What are the SBT saying!!! (1 Viewer)

[Covcraig@bury]

Originally Posted by Covcraig@bury:
I didn't join, and very glad about that
The Trust have shown to me over the past 6 months they are weak Lilly livered liberals who sit on the fence so not to offend anyone.
If the members of the Trust are OK with that then crack on.
Another sit back and criticise keyboard warrior. Get the facts
Just because Its in the Coventry Telegraph after talking to a Trust member does not mean its their view

Reply
Well who's view is it then. Obviously the leaders of the Trust are not talking to their members and informing them of the majority view.
So why are the senior board members not being interviewed, was they not there at the Hilton ? After all it was there show !!

 

---

[wingy]

It could be possible some counter Bluffing is going on here ,when you take in the whole days events and statements .
If the Kids wer'nt running wild all over this Site today they might see some nuances . I've either Dreamt this or the administrator has made some condition about SISU sorting a deal to play in the CITY while they carry out the construction of the Dream new Stadia. ACL seem to have made a very confident statement about the doors are wide open and the Pitch is undergoing preperation now.The Admin has taken two more weeks to come up with further information before the Creditors can approve a deal or CVA .So does'nt appear to be the Cakewalk for SISU
predicted.Mr Powell representing ACL is going to appraoch the FL to be more catagoric about the Club being in Admin meaning the Administrator is unequivically the spokesman for The Club. These developments would mean a delay in holdings presenting the league with relevant information to progress plans to enter next seasons competition ,sorry if this is a cock -up but that is what i think i've read and heard today.

 

[Nick]

Another sit back and criticise keyboard warrior. Get the facts
Just because Its in the Coventry Telegraph after talking to a Trust member does not mean its their view :facepalm:

It is the same as the Late Kick Off with all of the trust people saying they wanted admin but it wasnt the trust view. When somebody is introduced as a trust spokesperson and makes a statement it usually means it is on behalf of the trust!

 

[SkyblueBazza]

No we don't but I thought fisher spouted even smaller last week 8,000

For the sake of CCFC SISU MUST GO

I think you got that from somewhere unreliable. He never said what capacity they had in mind. 8k I think was reference to what they would anticipate if playing at Walsall or similar.
As for 12k capacity - that might be based on listening to fans, because if they believe what about 90% of posters on this forum say about it 12k will still leave plenty of room except the odd cup-run.

 

[Noggin]

I think you got that from somewhere unreliable. He never said what capacity they had in mind. 8k I think was reference to what they would anticipate if playing at Walsall or similar.
As for 12k capacity - that might be based on listening to fans, because if they believe what about 90% of posters on this forum say about it 12k will still leave plenty of room except the odd cup-run.

The 8k wasn't in reference to playing at walsall, Fisher said he expected 6k-7k at another stadium if we were doing very well, significantly lower if we wern't (and we know we won't be)

The 8k was in reference to the new stadium but it was from Stuart Linnell and not Tim Fisher.

 

[Grendel]

Tottenham Hotspurs are in a process of building a 56,000 stadium for £430m which will consist of similar additional facilities as we have at the Ricoh ...

I know the land they will be building on will be more expensive as it is in London and also they are a premier league team but for the fact it is costing them £430m to build a 56,00 stadium, do you honestly think a £30m stadium SISU have quoted will be in the capacity of 20k ... no chance .... be lucky if it is 13k max.


http://www.24dash.com/news/local_go...s-to-transform-white-hart-lane-neighbourhoods

You're really bright aren't you? So you think it's pound per seat? Christ bet you didn't get a degree in economics.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

The 8k wasn't in reference to playing at walsall, Fisher said he expected 6k-7k at another stadium if we were doing very well, significantly lower if we wern't (and we know we won't be)

The 8k was in reference to the new stadium but it was from Stuart Linnell and not Tim Fisher.

Fair enough...but still no mention of 12k capacity I think I'm right in saying?

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Originally Posted by Covcraig@bury:
I didn't join, and very glad about that
The Trust have shown to me over the past 6 months they are weak Lilly livered liberals who sit on the fence so not to offend anyone.
If the members of the Trust are OK with that then crack on.
Another sit back and criticise keyboard warrior. Get the facts
Just because Its in the Coventry Telegraph after talking to a Trust member does not mean its their view

Reply
Well who's view is it then. Obviously the leaders of the Trust are not talking to their members and informing them of the majority view.
So why are the senior board members not being interviewed, was they not there at the Hilton ? After all it was there show !!

