Astute
Well-Known Member
You have insinuated several things against me when they are all false.
You have insinuated several things against me when they are all false.Did I say you had said CCC were truthful then? Can you point it out to me please.
The high rent was a legally binding contract. Something you and others get very upset about being broken. SISU didn't negotiate a rent of £1.3 million. They inherited it. Yes they should have addressed it when they took over. No debate required on that. Problem was everybody's hero Ranson didn't think it was necessary. People still continue to think he was a good guy though. I assume because he spent money. Only problem with that was. It weren't our money.
Oh and the point you missed is that if the initial lease was longer the loan would have been easier to finance. Thus meaning the rent wouldn't of been so high. Now SISU weren't around when the initial lease was granted.
Que an abusive reply.
Do you mean the mortgage where the arena would have gone as security to the mortgage lender and not SISU?Alternatively they could have let it go into administration. Thus removing some or all of the loan. The loan that CCC set up which hampered ACLs viability from the outset.
Do you mean the mortgage where the arena would have gone as security to the mortgage lender and not SISU?
What has the lease got to do with SISU? They were not on the scene. It was supposed to be 50% ours. But those running our club had different ideas on how to keep our club afloat.The point is if CCC had issued a longer lease and was less reliant on the football club. It would have been difficult for SISU to distress it. Companies that are distressed are those in difficulty. The difficulty ACL were in was of the council's making.
It would have been open to bidders.What would the mortgage lender have done with it? I'm talking YB. At the start of this mess. They would have appointed an administrator? To achieve the best possible price? Which would be where SISU would buy it? That's what they do. They would have lent on the administrator saying the ricoh is only viable with the club as a tenant so you should sell to us.
What has the lease got to do with SISU? They were not on the scene. It was supposed to be 50% ours. But those running our club had different ideas on how to keep our club afloat.
It would have been open to bidders.
Are you going to say that it was a white elephant and only SISU would have been interested?
Astute has already told you... SISU were NOT on the scene at that time.Another that completely misses the point. CCC ballsed up on the lease and financing it. They then were shit at running ACL. This led to a high rent for the club and a reliance on the club. CCC set ACL up to fail. I said it above. That isn't and wasn't the fault of SISU.
Why are people hellbent on defending a council who screwed over their football team out of spite against its owners.
OK. We seem to be getting somewhere now.
So who has said that it was all the fault of SISU and nobody else is to blame? I blame quite a few from Richardson onwards. But you have others that will tell you people like Richardson are innocent of all charges.
It would have been open to bidders.
Are you going to say that it was a white elephant and only SISU would have been interested?
How did you work that out Nick?Because if it had a proper lease at the start, ACL wouldn't have been struggling so much whether it had the club or the Higgs.
You called it a white elephant that nobody but SISU would be interested in. You was wrong as usual and still try to say the same.Of course it was a a white elephant.
What do you blame SISU for?What do you blame the council for?
How did you work that out Nick?
You called it a white elephant that nobody but SISU would be interested in. You was wrong as usual and still try to say the same.
1, Trying to help CCFC with public money.What do you blame the council for?
And Wasps are a figment of your imagination I suppose.No I was 100% correct. It was valueless and no one would touch it with a barge pole.
He blames CCC for everythingA scenario for you Grendel.... You are SISU. You actually do "Due Diligence" and decide not to buy CCFC. What do you do next?
And Wasps are a figment of your imagination I suppose.
A scenario for you Grendel.... You are SISU. You actually do "Due Diligence" and decide not to buy CCFC. What do you do next?
OK. You make out that you know everything. So the loan would have been long term. Only paying interest by the sound of what you say was best. So how much would the endless payments have been?The reason is the loan would have been financed at a far more preferential rate.
The only profit stream was from the rent received by the club. That effectively financed the loan.
A long lease would have made the business far more viable, allowed financing to be made over a much longer period and at a lower rate and therefore allowing he main tenant a far more sensible deal.
Once a lease goes below 50 years it's value becomes much lower.
They did. And got the lease extension by negotiation. Something SISU refused to do.Wasps didn't buy a management company with a 40 year lease as that's a worthless company.
They did. And got the lease extension by negotiation. Something SISU refused to do.
They did. And got the lease extension by negotiation. Something SISU refused to do.
I'll bet you're into S&M toojordan willis's girlfriend
OK. You make out that you know everything. So the loan would have been long term. Only paying interest by the sound of what you say was best. So how much would the endless payments have been?
They didn't, it was always about 100% and the long lease. The lease was approved before they even bought Higgs share.
They got 100%, a 250 year lease for not far from what they wanted off CCFC for 50% of a short lease. There's the difference, hence one is worthless.
This should define what really happened, although the CT isn't trusted too much nowadays....
Any other highlights?
Wasps were granted an extension to the Ricoh Arena lease from 50 years to 250 years as a result of the deal to secure ACL.
The Ricoh Arena was given a value of £48.5m.
The club’s premiership rugby shares were valued at £9.7m.
Average attendance of 11,401 was up 29 per cent from 8,846 in the previous year.
Ticket income was up 42 per cent on the previous year.
Of course it was all the CCC's fault. They had SISU in the "Sharpshooter" and forced them into submission to buy into the high rent. What is the saying now?.... "Should have gone to Specsavers"
OK where do we start just in case you are clueless.
SISU moved us to Northampton leaving the arena empty.
They said we would never move back to the Ricoh.
They continually said that they were building a new stadium.
They refused to negotiate on the Ricoh.
They knew that the arena would make a loss without a full time tenant. They knew that CCC couldn't keep losing money especially in these days of austerity where funds needed for people in need are even being cut.
SISU were refusing to take on the mortgage. Fisher even said that they would not have taken on the debt like Wasps did.
So what is your point on SISU not forcing CCC into a corner?
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?