skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Fortunately for them what they do have is ground capacities that supports their ambition. Car parking revenue not so important then.
365 Revenue at Chesterfield (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Fortunately for them what they do have is ground capacities that supports their ambition. Car parking revenue not so important then.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Held on to the Ricoh - a great successful business remember - and waited until SISU left which one day they will. There was no need to give an out of town franchise a 250 year lease.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
But what about screwing sisu over? That's what we all want. Our official fans spokeswoman ann said so.
When SISU arrived, Mutton and Ann Lucas were city fans. We were in the Championship renting a stadium ( at a high price ) with "365 days a year" income potential. We had an option to buy into it. The stadium has a capacity for premiere league games. Car parks, no local residents, planning permission for more leisure developments and is in Coventry with good transport links. Everything TF is looking for. I don't blame Joy for what happened in the beginning- I believe her when she says she didn't know she had a soccer club in her portfolio. But, something must have happened to turn Mutton and Ann Lucas against SISU. I certainly don't accept that CCC just decided to screw SISU over on a whim. Yes, we are seeing CCC's "dirty washing", but it would be great if SISU had to hand over the protocols of their discussions- possibly about screwing CCC over - but they don't have to, and will never voluntarily hand them over. So, enjoy the mud slinging, but remember that nothing happens without a cause.
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
It was/is all about egos. Not remember ann saying her day was yesterday when the wasps deal was announced. I believe ann was jealous of joy. Jealous of what she had achieved and how successful she was. That she had worked just as hard but didn't have the reputation nor wealth that joy had. Screwing sisu over was her way of proving a point. Who to? I don't know. Just my opinion.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Lucas is probably more complex - if we're talking ethics, then some of the rhetoric from club employees because of her stance over us signing Marlon King was shameful.
Is it, however, unreasonable to suggest this boils down to ideological differences on both sides (Mutton's rhetoric certainly suggests this, is it unreasonable to suggest an organisation such as SISU where one person can make a decision, gets annoyed by a council where everything has to be decided by committee?) and a traditional council attitude (not limited to CCC) that struggles to relinquish property. Again, this boils down to national government directives, which sees councils often put too high a price on their assets, because of an attitude that if a private company can make a profit from them... the public sector may well do, too. But nobody in the public sector provides the risk capital to allow this to happen, so an impasse is instead what we get.
Nothing indeed happens without a cause, but that is also why it's daft to blame just one side for this. In a way, looking for blame deflects from campaigning for what should be. In a way, looking for blame is why selling a ground to Wasps passes without protest, as the response is just 'that's SISU's and/or the Council's fault' as opposed to... this should not happen!
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
I think it was personal differences rather than frustration around political procedures. The whole war on joy in the emails must of stemmed from a personal clash? You wouldn't go after someone solely because they didn't agree with your procedures at work?
Nick
Administrator
So what you mean is, the council have done things wrong but only because SISU did something first but you don't know what?
SISU were the council's preferred bidder weren't they because of the stadium, other parties who wanted the stadium didn't seem to favourable at the time.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It strikes me as a typical political position to me. You know a battle is starting, and coming up, you know a football club gets populist support (hence the fact the ground was built in the first place!) so you want to ensure public opinion gets swayed towards your position.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
The council didn't want SISU either. The bid was considered 'derisory' by the council leader at the time.
Nick
Administrator
Who was the leader then?
Did they have no say over the bidders at that time?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Ken Taylor.
They had no say.
The Shapiro bid is interesting however, in that it's remarkably similar to what SISU came to want. You could say, the Shapiro bid is more what you'd expect for a club in a saleable condition, as opposed to one where you only attract high risk oriented candidates.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-face-bleak-future-3105889
Note again the constant position.
Unfortunately, much as Robinson (and SISU!) speculated and lost... and have to accept that. It seems similar financial rules aren't seemingly accepted by some parties when it comes to public authorities and charities. This is, however, what happens when you play with risk! Now we could have a whole other debate about whether this *should* happen (why should a sports club be risked by prople who want to make money in the first place, and why do public buildings that provide a service, such as the Ricoh, have to turn a profit when they can help society in other ways?), but this is the world we live in.