Given the situation facing CCFC, Craig, what is your suggested way forward? Criticising in any aspect of life is easy, suggesting a realistic way forward is a lot more difficult so I'm genuinely interested to hear your ideas. Thx

 

[Noggin]

Fair enough...but still no mention of 12k capacity I think I'm right in saying?

The 12k comes from the fact that the club have said the ground they will be building is based on Rotherhams ground, which has 12k seats. Of course they don't necessarily mean it will be the same design, perhaps just built on the same principles, modular etc.

there is absolutely no chance of them doing it cheap enough that would make it a better option than just paying the 400k rent they were offered, even after taking extra revenues into account.

 

[Bluegloucester]

The 12k comes from the fact that the club have said the ground they will be building is based on Rotherhams ground, which has 12k seats. Of course they don't necessarily mean it will be the same design, perhaps just built on the same principles, modular etc.

If it was to be a 20k seater stadium though there is absolutely no chance of them doing it cheap enough that would make it a better option than just paying the 400k rent they were offered, even after taking extra revenues into account.

Unless they are going to charge £50 a ticket and £10 a pint. God knows how much for a pie!

 

[grego_gee]

It is not that it appears to be Gospel... It's doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that spending £30m max to build a stadium today, it would be a stadium with an estimated capacity of 12k - 15k max.

Look at what we have now a 32000 capacity stadium that is always half empty and costs too much.
what would you propose to build?
the proposal I heard was 12000 now that could have "modules" built to extend the capacity as it was needed, perhaps extending to 24000 fully extended?
What would you propose?

imp:

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Poor statement from Jan.

Only last week the SBT released a statement saying this:

"The Trust board will be working with every means at its disposal including peaceful demonstration and other means of legal protest to ensure that the Administrator and the Football League do not return the “Golden Share” to any SISU controlled company, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario outlined above. We understand there are several alternative bidders available to receive the share and we will be urging that these bids are given precedence over SISU’s flawed plan."

only for today saying:

"He added that, if Sisu were to continue as owners with its plans to build a new stadium on the city’s outskirts within “three years”, then talks must take place for home matches at the Ricoh in the interim - not under groundsharing arrangements outside the city, such as at Walsall’s Banks’s stadium."

Seriously? :facepalm::facepalm:

I thought the trust agreed no SISU controlled company should be running ccfc and now today you are saying this?

I am confused as to what the SBT stance is. It does not represent the vast majority of fans who do not want SISU near our club any longer. It's as simple as that for most fans.

 

[Noggin]

Look at what we have now a 32000 capacity stadium that is always half empty and costs too much.
what would you propose to build?
the proposal I heard was 12000 now that could have "modules" built to extend the capacity as it was needed, perhaps extending to 24000 fully extended?
What would you propose?

imp:

Stay where we are, a new stadium would be too small for big games, and cost more.

I've said this multiple times before but a 3% mortgage of 25million pounds is 1.4million a year (over 25 years), so if you compare that to a 400k rent then the club needs to bring in 1million a year in food and beverage profit to break even assuming equal crowds. For that to happen every single person every single game would need to spend say £15 on food and drink (assuming profit of 33% of food/drink after costs, im not sure what this percentage should be).

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Poor statement from Jan.

Only last week the SBT released a statement saying this:

"The Trust board will be working with every means at its disposal including peaceful demonstration and other means of legal protest to ensure that the Administrator and the Football League do not return the “Golden Share” to any SISU controlled company, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario outlined above. We understand there are several alternative bidders available to receive the share and we will be urging that these bids are given precedence over SISU’s flawed plan."

only for today saying:

"He added that, if Sisu were to continue as owners with its plans to build a new stadium on the city’s outskirts within “three years”, then talks must take place for home matches at the Ricoh in the interim - not under groundsharing arrangements outside the city, such as at Walsall’s Banks’s stadium."

Seriously? :facepalm::facepalm:

I thought the trust agreed no SISU controlled company should be running ccfc and now today you are saying this?

I am confused as to what the SBT stance is. It does not represent the vast majority of fans who do not want SISU near our club any longer. It's as simple as that for most fans.

