SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Tell me Rupert the clown who is going to come in and take on a league 1 club and pay 1.2 million rent?
Yesterdays meeting (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter mattylad
- Start date
thegameaintstraight
New Member
If OSB is right and SISU are manouvering to get all of ACL on the cheap how much might it cost them and how much could they then exit for?
Could not someone else step in and buy a distressed ACL from under SISU's nose. What would they do then? SISU can pull the plug on CCFC any time, but at least they would be gone. You will have gathered I haven't much of a clue, just musing how to change things.
Could not someone else step in and buy a distressed ACL from under SISU's nose. What would they do then? SISU can pull the plug on CCFC any time, but at least they would be gone. You will have gathered I haven't much of a clue, just musing how to change things.
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
You never know !! Anyone stepping in would do so from a power of strength and would almost certainly done mountains of homework, something i think SISU didn't do. Do they exist ?? don't know, but think they might
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No that was not the point at the remark.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
i wonde rif the ACL utd fans will stay on SBT if rent gets agreed and the season moves on?
can we have a sub forum for acl utd fans?
can we have a sub forum for acl utd fans?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well I am sure that reassures all supporters doesn't it?
mattylad
Member
Thats the point of my post though, no judge will be involved if its SISU that file for voluntary liquidation only if its compulsory! No one can stop SISU from saying ok were done close the doors however you would think they would sell if someones come forward with more cash than they stand to gain through liquidation (circa 2-3 million I would guess after all fee's are paid)
Bluegloucester
New Member
If SIsu liquidate what are they getting £2/3m for? The only asset is Ryton and that is not worth anything like £2/3m.
SkyBlueCharlie
Well-Known Member
How do we know this meeting took place apart from some vague report on CWR, who are of course, totally against the 'leaked' statements in the CT. :thinking about:
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
And so would CCFC.....
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Does the FA have rules for liquidation? I know that football creditors get paid first when a club goes in to admin.
mattylad
Member
how do u know CWR dont report leaked statements or that the report was vague?
Last edited:
mattylad
Member
I am not sure it has ever happened to a league status club in England?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It did to Maidstone - they I think we're the last - and Newport and Accrington.
mattylad
Member
Aldershot had to start again at the bottom of the pyramid under a new name I have just read and they were wound up by the courts
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Sky Blues
Active Member
Lord Tim Vader, your devotion to that old religion has not brought about the reduction in rent we were hoping for.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8GEidaMMI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Last edited:
CJparker
New Member
So you're happy to see CCFC take the piss and not pay the agreed rent, which is to cover the mortgage the council had to take out when they built the stadium for the club??
I don't want ACL to settle for a single penny less than the agreed rent. Yes it's more than the L1 average, but it's the best stadium in the league by far and we're not going to be playing anywhere else. It's dishonourable now to try to worm out of a deal because we don't want to pay anymore.
As a taxpayer as well as a fan, I don't want to see some Mayfair sharks benefit by holding the council to ransom and threatening to kill CCFC. Renegotiate in future, maybe. Sell a sharei n the stadium in future, maybe. But don't give in
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I am aghast any fan wants the club to be forced to pay a bloated rental any longer -- unbelievable.
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Fulfilling a contract is not 'forced' except in Grendel's Sisu PR world....
stupot07
Well-Known Member
That's wrong, The mortgage is ACL's not the council's and it (the £20m) paid upfront the 50 year lease for the Ricoh. This £20m paid back the money the council spent on building the Ricoh.
CJparker
New Member
And why is the rent so high? BECAUSE THE COUNCIL PAID FOR THE STADIUM - when we didn't have a pot to piss in and were homeless!!!!! YOU CRETIN
They have paid for us to have a ground and now we are walking on out on the arrangement for us to pay them back. It's unfair, unjustifiable, and dishonourable. It embarrases me as a CCFC. IF I was ACL I would evict them and not renegotiate a penny.
