Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 3, 2015 12:42:09 GMT
Why didn't our legal team get in first with a settlement offer - say £25m? Surely this would have covered the issue of costs going against us? That would only work if we were awarded damages of over £25m (we may have made such an offer for all we know) but so far we've been awarded zero so that wouldn't offer us any costs protection? Rovers might say we weren't advised to take £1.5m, but I don't think we denied that we wanted £15m+
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Aug 3, 2015 16:09:37 GMT
Why didn't our legal team get in first with a settlement offer - say £25m? Surely this would have covered the issue of costs going against us? That would only work if we were awarded damages of over £25m (we may have made such an offer for all we know) but so far we've been awarded zero so that wouldn't offer us any costs protection? Of course, thanks - I'm so confused with this, can't see the wood for the trees!
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Aug 3, 2015 18:42:16 GMT
Toni Watola said on Made in Bristol that the statement released by Sainsbury was NOT true.
He indicates that the Judge did not say we should have accepted £1.5m
No doubt his interview will appear shortly
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 18:58:19 GMT
Toni Watola said on Made in Bristol that the statement released by Sainsbury was NOT true. He indicates that the Judge did not say we should have accepted £1.5m No doubt his interview will appear shortly Did he give his explanation of things, or just deny theirs?
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:10:14 GMT
Toni Watola said on Made in Bristol that the statement released by Sainsbury was NOT true. He indicates that the Judge did not say we should have accepted £1.5m No doubt his interview will appear shortly Did he give his explanation of things, or just deny theirs? It was a short interview.
It covered the above point. The interpretation of the £375k costs and he declined to comment on if Sainsbury made an offer what was acceptable.
I do not blame him for the answer to the last point as BRFC are hoping to clear this matter by the end of this year.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:19:13 GMT
Think you've missed a vital word or words in your last post?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 19:20:46 GMT
Did he give his explanation of things, or just deny theirs? It was a short interview.
It covered the above point. The interpretation of the £375k costs and he declined to comment on if Sainsbury made an offer what was acceptable.
I do not blame him for the answer to the last point as BRFC are hoping to clear this matter by the end of this year.
It sounds like he didn't say anything about whether UWE are still 'our partners' either. That's a shame.
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:23:48 GMT
Think you've missed a vital word or wors in your last post? I've got no idea what you mean.
I suggest you all wait for the interview to appear somewhere.
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:25:39 GMT
It was a short interview.
It covered the above point. The interpretation of the £375k costs and he declined to comment on if Sainsbury made an offer what was acceptable.
I do not blame him for the answer to the last point as BRFC are hoping to clear this matter by the end of this year.
It sounds like he didn't say anything about whether UWE are still 'our partners' either. That's a shame. You have to take into account that Made in Bristol only appear to ask three questions.
They could well have asked more but they never made the broadcast item
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:41:14 GMT
Think you've missed a vital word or wors in your last post? I've got no idea what you mean.
I suggest you all wait for the interview to appear somewhere.
"declined to comment on if Sainsbury made an offer what was acceptable." Just that comment didn't make sense to me? Surely they'd accept an offer which was acceptable to them, or wasn't he prepared to comment what was an acceptable offer? If the latter, like you, I don't blame him!
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Aug 3, 2015 19:54:06 GMT
I've got no idea what you mean.
I suggest you all wait for the interview to appear somewhere.
"declined to comment on if Sainsbury made an offer what was acceptable." Just that comment didn't make sense to me? Surely they'd accept an offer which was acceptable to them, or wasn't he prepared to comment what was an acceptable offer?
If the latter, like you, I don't blame him! Sorry if my message was ambiguous.
He was not prepared to comment on what was an acceptable offer although he said he had his own opinion but the matter had not been discussed by the Board.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 3, 2015 19:59:51 GMT
Watola is a knob anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 3, 2015 20:04:12 GMT
No need to apologise but thanks for clarifying, I do find it hard to believe both sides have apparently attended a mediation meeting, to try and agree settlement prior to the trial but the BoD have never discussed what would be a reasonable settlement.
You can see how the meeting went:
Sainsbury's "our opening offer is £1.5m
Rovers "we went the full £15m"
Sainsbury's "we're not prepared to pay that but are prepared to negotiate if you want to make a counter offer"
Rovers "unfortunately we're not prepared to negotiate as we're confident we have a watertight contract "
Sainsbury's "in that case we'll have to see you in court"
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 3, 2015 20:07:14 GMT
No need to apologise but thanks for clarifying, I do find it hard to believe both sides have apparently attended a mediation meeting, to try and agree settlement prior to the trial but the BoD have never discussed what would be a reasonable settlement. You can see how the meeting went: Sainsbury's "our opening offer is £1.5m Rovers "we went the full £15m" Sainsbury's "we're not prepared to pay that but are prepared to negotiate if you want to make a counter offer" Rovers "unfortunately we're not prepared to negotiate as we're confident we have a watertight contract " Sainsbury's "in that case we'll have to see you in court" Exactly,.we were never ready to negotiate
|
|
|
Post by woodygas on Aug 4, 2015 13:31:22 GMT
It does clearly say that the £1.5m was the final offer after other "derisory offers". I'd therefore say we would all turn down offers of a couple of hundred grand if we were confident in winning. The final offer of £1.5m was still low, so if Rovers had said £15m as an opener in response to £100k, then said £10m in response to £500k, as examples, then £1.5m as a final offer was a long way short of the negotiation or bartering...
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 4, 2015 13:44:44 GMT
It does clearly say that the £1.5m was the final offer after other "derisory offers". I'd therefore say we would all turn down offers of a couple of hundred grand if we were confident in winning. The final offer of £1.5m was still low, so if Rovers had said £15m as an opener in response to £100k, then said £10m in response to £500k, as examples, then £1.5m as a final offer was a long way short of the negotiation or bartering... Bartering would have been good. 'We are prepared to take the £15m in cream crackers and Findus fishcakes'
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 4, 2015 14:00:41 GMT
It does clearly say that the £1.5m was the final offer after other "derisory offers". I'd therefore say we would all turn down offers of a couple of hundred grand if we were confident in winning. The final offer of £1.5m was still low, so if Rovers had said £15m as an opener in response to £100k, then said £10m in response to £500k, as examples, then £1.5m as a final offer was a long way short of the negotiation or bartering... Well are opener must of been higher then £15m if we wanted ten times what Sainsbury's offered
Sainsbury's offers might have been unrealistically low, but ours were unrealistically high.
|
|
|
Post by woodygas on Aug 4, 2015 14:06:31 GMT
I was sold with the crackers and fish fingers to be fair.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 4, 2015 14:45:46 GMT
It does clearly say that the £1.5m was the final offer after other "derisory offers". I'd therefore say we would all turn down offers of a couple of hundred grand if we were confident in winning. The final offer of £1.5m was still low, so if Rovers had said £15m as an opener in response to £100k, then said £10m in response to £500k, as examples, then £1.5m as a final offer was a long way short of the negotiation or bartering... Well are opener must of been higher then £15m if we wanted ten times what Sainsbury's offered
Sainsbury's offers might have been unrealistically low, but ours were unrealistically high.
and we wanted nectar points so we could double point friday to get our £30m
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 4, 2015 15:19:39 GMT
It does clearly say that the £1.5m was the final offer after other "derisory offers". I'd therefore say we would all turn down offers of a couple of hundred grand if we were confident in winning. The final offer of £1.5m was still low, so if Rovers had said £15m as an opener in response to £100k, then said £10m in response to £500k, as examples, then £1.5m as a final offer was a long way short of the negotiation or bartering... But it was still far higher than we have at present?
|
|