Nervous PMG

Don't worry it's a wasted thread according to Sven it's bollocks

It was in fact Cardiff city's own chief executive who met with the council for PMG - but Sven will probably say that's v
Bollocks too.

My contact at the council claims Jenkins is actually paid/ employed by PMG and not Cardiff city , according to Jenkins.hence why he represented PMG to the council enquiry.

Thanks Motor Mouth....I think you'll see I actually apologised when Big Gwyn said it was FACT!! Unlike YOU, I can do that when appropriate!!

And let's be fair, you do have form for getting things wrong....

I await another slating....

Don't worry it's a wasted thread according to Sven it's bollocks

It was in fact Cardiff city's own chief executive who met with the council for PMG - but Sven will probably say that's v
Bollocks too.

My contact at the council claims Jenkins is actually paid/ employed by PMG and not Cardiff city , according to Jenkins.hence why he represented PMG to the council enquiry.

Thanks Motor Mouth....I think you'll see I actually apologised when Big Gwyn said it was FACT!! Unlike YOU, I can do that when appropriate!!

And let's be fair, you do have form for getting things wrong....

Say again?

I await another slating....

I tell you what , its a good job you stick to the rule of not allowing "sniping" on here when you post Annis.

Shadwell asked who owned shares in which company , nothing to do with old accounts (which contain info. up to July 2010 so are fairly recent anyway). The answer is that VT holds in shares in Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd - as disclosed in all the papers sent out to shareholders , including yourself , before the meeting to approve the share issue last May.
Holdings then owns all the shares in both Cardiff City Football Club and Cardiff City Stadium - they are both wholly owned subsidiaries.

The chances of anyone trying to avoid debt by putting one company through but retaining assets in a closely connected one are pretty slim , both under insolvency legislation and in football terms.You may remember Southampton F.C claiming their holding company was totally seperate from their football club when they went into Admin , and failed.

If PMG have made a formal approach to the Council over this and it is given any kind of serious consideration, it is likely to appear shortly in published minutes on their website.

The situation I always think of when this comes up is the Farepak Christmas Hamper situation in 2006. Farepak was a wholley owned subsiderary of European Home Retail but when Farepak went into administration, it entered alone and EHR were not responsible for any of its debts and basically walked away.

If that's the case then why wouldn't the same apply to CCFC Holdings (and by association CCS Ltd) if say CCFC went bust?

Keith, out of interest though. Suppose the club went tits up because the Malaysians did a runner, from what you are saying the stadium would be in trouble aswell. PMG though would be the major creditor I assume and therefore have first dibs on the stadium and everything in it.
With no other buyers likely they could then offer their secured 9m debt (or what ever it is) as payment for the stadium. Doubt there'd be any other takers so they would then turn their 9m debt into a 30m asset, that asset being a new stadium without any debt.
The overheads would be drastically reduced because there's no footballers to pay, no debts to pay, and with that peppercorn rent they pay to the council everything would be fine apart from who would play there.
So maybe that's why they meet with the rugby people to answer that question. Maybe the WRU would be able to find use for a stadium that can host events that the Millennium can't and on a week to week basis maybe the Newport Dragons could share with the Blues.

Keith, out of interest though. Suppose the club went tits up because the Malaysians did a runner, from what you are saying the stadium would be in trouble aswell. PMG though would be the major creditor I assume and therefore have first dibs on the stadium and everything in it.
With no other buyers likely they could then offer their secured 9m debt (or what ever it is) as payment for the stadium. Doubt there'd be any other takers so they would then turn their 9m debt into a 30m asset, that asset being a new stadium without any debt.
The overheads would be drastically reduced because there's no footballers to pay, no debts to pay, and with that peppercorn rent they pay to the council everything would be fine apart from who would play there.
So maybe that's why they meet with the rugby people to answer that question. Maybe the WRU would be able to find use for a stadium that can host events that the Millennium can't and on a week to week basis maybe the Newport Dragons could share with the Blues.

In that scenario, PMG would be liable for things like business rates. Maintenance costs for the stadium. Management of the stadium.

You think PMG want that, for what would be a white elephant?

Blues can't even half fill the stadium. You talk about renting it, well, without WRU/council subsidies, PMG would have to ask for more rent from the Blues - who are cash strapped. Newport? LOL. Only in emergencies, as Newport's crowds would drop dramatically.