Seriously Grendel, if you can't see the logic of this then you are the one-eyed one around here. Putting the banter about King for England and Andy Thorn to one side, you either love playing devil's advocate or are a bit of a knob.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Your facts regarding Ground ownership, what we owe, implications for tax payers and how that determines what we have to pay are all factually incorrect.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
They didn't pay for the stadium, they contributed about £15m to a £113m build (doesn't include land clearance that ccfc paid for), this had been paid back by ACL paying the 50 year lease rent upfront (£20m).
CJparker
New Member
But the rent is there to pay back ACL (the council) for stepping in and making the up the shortfall in investment when the club couldn't afford to complete the ground - and CCFC cant' just renege on that. £1.2m per year is perfectly reasonable.
To be honest I don't even know why this being debated. The council/ACL are in the right in every conceivable way.
I don't want to see SISU turfed out as such, but their stewardship of CCFC has been an embarrasment , no more so than when they are trying to bully the council and its taxpayers into settling.
kg82
Well-Known Member
You would welcome CCFC being kicked out, having nowhere to play? Therefore probably leading to crippling penalties, both financially and in football terms?
I want this sorted as quickly as possible. The one thing I do not want is no team to support.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No ACL are a commercial entity who were set up to manage and eventually profit from the Ricoh. Our rent is just part of that income, nothing to do with paying off the debt, their mortgage is just part of their expenditure.
Business deals are renogotiated every day, even the council will be renogotiating deals with their suppliers to get the best price and value for money they can.
I don't agree with witholding the rent but to suggest that the rent shouldn't be renogotiated and should stay as it is bizarre.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
ACL is not the council. It is the company entrusted with managing the Ricoh that comprises the Higgs charity and the council-the charity having bought that share off the club who wanted the money to settle more pressing short term debts. The stadium itself is a legacy of BR's 'punt'.
CJparker
New Member
Stu[pot, you seem to view ACL and the rent as completely divorced from the question of the council's investment in the stadium in the first place. The rent is meant to go to ACL to refund them for their investment in the stadium - simple as that.
Yes business deals are re-negotiated, but to me it appears that only one party here is negotiating - ACL. From their point of view, I don't see why they should, and would not see an advantage in re-negotiating. As a taxpayer, I want the best deal possible for the club and the council - on balance, that means keeping the status quo.
Yes business deals are re-negotiated, but to me it appears that only one party here is negotiating - ACL. From their point of view, I don't see why they should, and would not see an advantage in re-negotiating. As a taxpayer, I want the best deal possible for the club and the council - on balance, that means keeping the status quo.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
ACL haven't invested in the stadium, they have bought a 50 year lease to enable them to manage and profit from the building. The ccfc rent is just income just like the concerts, the exhibitions, the Olympics, etc. from that income they pay the bills (e.g utilities and the mortgage, etc).
No money goes into ACL from the council and no money (yet) has come out.
ACL paid the 50 year lease up front, this money paid the council back for their contribution towards the stadium.
Our rent is part of ACLs income it is not a HP agreement.
The council will not agree a deal that is not affordable.
CJparker
New Member
Again, you talk about ACL and the council as if they are totally different entities - one co-owns the other!!
Mat,e you need to see the bigger picture. A tenant has cocked up massively, and through no fault of the landlord is crying wolf about being unable to pay. All to make the losses a bit more bearable for a Mayfair hedge fund who haven't exactly done an Abramovic at CCFC. The rent as it is now is affordable - it's just that our owners are choosing not to pay.
Dress it up whatever way you want - we are legally and morally obliged to pay back people who saved our necks, and yet we are knifing them in the back instead. It's disgusting.
Mat,e you need to see the bigger picture. A tenant has cocked up massively, and through no fault of the landlord is crying wolf about being unable to pay. All to make the losses a bit more bearable for a Mayfair hedge fund who haven't exactly done an Abramovic at CCFC. The rent as it is now is affordable - it's just that our owners are choosing not to pay.
Dress it up whatever way you want - we are legally and morally obliged to pay back people who saved our necks, and yet we are knifing them in the back instead. It's disgusting.