What had happened in 2011? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
Dunno. Was that Balloongate?
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
i think council were not receptive to discussions to lower the rate from 1.4m
alot like how everytime CET ran a story about cov possibly buying the ricoh they would release a statement saying WE HAVE THE POWER OF VETO
alot like how everytime CET ran a story about cov possibly buying the ricoh they would release a statement saying WE HAVE THE POWER OF VETO
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The council were led at the time by that clown Mutton, he was probably pissed off about the perceived lack of investment in the team. That mentality set the negotiations for the stadium up to fail along with all of the other reasons.
Nick
Administrator
Tried here but not much - http://www.skybluetrust.co.uk/index...ine/357-ricoh-arena-timeline?showall=&start=5
This is from the Judicial Review findings -
"16. The worsening performance of the Football Club – both on the pitch and financially – caused its owners to begin discussions for a fundamental restructure of the business of both the club and ACL from about October 2011. SISU were commercial investors, and were not prepared to put funds into the Football Club without a plan for a return on the substantial investment they had made, which they estimated to have been about £40m. There were a number of strands to their approach, as follows:
i) In pursuit of their wish to have some ownership of the Arena, SISU would purchase back the 50% share of ACL held by the Higgs Charity. SISU regarded obtaining an interest in the Arena, and hence the revenues from the Arena, as crucial.
ii) SISU would discharge the whole of the existing bank debt, by purchase and
write off.
iii) SISU and the Council would together work as partners in ACL to place the businesses on a sound commercial footing,
by (a) increasing usage of the Arena in cooperation with a venue management company, AEG;
(b) agreeing commercially sustainable terms for rent and match-day revenues; and
(c) the Council extending the lease to ACL to 125 years.
17. There were therefore a number of meetings between representatives of ACL (including Mr Reeves, Mr West and Mr Harris) and of SISU (including CCFC). At these, all parties fully appreciated that the arrangements in place could not continue: CCFC was simply unable to comply with its contractual obligations to ACL (notably the rental payments), and SISU were not minded further to bankroll its subsidiary.
At the meeting on 29 March 2012, Ms Joy Seppala (the Chief Executive Officer of SISU Capital Limited, a SISU company which acted as investment manager for certain funds held within the SISU group) “confirmed that [SISU] cannot keep funding ad infinitum to the football club without a resolution with ACL”, and she “added that if [the parties] cannot do a stadium deal, then SISU is finished "
"16. The worsening performance of the Football Club – both on the pitch and financially – caused its owners to begin discussions for a fundamental restructure of the business of both the club and ACL from about October 2011. SISU were commercial investors, and were not prepared to put funds into the Football Club without a plan for a return on the substantial investment they had made, which they estimated to have been about £40m. There were a number of strands to their approach, as follows:
i) In pursuit of their wish to have some ownership of the Arena, SISU would purchase back the 50% share of ACL held by the Higgs Charity. SISU regarded obtaining an interest in the Arena, and hence the revenues from the Arena, as crucial.
ii) SISU would discharge the whole of the existing bank debt, by purchase and
write off.
iii) SISU and the Council would together work as partners in ACL to place the businesses on a sound commercial footing,
by (a) increasing usage of the Arena in cooperation with a venue management company, AEG;
(b) agreeing commercially sustainable terms for rent and match-day revenues; and
(c) the Council extending the lease to ACL to 125 years.
17. There were therefore a number of meetings between representatives of ACL (including Mr Reeves, Mr West and Mr Harris) and of SISU (including CCFC). At these, all parties fully appreciated that the arrangements in place could not continue: CCFC was simply unable to comply with its contractual obligations to ACL (notably the rental payments), and SISU were not minded further to bankroll its subsidiary.
At the meeting on 29 March 2012, Ms Joy Seppala (the Chief Executive Officer of SISU Capital Limited, a SISU company which acted as investment manager for certain funds held within the SISU group) “confirmed that [SISU] cannot keep funding ad infinitum to the football club without a resolution with ACL”, and she “added that if [the parties] cannot do a stadium deal, then SISU is finished "
The Penguin
Well-Known Member
They've certainly hung around for a long time for people who are "finished".
"18. At 2 April 2012, there were rent arrears owed by CCFC to ACL of about £89,000. From that date, CCFC went on a rent strike, making it tolerably clear that they did not intend to pay any further rent unless and until a restructuring agreement to their (and SISU’s) satisfaction was made. No further rent was in fact paid; although
(i) from April 2012, ACL drew down moneys from the escrow account as and when rent fell due (see paragraph 24(ii) below),
and (ii) from August 2012, CCFC agreed to pay ACL up to £10,000 per match in respect of match-day costs (which would have been covered by the rental payments, had they made them) without which ACL made clear they would not be allowed to open the ground for the match.
19. ACL were dependent upon the rental income from CCFC to enable it to make repayments of the Bank loan. Without the rent regularly being paid, as SISU wellknew, ACL would not be able to continue to make those repayments. In those circumstances (or if CCFC were to go into administration or, worse, liquidation, each of which SISU suggested they contemplated as possibilities), SISU and the Council, as well as ACL, knew that ACL would be at the mercy of the Bank or anyone who purchased the loan from the Bank.
20. CCFC’s rent strike thus provoked a financial crisis within ACL which, as 2012
progressed, increased in intensity.
(i) from April 2012, ACL drew down moneys from the escrow account as and when rent fell due (see paragraph 24(ii) below),
and (ii) from August 2012, CCFC agreed to pay ACL up to £10,000 per match in respect of match-day costs (which would have been covered by the rental payments, had they made them) without which ACL made clear they would not be allowed to open the ground for the match.
19. ACL were dependent upon the rental income from CCFC to enable it to make repayments of the Bank loan. Without the rent regularly being paid, as SISU wellknew, ACL would not be able to continue to make those repayments. In those circumstances (or if CCFC were to go into administration or, worse, liquidation, each of which SISU suggested they contemplated as possibilities), SISU and the Council, as well as ACL, knew that ACL would be at the mercy of the Bank or anyone who purchased the loan from the Bank.
20. CCFC’s rent strike thus provoked a financial crisis within ACL which, as 2012
progressed, increased in intensity.