Concert revenue, sure, but there aren't going to be a massive number of such things...

PMG would prefer the land rather than the stadium. Without permission for that to be rezoned... then you've demolition costs to factor in... also add that would mean the Blues needing to play elsewhere, which could scupper the council's CAP plans...

I'd expect PMG wuld look at the possibilities for a worst case scenario. us going out of existence and PMG having the stadium would very much be something PMG wouldn't want.

I tell you what , its a good job you stick to the rule of not allowing "sniping" on here when you post Annis.

Shadwell asked who owned shares in which company , nothing to do with old accounts (which contain info. up to July 2010 so are fairly recent anyway). The answer is that VT holds in shares in Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd - as disclosed in all the papers sent out to shareholders , including yourself , before the meeting to approve the share issue last May.
Holdings then owns all the shares in both Cardiff City Football Club and Cardiff City Stadium - they are both wholly owned subsidiaries.

The chances of anyone trying to avoid debt by putting one company through but retaining assets in a closely connected one are pretty slim , both under insolvency legislation and in football terms.You may remember Southampton F.C claiming their holding company was totally seperate from their football club when they went into Admin , and failed.

If PMG have made a formal approach to the Council over this and it is given any kind of serious consideration, it is likely to appear shortly in published minutes on their website.

The situation I always think of when this comes up is the Farepak Christmas Hamper situation in 2006. Farepak was a wholley owned subsiderary of European Home Retail but when Farepak went into administration, it entered alone and EHR were not responsible for any of its debts and basically walked away.

If that's the case then why wouldn't the same apply to CCFC Holdings (and by association CCS Ltd) if say CCFC went bust?

Tony

That`s a fair comment re Farepak , but that case is also the reason why the courts have since taken a tougher stance on attempts to "cut off the offending part" as it were.

If anyone wanted to collapse part of the CCFC group and still carry on as a football team they would have course have the problem of the legal precedent in the Southampton case and well as the problem with the tightening up of the League insolvency rules brought in since the likes of Swansea, Leicester wtc. took advantage of the old ones to shed debt but carry on.

If someone jusy wanted to move forward with the stadium asset , they also have a problem as there is a clawback clause in place with the Council for the first 20 years to prevent exploitation of the land for anything other than sporting purposes.No other local sport other than CCFC would be able to fund the running of the stadium.

Keith

FFS all these posts about who owes who what,whos taking who to court,which agreement on the loan notes is in play,its all getting a bit tedious whoever owes who what or whatever happens theres not a lot us mere mortals can do about it so i suggest we forget about all these claims and counter claims,and people sniping against each other ,and wait and see what happens,if the shit does hit the fan then we can raise the issue but until then as i say lets leave it alone theres nothing we can do about it
and before anyone says i dont care about the club because this affects the club,bollocks im just sick of reading about it; RANT OVER

FFS all these posts about who owes who what,whos taking who to court,which agreement on the loan notes is in play,its all getting a bit tedious whoever owes who what or whatever happens theres not a lot us mere mortals can do about it

I'd never question someone's commitment to the club on the back of a sensible point like that.

I think the problem is the bit I've quoted here - from what I can gather some people think they have more influence on the club than they do. This is how it appears from looking objectively at various opinions. I can't help that.

You're too right though, nobody posting on here has any influence on actions at Cardiff City FC in the grand scheme of things.

If someone jusy wanted to move forward with the stadium asset , they also have a problem as there is a clawback clause in place with the Council for the first 20 years to prevent exploitation of the land for anything other than sporting purposes. No other local sport other than CCFC would be able to fund the running of the stadium.

Keith

The bolded part isn't quite true, from memory.

I was informed by someone at the council quite a while ago their concern based over the sale of Plough Lane; hence the clause was added to mainly prevent Hammam ( later Ridsdale ) from getting the stadium built then flogging the stadium off ASAP.

The land, afaik, wouldn't be exploitable for other purposes without council permission anyway - as planning permissiomn was granted for the stadium, so too any changes would also need to get full permission.

EDIT:

And even so, the council are prepared to change their minds - wasn't there a codecil on Ninian the land was given to the city of Cardiff on the proviso it was used for sports facilities?