Always a Wasp

Retirement? Good luck to you.  Life is short, get out early, people.

The world is full of talentless 'leadership' arseholes who couldn't hang a picture or wire a plug, spending their time analysing, reviewing, and 'managing' vacuous transitions from exploration to implementation phases of project  'x' where x is a project to do what was being done 10 to 15 years ago with a new empty slogan on top and a few buzz words thrown in. Rinse and repeat five years down the line with a new project to create an illusion of prigress. They create more parasites to manage whilst the people actually doing the jobs slip further down the tree.
This is one reason why people in their 50s who can are leaving the workforce in record numbers. It has been going on for years - look back at satires like The Fall and Rise of Reggie Perrin and you can see it in the 70s, but the magnitude of it today is off the scale.
I love my job of teaching- well I love the lessons and the staff room talk- but I will be getting out as soon as I can afford to. I am lucky to have had the choice to work in the independent sector, which is often behind state in the bullshit, but it catches up eventually.

For a moment there, I thought you worked in the NHS.

Agreed. I fear your owners have dropped you in it somewhat with the Hyam sale but you’re still good enough for mid table - which is an achievement given the circumstances. I don’t follow closely but I’m confused as to why holding on to your three best assets has been so badly received in terms of the transfer window?

People simply expected more than keeping them, a view that a bit of investment would make us promotion prospects - especially given the record st sales. However, it doesn’t sound as if we have got the proverbial pot to pee in, the Hyam sale was a huge surprise yet didn’t give enough cash to reinvest. Not having a poke, but the postponed three games will have created a cash flow problem which the Hyam sale will probably have merely plugged.

But that’s just my take on it - as usual.

Quote from: Shugs on September 02, 2022, 08:27:59 PM

Stadium upkeep costs paid by who? Not SISU. Not CCC. I think you’ll find it’s redeemed Sam - not the news you wanted I know.

But he has to keep poking!

I’m not poking, it’s a fact that the bonds haven’t actually been redeemed yet. It’s bondholders who are saying that they are in a worse position than before - now no timetable and just a repeat of what was said about HSBC three months ago. If it comes to pass then great, but just don’t count chickens etc. on the other hand, someone called John Dawkins who seems to claim to be itk on all sorts of matters (and Shuggs would otherwise call a hack) suggested a few days ago that Wasps had got a deal. So may be it’s true, and if so good luck to you.

Quote from: SBSam on September 01, 2022, 05:43:52 PM

Quote from: Raggs on September 01, 2022, 05:14:55 PM

"The issuer is now working on the proposed bond terms to be amended and will formally launch a consent solicitation process in August once the proposed terms have been finalised."

Let's highlight the other bit. Perhaps the terms haven't been finalised. If the terms are being put together with the input of major bondholders (I'd presume this is allowed and indeed sensible), then it could be that things are still being hammered out.

It could even be signs of good news. There's no need to launch a consent solicitation process if the bond is simply going to be paid.

There was clearly an expectation that the terms would have been finalised in sufficient time before the end of August in order that the revised terms could be offered for acceptance or rejection in August. This is similar to the statements that we have agreed terms with HSBC, we are finalising terms with HSBC, we are pursuing alternative financing - all at various points in this debacle as the end point has been kicked further and further down the road.

However, your point about the lack of need for a Solicitation if the bonds are simpler going to be repaid is a good one. However, if there was an expectation that this would be the case, why not update the bondholders?

I suspect you've seen the latest update, looks like I may well have been correct.

Yes you may well have been, but as I said on the good news thread Wasps said they were in a similar position with HSBC in May. As I also said on the other thread, if they manage to pull this off it will be good news for all Wasps supporters.

What really should have happened is that the unavailability of the pitch due to the CWG should have been written in to the lease agreement which had to be approved by the EFL who would then have had to take it in to account when scheduling.

That being said, the pitch wasn’t available on 21 August either.

As RossM said, it is probable that everyone was taken by surprise by the damage, although the ground staff were tweeting about difficulties with getting the pitch ready for the 7s beforehand.

As an aside, I am turfing on my lawn today 

Quote from: SBSam on September 02, 2022, 12:10:11 PM

Quote from: matelot22 on September 02, 2022, 12:05:38 PM

Quote from: SBSam on September 02, 2022, 11:59:49 AM

Quote from: WonkyWasp on September 02, 2022, 10:36:15 AM

Presumably Slimy you referring to the bit where ccfc admit that they didn't actually pay anything at all towards  the pitch improvements??   Can we now look forwards to abject apologies (or any apologies of any kind would be nice)   for the mud slinging and claims that ccfc were indeed paying for said improvements??