AFC, same point as I put to Craig - given the situation facing CCFC what is your suggested way forward? Criticising in any aspect of life is easy, suggesting a realistic way forward is a lot more difficult so I'm genuinely interested to hear your ideas. Thx

 

[Noggin]

Poor statement from Jan.

Only last week the SBT released a statement saying this:

"The Trust board will be working with every means at its disposal including peaceful demonstration and other means of legal protest to ensure that the Administrator and the Football League do not return the “Golden Share” to any SISU controlled company, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario outlined above. We understand there are several alternative bidders available to receive the share and we will be urging that these bids are given precedence over SISU’s flawed plan."

only for today saying:

"He added that, if Sisu were to continue as owners with its plans to build a new stadium on the city’s outskirts within “three years”, then talks must take place for home matches at the Ricoh in the interim - not under groundsharing arrangements outside the city, such as at Walsall’s Banks’s stadium."

Seriously? :facepalm::facepalm:

I thought the trust agreed no SISU controlled company should be running ccfc and now today you are saying this?

I am confused as to what the SBT stance is. It does not represent the vast majority of fans who do not want SISU near our club any longer. It's as simple as that for most fans.

Are those contradictory? I agree with both of them, Obviously by an order of magnitude the first scenario is best but should the worst happen and we are stuck with sisu then the second option needs to happen or the club is dead.

 

[Godiva]

Poor statement from Jan.

Only last week the SBT released a statement saying this:

"The Trust board will be working with every means at its disposal including peaceful demonstration and other means of legal protest to ensure that the Administrator and the Football League do not return the “Golden Share” to any SISU controlled company, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario outlined above. We understand there are several alternative bidders available to receive the share and we will be urging that these bids are given precedence over SISU’s flawed plan."

only for today saying:

"He added that, if Sisu were to continue as owners with its plans to build a new stadium on the city’s outskirts within “three years”, then talks must take place for home matches at the Ricoh in the interim - not under groundsharing arrangements outside the city, such as at Walsall’s Banks’s stadium."

Seriously? :facepalm::facepalm:

I thought the trust agreed no SISU controlled company should be running ccfc and now today you are saying this?

I am confused as to what the SBT stance is. It does not represent the vast majority of fans who do not want SISU near our club any longer. It's as simple as that for most fans.

So am I to be honest.

The Trust seem to have abandoned the original 'Aims & Objectives' without asking the members. That is not democratic.
The leaders also seem unwilling to reveal how many members responded to the poll - that is not transparant.

 

[Bluegloucester]

Stay where we are, a new stadium would be too small for big games, and cost more.

I've said this multiple times before but a 3% mortgage of 25million pounds is 1.4million a year (over 25 years), so if you compare that to a 400k rent then the club needs to bring in 1million a year in food and beverage profit to break even assuming equal crowds. For that to happen every single person every single game would need to spend say £15 on food and drink (assuming profit of 33% of food/drink after costs, im not sure what this percentage should be).

I don't think Sisu could raise funds at anywhere near 3%. Also, a cheap build stadium would probably not have a 25 year lifespan.

 

[wingy]

Poor statement from Jan.

Only last week the SBT released a statement saying this:

"The Trust board will be working with every means at its disposal including peaceful demonstration and other means of legal protest to ensure that the Administrator and the Football League do not return the “Golden Share” to any SISU controlled company, thus avoiding the nightmare scenario outlined above. We understand there are several alternative bidders available to receive the share and we will be urging that these bids are given precedence over SISU’s flawed plan."

only for today saying:

"He added that, if Sisu were to continue as owners with its plans to build a new stadium on the city’s outskirts within “three years”, then talks must take place for home matches at the Ricoh in the interim - not under groundsharing arrangements outside the city, such as at Walsall’s Banks’s stadium."

Seriously? :facepalm::facepalm:

I thought the trust agreed no SISU controlled company should be running ccfc and now today you are saying this?

I am confused as to what the SBT stance is. It does not represent the vast majority of fans who do not want SISU near our club any longer. It's as simple as that for most fans.

It is possible they are aware of movement already occuring AFC.

 

[Noggin]

I don't think Sisu could raise funds at anywhere near 3%. Also, a cheap build stadium would probably not have a 25 year lifespan.

