried.

Wasps’ Legal Troubles

That the sale of land at a value other than the true market value can be considered “aid” was confirmed in Commission v Real Madrid CF [2016]. In that case, as Keane explains, Real Madrid exchanged a plot of land known as “Las Tablas” for public land owned by the City of Madrid around the Bernabeu stadium, in an operation to offset mutual debts. The Commission found that the public land had been over-valued by EUR 18.4 million and ordered Real Madrid to pay that amount back to the City.

Im not an expert, just an example.

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

Liquid Gold said:
What has happened in previous state aid cases? My instinct says as long as there’s no proof of collusion London wasps would be ok. Probably why they’re so worried.

I'm not sure, LG - the outcomes stated by the EC are that Wasps (i.e. the party that has benefitted from the state aid) COULD be forced to pay the amount by which they have benefitted.

Sky Blue Pete · May 17, 2019

David O'Day said:
I have a life outside of here? Is that a crime? You of these folk who still has city bed sheets in old age?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Just a towel

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
Wasps’ Legal Troubles

Im not an expert, just an example.

Exactly - therefore Real were 18.4 million out of pocket by benefitting from the state aid. The same COULD happen to Wasps, which is why they cannot be separated from CCC in the complaint, in my view.

Nick · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
Exactly - therefore Real were 18.4 million out of pocket by benefitting from the state aid. The same COULD happen to Wasps, which is why they cannot be separated from CCC in the complaint, in my view.

That would only happen if CCC were at fault. If they have a problem, they should be speaking with CCC rather than demanding SISU or CCFC cover it

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

David O'Day said:
When did I even reply to you

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Wasps pull out...

None taken :joyful:

Sky Blue Pete · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
That would only happen if CCC were at fault. If they have a problem, they should be speaking with CCC rather than demanding SISU or CCFC cover it

Yep true but they do own the ball and can do what they like with anyone that wants to join in. They aren’t innocent bystanders anymore even if they were in many peoples eyes previously

Liquid Gold · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
I'm not sure, LG - the outcomes stated by the EC are that Wasps (i.e. the party that has benefitted from the state aid) COULD be forced to pay the amount by which they have benefitted.

So they COULD not. It depends on the terms of the investigation. Collusion would be a pretty big indicator as to why they COULD be forced to pay.

Liquid Gold · May 17, 2019

Sky Blue Pete said:
Yep true but they do own the ball and can do what they like with anyone that wants to join in. They aren’t innocent bystanders anymore even if they were in many peoples eyes previously

So we should leave the Ricoh asap as we don't want landlords that act like that yeah?

Nick · May 17, 2019

Sky Blue Pete said:
Yep true but they do own the ball and can do what they like with anyone that wants to join in

Yeah that point was brought up when CCC sold it to them but it was overlooked but Lucas reeled out her bullshit and a PR campaign to make sure people weren't bothered.

It baffles that people can't see that if SISU went tomorrow, it would still be their ball to do what they like with...

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
That would only happen if CCC were at fault. If they have a problem, they should be speaking with CCC rather than demanding SISU or CCFC cover it

Would it though, Nick? The investigation will be into the transaction (i.e. sale of the Ricoh), unless they will only investigate CCC because that is what SISU asked them to do? I think the EC will broaden their scope to look at all aspects of the deal. City of Madrid weren't required to pay anything in that example.

chiefdave · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
Exactly - therefore Real were 18.4 million out of pocket by benefitting from the state aid. The same COULD happen to Wasps, which is why they cannot be separated from CCC in the complaint, in my view.

For that to happen CCC would have to be found to be in the wrong, possibly along with Wasps as well. If that's the case surely the blame is on them not SISU? And if they aren't found to be in the wrong the EC will chuck it out and no harm done to Wasps.

Nick · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
Would it though, Nick? The investigation will be into the transaction (i.e. sale of the Ricoh), unless they will only investigate CCC because that is what SISU asked them to do? I think the EC will broaden their scope to look at all aspects of the deal. City of Madrid weren't required to pay anything in that example.

They will investigate what they think would be in the wrong. They only even investigate if they think it's dodgy in the first place.

If for some reason they investigate and on the off chance they find wrong doing, that will be on the council's head won't it?

