I can't get my head round this.
Everybody is saying it's cheap at £2.77M but Sisu offer suggests it's not.
I'm confused on the value of the place.
From here on the Ricoh now has a permanent tenant playing at the top level in their sport. This should add value and will mean that ACL should be worth more than Wasps paid.
To try and keep it brief SISU had, from day one, the option to buy 50% at the formula price - they never exercised this option. They made a bid at below the formula price which was accepted by Higgs, they then changed this offer and the deal fell apart, according to the judge in the JR neither side had any desire to complete the deal.
It appears that SISU have been successful in distressing, at least to some extent, ACL. As a result both CCC and Higgs accepted a lower price, and took a loss, than otherwise might have been accepted. The price Wasps have paid is seemingly fair but is cheap in the grand scheme of things due to SISU's cause of action in causing distress to ACL.
From here on the Ricoh now has a permanent tenant playing at the top level in their sport. This should add value and will mean that ACL should be worth more than Wasps paid.
But sisu were trying to offering the same? Better educate fred the common sense king then
Sisu’s Joy Seppala says Coventry City Football Club will not “interfere” with any talks over a sale of the Ricoh Arena to rugby club London Wasps.
Speaking for the first time about the controversial Wasps proposal, she told the Get Cov Back To The Ricoh fans’ group: “We will not interfere with any deal between Wasps and Arena Coventry Limited regarding the Ricoh.” She said one of many hurdles to any prospect of a Ricoh deal had been ACL’s contract with private firm Compass and the joint venture IEC, which had made an upfront payment to ACL in return for the Ricoh’s revenues from catering sales.
“We don’t want to be distracted from what really matters to us, to the club and to the fans. We are focusing all of our efforts on making this season a great one for CCFC and securing our future.”
Ms Seppala added there remained “long term investment plans” for the Coventry City football club, and “long-term investors” backing plans for a new stadium. Property consultants are actively working to secure a site that would include the commercial development potential around it. The long-term aim is for the new stadium to help maximise income for the team from stadium revenues.
She said: “We are moving on with our new stadium plans because the club needs access to revenues 365 days a year. You can’t build a new stadium overnight and we are happy to be back at the Ricoh Arena while we develop our plans for a new permanent home for CCFC.”
But sisu were trying to offering the same? Better educate fred the common sense king then
Negotiations for the Restructuring or Purchase of the Bank Debt
46. As I have indicated, SISU were of the view that there was no commercial rationale for a deal with the Bank over purchase of the ACL debt, without agreement on the purchase of a share in ACL. However, SISU’s aspirations for the debt purchase too were unrealistic.
47. SISU considered that the Bank debt could be purchased for £2m-5m. It was part of their plan that the debt be purchased – in whole, or at least as to 50%, by them – for that sum. They were not prepared to offer more. The Heads of Terms supposed that, the debt having been purchased, it would be entirely written off; although the Council was sensible to the possibility that SISU might purchase the debt from the Bank (which had no constraints on the person to whom the loan and mortgage might be transferred) and use their position as creditor to put further pressure on ACL and thus the Council.
Focusing on this season being a great one !!!
I would suggest they need more focus !
SISU's offer hung on what they could negotiate with Yorkshire Bank. They were planning to pay back a fraction of the outstanding £14M loan from them.
However they never got any agreement with YB and the amount they said they'd need to pay back was unrealistic.
So in fact Nick, SISU's offer I'm sure you will agree was not like what Wasps, because it is understood that Wasps have taken on the whole loan and I think I read somewhere that they have to pay back over a shorter term than the one the council had restructured the original YB loan to.
This was all stated in the JR judgement.. http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/in...ece/binary/Judicial Review High Court verdict
You don't expect an answer to that, do you? Posting factual data and exerts from the JR doesn't have the same currency as making things up, forgetting key facts, and extending a hypothesis based on 'ifs'...
SISU's offer hung on what they could negotiate with Yorkshire Bank. They were planning to pay back a fraction of the outstanding £14M loan from them.
However they never got any agreement with YB and the amount they said they'd need to pay back was unrealistic.
So in fact Nick, SISU's offer I'm sure you will agree was not like what Wasps, because it is understood that Wasps have taken on the whole loan and I think I read somewhere that they have to pay back over a shorter term than the one the council had restructured the original YB loan to.
This was all stated in the JR judgement.. http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/in...ece/binary/Judicial Review High Court verdict
Was that both offers? Including the cash one for between 2 and 3 million (cant remember the exact amount) where people like Dongo were going batshit mental about starving children being ripped off?
Does anybody know what has happened to the loan now wasps are here?
Was that both offers? Including the cash one for between 2 and 3 million (cant remember the exact amount) where people like Dongo were going batshit mental about starving children being ripped off?
Does anybody know what has happened to the loan now wasps are here?
Is it too obvious for it to still be with ACL?
You know like every other arrangement with ACL. Or has the clubs current rent deal with ACL also mysteriously disapered too?
Nothing is ever too obvious though is itMaybe intheknow can answer on the other thread when he turns off his laser sight from les reid.
So what reason do you have to think otherwise?
I am not saying that the full loan hasn't just been passed over
It's the more likely answer in fact.
But fascinating that in the interests of an open accountable democracy, nobody wants to say and put the conspiracies to bed...
ACL will have to file accounts with Companies House at some time. So we will get to know then at the latest. If the deal has been completed, why can't we ask under the FOI act? Even if it is commercially sensitive, the deal is done now - so why the secrecy?
ACL will have to file accounts with Companies House at some time. So we will get to know then at the latest. If the deal has been completed, why can't we ask under the FOI act? Even if it is commercially sensitive, the deal is done now - so why the secrecy?
Perhaps the accounts will be a bit of a mess
But yes indeed, why the secrecy...?
If it's gone to the wasps consortium yes why. If it hasn't.......
Originally Posted by [B said:Grendel[/B]
If it's gone to the wasps consortium yes why. If it hasn't.......
Deleted member 5849;818864]What we need is someone intheknow to enlighten us.
It will show loan payments - I don't see why it would show who the lender is .
That nobody seems to actually know 100% as it was all done in private. I am not saying that the full loan hasn't just been passed over, but nothing is that simple is it?
In the mean time I'm sure there will be little hesitation about talking of the latest rumour as if it is a fact, and that's a fact!
It will show loan payments - I don't see why it would show who the lender is .
I assume MMM's Internet has gone down.
A lender generally takes security over the entity to which it provides the facility. That security is a matter of public record. He that helps.
Or I'm watching the England egg-chasing. Again, you've tried to change the debate.
Nick keeps harping on about SISU's offer being 'the same'. It's not. Their offer was conditional on getting the YB loan at a very low value. That's clearly evidenced in the JR papers, isn't it?
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Wasps took over the loan at any less than face value? Any at all?
So, if the lender is CCC, they will have a charge over the 250 year lease. If Wasps default, the lease reverts to CCC - is that correct?
Why do you think Wasps have a 250 year lease?
Do you answer every question with a question?
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?