Sure but I find it best show the figures don't work even in a best case scenario, if I demonstrated it at 5%, I'd soon have to be defending against the post saying well I'm sure they could do it cheaper than that.

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

It is possible they are aware of movement already occuring AFC.

Maybe. Byng said yesterday that a deal to rent needs to be done till they can complete any purchase of the Ricoh...

However, my thoughts were SBT agreed to not want SISU near the club anymore. Today's statement is entertaining the idea that if they stay and want to build a new stadium then use the ricoh for 3 years.

That is not acceptable to the majority of the fans. We do not want SISU near the club anymore and do not want them to build a new stadium.

 

[Bluegloucester]

Sure but I find it best show the figures don't work even in a best case scenario, if I demonstrated it at 5%, I'd soon have to be defending against the post saying well I'm sure they could do it cheaper than that.

If they could borrow money at 5%, they would bite the lender's hand off. It would also have to be over sub 20 years.

 

[grego_gee]

Stay where we are, a new stadium would be too small for big games, and cost more.

I've said this multiple times before but a 3% mortgage of 25million pounds is 1.4million a year (over 25 years), so if you compare that to a 400k rent then the club needs to bring in 1million a year in food and beverage profit to break even assuming equal crowds. For that to happen every single person every single game would need to spend say £15 on food and drink (assuming profit of 33% of food/drink after costs, im not sure what this percentage should be).

Your figures are good, but perhaps SISU wouldn't need a mortgage, they have investors money to utilise. Sure they have to give a return but that's what they are in business for. If they have a preference to buy rather than rent, why not?
but I don't think the plan of 12000 extending as needed is far off what is needed.
http://www.footballgroundguide.com/rotherham_united/index.htm#Whats-The-New-York-Stadium-Rotherham-Like

imp:

 

[Noggin]

If they could borrow money at 5%, they would bite the lender's hand off. It would also have to be over sub 20 years.

2.36 million a year on a 7% mortgage over 20 years. The numbers showed its a stupid idea at 3% and 25 years and it just gets worse and worse the more we deviate from that.

 

[Noggin]

Your figures are good, but perhaps SISU wouldn't need a mortgage, they have investors money to utilise. Sure they have to give a return but that's what they are in business for. If they have a preference to buy rather than rent, why not?
but I don't think the plan of 12000 extending as needed is far off what is needed.
http://www.footballgroundguide.com/rotherham_united/index.htm#Whats-The-New-York-Stadium-Rotherham-Like

imp:

You've seen right that they have put in about 30 mill and now we owe them 70, if the money comes from their investors its not any different to a mortgage really, we are still paying massive interest.

12k and extending is too small. Extending is much more expensive than just building to the right size in the first place, if they have any plans for being in the championship again it needs to be more like 20k.

 

[wingy]

Your figures are good, but perhaps SISU wouldn't need a mortgage, they have investors money to utilise. Sure they have to give a return but that's what they are in business for. If they have a preference to buy rather than rent, why not?
but I don't think the plan of 12000 extending as needed is far off what is needed.
http://www.footballgroundguide.com/...htm#Whats-The-New-York-Stadium-Rotherham-Like

imp:

Agian its all about their return ,not progressing the Club and well lets just say for some reason theres a stink around it all ,so we can now cut and run to suit this depleted demand and then borrow another £30M. from the mugs who lent us the initial £30 oddMillion,no need to pay interest well just load it on the Club .Oh hang on.

 

[Grendel]

Given the situation facing CCFC, Craig, what is your suggested way forward? Criticising in any aspect of life is easy, suggesting a realistic way forward is a lot more difficult so I'm genuinely interested to hear your ideas. Thx

The Trust shows maturity and correctness in making the statement.

Without doubt the best scenario is new ownership. However, experienced negotiators realise that they have to consider the worst case scenario and how to deal and Influence that scenario. If sisu remain the negotiator considers the best scenario then for supporters. Clearly then it is to remain at the Ricoh.

Supporters who have constantly tried to back the landlord in this dispute really need to consider their primary objective when making such posts. The benefit to the football club clearly was not on their agenda. It clearly is on the trusts and all things considered its a good statement.

 

[Bluegloucester]

The Trust shows maturity and correctness in making the statement.