SonofErnie · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
That would only happen if CCC were at fault. If they have a problem, they should be speaking with CCC rather than demanding SISU or CCFC cover it

That would be my thinking. Surely the only chance of a deal is if CCC indemnify Wasps against the potential outcome of the EC complaint and influence them to complete the deal with CCFC, on the basis that the chances of the EC finding against them is a long shot at best.

Not sure if you are inferring that's a conversation taking place or just hopeful that it might be?

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
They will investigate what they think would be in the wrong. They only even investigate if they think it's dodgy in the first place.

If for some reason they investigate and on the off chance they find wrong doing, that will be on the council's head won't it?

That's what i don't think anyone has asked for clarification on.
I'm not expecting anyone to provide answers they don't have, or just shit-stirring.
I think one of Giblet's twitterings "quoted" the EC as saying they could force Wasps to pay the shortfall (if they chose to investigate)

Nick · May 17, 2019

SonofErnie said:
That would be my thinking. Surely the only chance of a deal is if CCC indemnify Wasps against the potential outcome of the EC complaint and influence them to complete the deal with CCFC, on the basis that the chances of the EC finding against them is a long shot at best.

Not sure if you are inferring that's a conversation taking place or just hopeful that it might be?

No, Wasps are demanding that CCFC / SISU indemnify them against it. So effectively if the council are found to be in the wrong, CCFC or SISU cover anything they have to pay.

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

SonofErnie said:
That would be my thinking. Surely the only chance of a deal is if CCC indemnify Wasps against the potential outcome of the EC complaint and influence them to complete the deal with CCFC,

Well that's us fucked then!!!

chiefdave · May 17, 2019

SonofErnie said:
That would be my thinking. Surely the only chance of a deal is if CCC indemnify Wasps against the potential outcome of the EC complaint and influence them to complete the deal with CCFC, on the basis that the chances of the EC finding against them is a long shot at best.

Not sure if you are inferring that's a conversation taking place or just hopeful that it might be?

Can pretty much guarantee that conversation isn't talking place but again its a question the local media should be asking of Wasps. Why are you expecting CCFC to indemnify you and not CCC who, in the event of a payout having to be made, be the organisation at fault. Not to mention asking why their legal team didn't pick this up as an issue during the sale, given legal action was in progress then, and insist on indemnification from the council at the time of the sale.

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
No, Wasps are demanding that CCFC / SISU indemnify them against it. So effectively if the council are found to be in the wrong, CCFC or SISU cover anything they have to pay.

That would be perverse in the extreme! Fuck 'em!

Nick · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
That would be perverse in the extreme! Fuck 'em!

They have just moved the goalposts from what they originally said.

It's also interesting that SISU appeared to have signed something to call off the legals they were actively pushing too apparently. I didn't even expect that.

chiefdave · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
That would be perverse in the extreme! Fuck 'em!

Maybe they'll apply it to everything going forward. Lets say the Wasps manager gets done for drunk driving and get a couple of years inside, we could send Robins along to do his time.

chiefdave · May 17, 2019

Nick said:
It's also interesting that SISU appeared to have signed something to call off the legals they were actively pushing too apparently. I didn't even expect that.

Surprised me as well, certainly didn't expect SISU to sign up for anything like that.

Nick · May 17, 2019

chiefdave said:
Surprised me as well, certainly didn't expect SISU to sign up for anything like that.

Wonder if that is nulled now if there's no deal?

David O'Day · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
Wasps pull out...

None taken :joyful:

Oh yeah sorry

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

David O'Day · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
Wasps pull out...

None taken :joyful:

I think I quoted the wrong post, my bad

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

David O'Day said:
I think I quoted the wrong post, my bad

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

I assumed you were just being a c**t! Fucking disappointed now! :happy:

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

It auto-corrected my expletive!

MalcSB · May 17, 2019

SonofErnie said:
That would be my thinking. Surely the only chance of a deal is if CCC indemnify Wasps against the potential outcome of the EC complaint and influence them to complete the deal with CCFC, on the basis that the chances of the EC finding against them is a long shot at best.

Not sure if you are inferring that's a conversation taking place or just hopeful that it might be?

Wouldn’t the council indemnifying wasps be illegal state aid?

David O'Day · May 17, 2019

OffenhamSkyBlue said:
I assumed you were just being a c**t! Fucking disappointed now! :happy:

I can be a c**t if wantef

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

OffenhamSkyBlue · May 17, 2019

MalcSB said:
Wouldn’t the council indemnifying wasps be illegal state aid?

Like it!!

Wasps pull out... (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency