Sky blue north east
Member
There must be people interested as one group have been in touch with the administrator....
Whats your gut reaction (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter oldskyblue58
- Start date
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
Think I said this 4 pages back?
My gut reaction is survival now. We need SISU here now. If they went tomorrow what would become of us? We don't know because we don't have all the evidence yet.
I appreciate the sentiment OSB but this only serves to evaluate that media suggestion even more as under your remit I would expect most to vote for SISU to go as is being shown.
Like a good politician you have a twisted poll to enshrine the answer you are looking for.
It reminds me of a poll we may get on Europe. It's a bit muddied and leaning tbf OSB although I did see where your thinking lies but fear what it will do to the posters on here who are already either slightly blinkered and missing enormous facts and simply want these beastie boys to leave without knowing the consequences.
How about:
1. SISU go now, notwithstanding the fact there is no one else so club would fold.
2. SISU stay for the time being until a buyer is found or an exit plan is agreed with the council/ACL?
Think the answer would be very different.
Last edited:
skyblue1523
New Member
I agree with this
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
So how do we begin to answer this? Well OSB would probably define it better than me. But it's all paper trails and largely debt to them selves. You seem to be implying the figure of 60m or whatever is against CCFC or the football club as an entity and therefore we are in shit creek? It's not quite like that. case in point Man Utd....some 3 or 400m in debt and if that falls apart is largely in borrowings all raised in the market place.
CCFC Ltd is argued have no connection with the running of the football club and as such were put in admin while CCFC Holdings Ltd is not and running the club as is. The football club (the Sky Blues) can't be in administration unless you believe the view misunderstood by many.The only way that can happen is if the golden share, player registrations are with the company in admin.
What I don't understand is how CCFC Ltd which was stated as having no debts and basically just held the lease is suddenly 60m in debt? That surely is CCFC Holdings Ltd? if so why is the administrator mentioning this? Was all this debt somehow all dumped in the company now in admin? Or why is it said the administrator is running the football club? he is not. He is running/operating CCFC Ltd. We are also told they still can't determine where the golden share lies? How ridiculous is that? They would need to determine this to make the football club controlled by CCFC Ltd. and therefore the administrator? SISU dispute it still so they must be sure of themselves?
Nothing is clear cut here but there are two separate companies involved - one with an administrator and one still in control of the club. However why were the team fielded last week at the Ricoh and who is the short term agreement with to use the Ricoh to the end of season? Admin company or Holdings? For me if the admin company is running the show then they must have the golden share within that company? They would be on a sticky wicket otherwise. Yet SISU claim it's with Holdings? Who is paying players wages? Seems Holdings are so why if they don't have the golden share? Who has the players registrations? Holdings it seems. SISU went ahead and placed CCFC Ltd in admin because they stood their ground or why on earth would they do it? What's stopping SISU from placing 'Holdings' into liquidation?
For the administrator to step in and run the club as we know it then they have to assume they have the golden share, players registrations, will pay their wages, get short term agreements with ACL to use Ricoh, be in receipt of all ticket sales. That is what appears but they can't say for sure if they have all these crucial of shares, registrations etc at CCFC Ltd? As far as we know he is not paying player wages? Yet he must if they claim the running of the football club under the CCFC Ltd banner?
The league may find us one of the same for purposes of a points deduction come what may and I'd agree with that and glad that has happened now not next season. But they may yet be forced to reverse it. Why have SISU not dropped any appeal and just run with that? Maybe they have today?
It just does not add up. Yet it's simple to ask. Next time Linnell should ask Fisher those points I raise and get simple answers. Ask ACL the same and get simple answers.
CCFC Ltd is argued have no connection with the running of the football club and as such were put in admin while CCFC Holdings Ltd is not and running the club as is. The football club (the Sky Blues) can't be in administration unless you believe the view misunderstood by many.The only way that can happen is if the golden share, player registrations are with the company in admin.
What I don't understand is how CCFC Ltd which was stated as having no debts and basically just held the lease is suddenly 60m in debt? That surely is CCFC Holdings Ltd? if so why is the administrator mentioning this? Was all this debt somehow all dumped in the company now in admin? Or why is it said the administrator is running the football club? he is not. He is running/operating CCFC Ltd. We are also told they still can't determine where the golden share lies? How ridiculous is that? They would need to determine this to make the football club controlled by CCFC Ltd. and therefore the administrator? SISU dispute it still so they must be sure of themselves?
Nothing is clear cut here but there are two separate companies involved - one with an administrator and one still in control of the club. However why were the team fielded last week at the Ricoh and who is the short term agreement with to use the Ricoh to the end of season? Admin company or Holdings? For me if the admin company is running the show then they must have the golden share within that company? They would be on a sticky wicket otherwise. Yet SISU claim it's with Holdings? Who is paying players wages? Seems Holdings are so why if they don't have the golden share? Who has the players registrations? Holdings it seems. SISU went ahead and placed CCFC Ltd in admin because they stood their ground or why on earth would they do it? What's stopping SISU from placing 'Holdings' into liquidation?
For the administrator to step in and run the club as we know it then they have to assume they have the golden share, players registrations, will pay their wages, get short term agreements with ACL to use Ricoh, be in receipt of all ticket sales. That is what appears but they can't say for sure if they have all these crucial of shares, registrations etc at CCFC Ltd? As far as we know he is not paying player wages? Yet he must if they claim the running of the football club under the CCFC Ltd banner?
The league may find us one of the same for purposes of a points deduction come what may and I'd agree with that and glad that has happened now not next season. But they may yet be forced to reverse it. Why have SISU not dropped any appeal and just run with that? Maybe they have today?
It just does not add up. Yet it's simple to ask. Next time Linnell should ask Fisher those points I raise and get simple answers. Ask ACL the same and get simple answers.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Then you said....
The concept is easy to grasp.
The execution of the concept is ultimately impossible as considered thought is required.
Which one is it then?
So Stuart Linnell thinks its only a small minority that wants Sisu to go does he?, You'ld have to be a blind man on a galloping horse to miss the fact that its a huge majority who want Sisu to go, Taking their destructive, and shifty influence with them, these people are an epitome of all that's Rotten about the predatory methods of the vulture like Hedge funds.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
A couple of graphs showing the way debt has been loaded onto CCFC Ltd & CCFC(Holdings) Ltd in the past few years.
There is a clear trend, I'm sure the experts on site will be able to explain better why..
These graphs only show data till last published accounts in May 2011
CCFC Ltd
CCFC(holdings) Ltd
Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd
Note Sconset Capital (offshore company, no data) owns Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd which owns Otium Entertainment Group Limited (no data as never filed accounts for that company) which owns CCFC(Holdings)Ltd, which owns CCFC Ltd.
There is a clear trend, I'm sure the experts on site will be able to explain better why..
These graphs only show data till last published accounts in May 2011
CCFC Ltd
CCFC(holdings) Ltd
Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd
Note Sconset Capital (offshore company, no data) owns Sky Blue Sports & Leisure Ltd which owns Otium Entertainment Group Limited (no data as never filed accounts for that company) which owns CCFC(Holdings)Ltd, which owns CCFC Ltd.
Last edited by a moderator:
