No future with SISU
New Member
Sell it for a profit or run it to make money out of it. They will not fund the team, so it is 3rd tier football with them.
Vote Them Out. Demo on Sat 10 May & campaign aimed at getting councillors to speak. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Rob S
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It cannot really be misuse though can it because by definition the electorate have the ability to make the judgement that the issue is either more significant or less to them when voting? They would only get elected if the actual electorate deemed that single issue was the most significant issue to them?
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
Rob. I don't support your views in any way. You have set your stall out as anti CCC and the people of Coventry. You have determined guilt already. That last statement you made above is atrocious. You can say that only as you have no accountability or responsibility. I have no party allegiance, so have no axe to grind either way but on the evidence that is in domain today I fully support the CCC. I feel that 90% of the issue is SISU and the way they have attacked the issue.
If the JR emerges different evidence, then I will re-evaluate my stance. Until then, I hope your nonsense fails!!
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Sell it to who for profit? Why has it not been sold for profit yet? Why has nobody offered to buy it?
No future with SISU
New Member
Thank you for that round of applause, but like fisher you have got no idea what the fans are thinking, that is why he walked into a pub with city fans in it after they lost, very much like you have not relised SISU will only go if they know the fans will not go to northampton. That is why they are pissed off with KCIC and the Trust as SISU think they are the reason the gates are low at Sixfields. Well I have news for SISU the fans are never going to Sixfields.
blueflint
Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I am a fan you tit.
KCIC and the Trust have not kept the gates low at Northampton, it's generally down to people exercising their own free will not to go, me included.
No future with SISU
New Member
The club offerd to buy it, but their offer was too low. No one else has tried to buy it as it has not been up for SALE
Moff
Well-Known Member
John, I worry about you sometimes.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The club have never made an offer to buy it.
lamtara2006
Member
See Post No 39 for full quote.
As always, OldSkyBlue58 posts with great common-sense and courtesy. I agree with his every word and sentiment and was trying to compose something on similar lines, I can give up now.
One thing to add: if OSB58 ever wanted to stand for election, he'd get my support ... though living in Warwickshire I couldn't actually vote for him!
osb is 100% correct. Next step is JR. Maybe then we get to know more about the subject matter. I really don't see what the council can do without some form of offer from SISU. They have said the door is open. What should any pro return councillor ask for? That the council say the door is open, please make on offer? That is where we are now.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Rob S - the Telegraph is reporting this from you........ Rob Stevens, from GCBTR, said: “We warned last October that the council ruling out an unencumbered sale of the Ricoh, and insisting that the club could only return as tenants, would leave our beloved Sky Blues playing ‘home’ games 35 miles away for years and years – threatening the club’s future".
How much do you think the Council should receive for selling the unencumbered freehold? How much do you think it would cost the Council to obtain an unencumbered freehold? Do you think SISU have the will, or the funds, to pay this price?
Thanks.
How much do you think the Council should receive for selling the unencumbered freehold? How much do you think it would cost the Council to obtain an unencumbered freehold? Do you think SISU have the will, or the funds, to pay this price?
Thanks.
lamtara2006
Member
I read through the Skeleton Argument by Sisu to the Higgs Charity Case which Rob kindly distributed at the Sky Blue Trust Meeting on Monday.
Frankly, it is wrong to draw conclusions when you only have one side of the argument - and a very one sided argument it is indeed! Of course, you would expect it to be self-serving as it is defence and counter-claim to Higgs's claim. However, we haven't seen the Council's arguments and I feel that the above quote is 'rushing to judgement' to say the least.
On the basis of what is contained in the Skeleton Argument + other information already in the public domain, my current view is that little of Sisu's case passes the "so what?" test. Undoubtedly, there will be more information to come so my view may change, but at the moment there is far from a cut and dried case imo as Rob seems to imply.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Whereas you are clearly open minded about the whole thing.
TurkeyTrot
New Member
Great, never been to Denmark. Just have to wait for the date I guess.
spider_ricoh
New Member
I have discussed this with Rob and he is fair-minded guy, but he does also admit that this group is aimed more at the council as a counter-balance to the anti-SISU protests. He believes from the various documents in the public domain that the council have got some blame to take; my view is different but we still had a friendly chat over a pint.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I've only recently got into the whole thing to be honest. Been teaching myself world banking and economics as it's an area I have little knowledge in. I would've gone though if I knew.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I trust them with the stadium as much as I trust anybody else with it. I struggle to see why them owning the stadium is any worse than Coventry City Council owning it.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I agree with this. I don't think SISU would be any better or worse than anyone else. To suggest the minute they signed a bit of paper they will be liquidating the club is ridiculous. I'm all for SISU getting the stadium - hey it would mean we'd be home - as long as CCC put some caveats in place. Can't see what the hysteria is all about really.
"We want the team home!" they all cry, "but we don't want the current owners getting it". Makes no sense to me.
"We want the team home!" they all cry, "but we don't want the current owners getting it". Makes no sense to me.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Why is it we've still only had the SISU side of this? Is the Higgs side not going to be made public, if not does that imply that the SISU side was leaked and didn't come through an official release of court documents?
lamtara2006
Member
I don't know where Rob got the Sisu document from. Maybe he can answer? Even if we see the Higgs arguments, it is really the ACL/CCC arguments that are critical - exactly 2 months today until JR starts!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Out of curiosity, how would you feel about a Stanford Bridge type arrangement with it held in trust by a fans organisation (could be a new one specifically for that purpose, or made up of ST holders, whatever)?
MichaelCCFC
New Member
Torch, out of interest what do you think of what is now the set kcic approach? It's taken time to evolve and is contrary to how some people want to pigeonhole kcic and I'd appreciate you view. The approach, as previously posted, is - the top priority is getting an immediate return to the Ricoh (not endlessly arguing about who is to blame); and the way to do this is by first putting pressure on sisu and its owner, Joy Seppala, to 'make the call' to ACL to say CCFC will return, and then if ACL are obstructive to put pressure on them. They can then have all the time in the word to agree a long-term solution while making things better for the team and fans by being at the ricoh not NTFC.
duffer
Well-Known Member
I've got a lot of time for Rob, who I know as a thoroughly decent, likeable and intelligent chap.
However I can't see this as anything other than one-sided and anti-council, I note there's really nothing in there about how to pressure the owners.
I've read the SISU skeleton argument now, and there's certainly some very interesting stuff in there. The problem is that it is literally one side of the story, and as such is hardly likely to represent the entire truth.
I think it's quite proper that the council doesn't comment until after the JR. I understand that there may not be a strict legal reason why they won't, but given the antagonism and history it's clear that a single misguided or out of context comment will be jumped upon as potential evidence as the upcoming trial. Who could blame anyone for not wanting to talk under that pressure.
Personally I'd say that once the JR is done, then there's scope for this kind of action perhaps; but we need the whole truth out there before we draw judgement, surely.
(Fwiw, I also think it's a bit rich to accuse the Council of not being willing to answer questions when there's a court case pending, whilst our owners completely disregard all lines of enquiry with regard to the accounts or the location of the new stadium.)
However I can't see this as anything other than one-sided and anti-council, I note there's really nothing in there about how to pressure the owners.
I've read the SISU skeleton argument now, and there's certainly some very interesting stuff in there. The problem is that it is literally one side of the story, and as such is hardly likely to represent the entire truth.
I think it's quite proper that the council doesn't comment until after the JR. I understand that there may not be a strict legal reason why they won't, but given the antagonism and history it's clear that a single misguided or out of context comment will be jumped upon as potential evidence as the upcoming trial. Who could blame anyone for not wanting to talk under that pressure.
Personally I'd say that once the JR is done, then there's scope for this kind of action perhaps; but we need the whole truth out there before we draw judgement, surely.
(Fwiw, I also think it's a bit rich to accuse the Council of not being willing to answer questions when there's a court case pending, whilst our owners completely disregard all lines of enquiry with regard to the accounts or the location of the new stadium.)
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So you don't blame either side yet then - you wouldn't support any action against sisu either?
lamtara2006
Member
I think many would agree with the main sentiments so long as:
1) Council Tax Payers / National Tax Payers see a fair return on their 'investment' - it is not only Joy Seppala who should be caring about those who provide the funding;
2) The ground is inextricably tied to Coventry City Football Club for the future;
3) Assuming Sisu hold the Ricoh in a separate property company: the rental, licence, match day costs and revenues are established on a reasonable basis so that the Club is not once again struggling to survive and is able to comply with financial fair play rules.
My instincts tell me that Sisu won't want to deal on these terms, I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Michael. Pressure should be put on both sides not just SISU. With our current situation, percentage of blame and constant "he said, she said" won't get us anywhere. A lot of pride needs to be swallowed on both sides and in my opinion (and just mine) ACL aren't likely to try too hard if they feel they have the moral high ground. An attitude of "let them come to us" isn't helpful.
ACL should also be encouraged to pick up the phone and speak directly to the club and not use the FL as an intermediary. And I don't agree that pressure should only be applied to ACL if they are "obstructive". From the start you are taking sides and halving your chance of success. Really it's not difficult to see why the Club isn't on best terms with your group.
ACL should also be encouraged to pick up the phone and speak directly to the club and not use the FL as an intermediary. And I don't agree that pressure should only be applied to ACL if they are "obstructive". From the start you are taking sides and halving your chance of success. Really it's not difficult to see why the Club isn't on best terms with your group.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Sounds alright to me.
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
That's great Torch, its good to see that you agree
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
What fucking pressure do you want applied to the CCC with regard to the Ricoh then? Do you want them to say right Sisu it is for sale, then what, being as they have an obligation to get the best possible price for it, do you see Sisu/Otium making an offer because if that was the case then why haven't they done it already?
You want to pressure someone then it needs to be applied to Sisu/Otium to get their thumbs out of their arseholes and get moving on upto date valuations and making offers. Then pressure can be applied to CCC to either accepting said offer or refusing and therefore we can get on with building a new stadium.
This 'new' idea isn't going to bring about anything but take the focus away from the important local Coventry issues affecting local Coventry people. I am sorry if me not seeing this as the most important thing in Coventry bothers people (who live outside and therefore couldn't give two fucks about important things like education, welfare, social, transport etc in our City) but if this does detract from the real important issues in Coventry and affects them in some way then I hope whoever is behind this is happy with themselves.