Without doubt the best scenario is new ownership. However, experienced negotiators realise that they have to consider the worst case scenario and how to deal and Influence that scenario. If sisu remain the negotiator considers the best scenario then for supporters. Clearly then it is to remain at the Ricoh.

Supporters who have constantly tried to back the landlord in this dispute really need to consider their primary objective when making such posts. The benefit to the football club clearly was not on their agenda. It clearly is on the trusts and all things considered its a good statement.

On mobile, otherwise take a like for post.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Personally I'm delighted Jan has left the door open for the Trust to have a voice whoever the owners are.

 

[Steve.B50]

We are doing what we feel is right.

 

[Sky Blue Dal]

You're really bright aren't you? So you think it's pound per seat? Christ bet you didn't get a degree in economics.

Again you make more and more pathetic and attacking remarks without intellectually expanding on your comments.

Should I bother entertaining you ... nah!!

Btw you won the bet.. I didn't get a degree in Economics I feel really thick now!!!

Instead I only got a useless degree in engineering. Oh god WHY you curse me!!:facepalm:

 

[Grendel]

Again you make more and more pathetic and attacking remarks without intellectually expanding on your comments.

Should I bother entertaining you ... nah!!

Btw you won the bet.. I didn't get a degree in Economics I feel really thick now!!!

Instead I only got a useless degree in engineering. Oh god WHY you curse me!!:facepalm:

My expanded comment is for the more worthy and is in response to CCFC Michaels post - why not respond to that. In the meantime when home I will produce a list of stadia cost vs capacity to support my put down of you.

 

[Covcraig@bury]

Given the situation facing CCFC, Craig, what is your suggested way forward? Criticising in any aspect of life is easy, suggesting a realistic way forward is a lot more difficult so I'm genuinely interested to hear your ideas. Thx

-----------------------

For the Trust to stop hiding and be transparent .
There are 2K members but no one knows their agenda . Not even the silent Jan.
It's about time the trust grew some bollox and got off the fence.
I want CCFC to play at the Ricoh , nowhere else!! Tell TF that's the way it is . We will never watch Ccfc away from Coventry .
Sisu to go and never return
ACL/CCC to sell the share to a new reputable investor with the club a the forefront where all revenue streams go back into the club.
Failing that we go bump and start again. Clean sheet, clean start.

 

[Grendel]

-----------------------

For the Trust to stop hiding and be transparent .
There are 2K members but no one knows their agenda . Not even the silent Jan.
It's about time the trust grew some bollox and got off the fence.
I want CCFC to play at the Ricoh , nowhere else!! Tell TF that's the way it is . We will never watch Ccfc away from Coventry .
Sisu to go and never return
ACL/CCC to sell the share to a new reputable investor with the club a the forefront where all revenue streams go back into the club.
Failing that we go bump and start again. Clean sheet, clean start.

That is why the trust exists. To represent the balanced view and explore the best outcome in a worst case scenario.

That is why delusional morons like you are kept to the periphery of the debate.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

-----------------------

For the Trust to stop hiding and be transparent .
There are 2K members but no one knows their agenda . Not even the silent Jan.
It's about time the trust grew some bollox and got off the fence.
I want CCFC to play at the Ricoh , nowhere else!! Tell TF that's the way it is . We will never watch Ccfc away from Coventry .
Sisu to go and never return
ACL/CCC to sell the share to a new reputable investor with the club a the forefront where all revenue streams go back into the club.
Failing that we go bump and start again. Clean sheet, clean start.

If this was some kind of 3-way gunfight...if you come down too far in favour of one side or another & shoot the other guy dead. You can't just go say "sorry - I'm on your side now" if your later knowledge or understanding tells you that you shot the wrong side.
The trust isn't in a position to have all the information (& therefore understanding) needed to make the decision to be hard & fast "SISU-out" proponents. As time goes on eg. new owners, that changes over time & they can be more confidently assertive.

 

[Covcraig@bury]

That's why the trust are seen to be doing fuck all. A total waist of time . With the stance ( on the fence ) there taking no one will take what they say serious . They need to get off the fence and tell them ( all party's ) the supporters of CCFC will not except anything less .
Or are the Trust happy to go along with all this and watch the club ruined ?
They are the " voice " of the fans are they not ? Or have they formed a coalition with all concerned !!
Show your colours Trust, time is running out .