Slimy? That’s a bit unfair.

It is a carefully worded answer to a question. CCFC claimed in the beginning that they had offered to pay the upfront costs - help with the cash flow- which Wasps declined. Paying nothing extra over the season is consistent with that claim, in that upfront costs could be recovered by an equal and opposite reduction in rent. If that isn’t the case, wouldn’t it have been far easier just to say that Wasps had paid for the repairs? The beauty with statements is that you don’t have to deal with any awkward follow up questions.

IF the above is correct, it would indeed mean that Wasps have paid for said repairs, which is what should be the case in a landlord: tenant relationship. They have, however, done so with a degree of bad grace, such that the dispute resolution process had to be invoked and a third party mediator brought in.

In CCFC fans views, Wasps were in denial about the pitch given their statement about the move of the cup match to Burton and their hope that the next league match would be played at the CBSA, coupled with their reluctance to commence repairs asap. That is in addition to the need to bring in Andy Street. In the event, neither of the next two home league games were played. If Wasps had accepted that the pitch wasn’t up to scratch, agreed a remedy and actioned it at the earliest possible time, at least one of those matches could have been played.

I agree that the EFL were unsympathetic, assuming they were approached in the first place. We may get a feel for whether they were or not based in the whatever punishment they mete out to the football club for the postponements.

For your amusement, CCFC supporters are once again pretty cheered off with our owners, given the record st sales and lack of transfer activity and the clubs own role in the whole pitch fiasco.

I'll think you'll find Wonky was referring to Sliminator, and not your good self.

Wonky is the happiest, least offensive soul on the whole of the internet, and would never resort to petty name calling.

Phew. It can get difficult to know who is being responded to. TBH I thought it was an autocorrect, I would be deeply hurt to be insulted by Wonky.

I thought it was an autocorrect as well

In the early days of spellchecking, my son wrote a religious knowledge essay and the computer threw a wobbler at Iscariot and suggested escargot instead - true story.

That’s hilarious. Is the going rate for a snail 20 pieces of lettuce?

Quote from: SBSam on September 02, 2022, 10:35:15 AM

Depends on what that confidence was based. I think Wasps weren’t expecting the amount of damage, certainly rugby fans seemed surprised.

I don’t thin releasing the statement earlier would have made any difference to fans feelings. It was the fact that Wasps were denying there was a problem with the pitch, and hence refusing to repair it that was the big issue.

Wasps said nothing about the pitch.CCFC went crying to the press first.
No denial ever took place by Wasps.

Were you there when Vaughan and Boddy discussed it? Sometimes actions (in this case inactions) speak louder than words.

Presumably Slimy you referring to the bit where ccfc admit that they didn't actually pay anything at all towards  the pitch improvements??   Can we now look forwards to abject apologies (or any apologies of any kind would be nice)   for the mud slinging and claims that ccfc were indeed paying for said improvements??

Slimy? That’s a bit unfair.

It is a carefully worded answer to a question raised on SBT. CCFC claimed in the beginning that they had offered to pay the upfront costs - help with the cash flow- which Wasps declined. Paying nothing extra over the season is consistent with that claim, in that upfront costs could be recovered by an equal and opposite reduction in rent. If that isn’t the case, wouldn’t it have been far easier just to say that Wasps had paid for the repairs? The beauty with statements is that you don’t have to deal with any awkward follow up questions.

IF the above is correct, it would indeed mean that Wasps have paid for said repairs, which is what should be the case in a landlord: tenant relationship. They have, however, done so with a degree of bad grace, such that the dispute resolution process had to be invoked and a third party mediator brought in.

In CCFC fans views, Wasps were in denial about the pitch given their statement about the move of the cup match to Burton and their hope that the next league match would be played at the CBSA, coupled with their reluctance to commence repairs asap. That is in addition to the need to bring in Andy Street. In the event, neither of the next two home league games were played. If Wasps had accepted that the pitch wasn’t up to scratch, agreed a remedy and actioned it at the earliest possible time, at least one of those matches could have been played.

I agree that the EFL were unsympathetic, assuming they were approached in the first place. We may get a feel for whether they were or not based in the whatever punishment they mete out to the football club for the postponements.

For your amusement, CCFC supporters are once again pretty cheered off with our owners, given the record st sales and lack of transfer activity and the clubs own role in the whole pitch fiasco.