A figure of 30m was put about by Fisher for a new stadium build in Lego style. Had Joy paid the 5,5m to Higgs, the 14,4m loan off in full - on the condition that CCC sells their share for circa 6m, added 1 or 2m for a lease extension and demanded the chance to put the deal to full council with reporters present - we could theoretically have got everything we wanted for just under 30m. Instead SISU haggled, threatened, moved, threatened etc..we will now have years of site seeking, planning applications and subsequent debates and sometime or other, maybe, end up with a 15000 stadium in a village near Coventry. I think a lot has to do with the manner you approach councils - they have power and you have to accept that. You don't have to like it. In the meantime we will have to eat humble pie and do a deal with Wasps.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
The deal on offer to SISU has never been taken up by any group and, as seen in the link above, anybody wanting the ground has always wanted a longer lease to go with it.
Which, as it turns out, was possible for a "small" consideration- which as far as we know, Joy didn't offer. Was not offered, but up to her to ask for imo.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It only turned out to be on offer *after* all the shenanigans however, not *before*?
Yes, but TF and Joy were responsible for the "shenanigans" that pushed the lease extension from 125 years ( mentioned before Wasps ) to 250 for Wasps.
would it have been better for Joy to offer to come to Coventry, meet Mutton and Ann out of council offices ( with a council officer as witness )? Do a tour of Cov and then go to a restaurant for informal talks as to what needed to be done to improve relations between CCC and her company - which were damaged originally by her employees and not by her?
What actually happened is that ML said that Ann should get on the train and come to Joy's office - a bit like a schoolboy reporting to headmaster's study. Like it or not, Ann Lucas represents over 300000 people, you don't treat her like that ( regardless of what you may think of her ).
Moff
Well-Known Member
Its funny how their stance changed, as when Robinson/Elliott et al nearly took us to the precipice and had to find a new owner, the Council vetoed another bidder in favor of their prefrerred one, SISU.
People seem to overlook that one of the reasons SISU are with us, is that the Council chose them above the others.
Not denied, but emphasises how badly the relationship managed to collapse. I hold Dulux responsible for a lot of this. He not only ruined it for us and CCFC, but screwed up Joy's SISU business in the process. Her investors wouldn't be too pleased if they got to judge Dulux' record at CCFC.
Nick
Administrator
CCC made the decision in the end didn't they? for how long can you keep saying "yes but they only did this because SISU did x or y" before you finally get to the point where you think they were both being dodgy.
How do you treat people? Do you carry out PR attacks on them?
Moff
Well-Known Member
That is not a record they would want to be looking at!
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
So with Wasps out the way what do you really think Sisu would do next ?
Base your answer on previous dealings and the fact they needed to recuperate debt.
I believe they would have continued to run ACL down and the council obviously believed the same.
From the CC ratepayers view the Ricoh is buzzing. (Excuse the pun)
Businesses are finally recovering from the Northampton period and investing in the area.
From a CCFC point of view it is crap but with these clowns in charge it could be expected.
Some fans believe that the Sisu plan, if it worked, would have been acceptable.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
How do you think the ratepayers see her now that the Ricoh has upped it's profile ?
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
SISU would have done exactly what wasps have done and mortgaged it. The very same thing people wrote to their local councillors begging the Ricoh not to be sold to SISU for that reason. From the CC ratepayers view, it's still very much wait and see. They have been here a year, not long enough to judge. Sterling work though Italia. You keep at it with that sweeping. Some people will listen. Just a shame it's the uneducated ones.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Are people really accepting 365 days revenue or are they asking to see full details of all options to make an informed choice?
We have seen that we can't compete above L1 level staying at the Ricoh. Just look at our revenues compared to others when we were last in that division. We've also had independent experts quoted by local media confirming the same. Does it therefore not make sense to at least have a full examination of other options? Or are we happy to be a L1 / Championship yo-yo club at best?
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
I can't stand her personally but can't speak for the entire city. Most CCFC fans I imagine will be turning against her with the information that is coming out. Most would have backed her and seen SISU as the protagonists in the situation. Yet that was down to the PR war which is all starting to come out. Also imagine most will dislike her for wanting Coventry to be part of Birmingham. Most will think the fact that she didn't release full details of the WMCA talks to the full council chamber isn't on. Some will see similarities between that and the Ricoh deal. Some though will be blind to it all or just not care. Such is life.
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
And can you stop this upped the Ricoh profile thing. We are talking about the same Ricoh that held the Olympics, staged European rugby matches and England U21 internationals. The same arena who has hosted Coldplay, Take That, Oasis, Bon Jovi and Red Hot Chilli Peppers. It was hardly unheard of!
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Not according to my inbox.
Sisu should have made a reasonable offer and not 'expect' to get it for nothing.
They probable needed to get it for nothing and empty of tenants to have a business case for a low profile club in L1.
CCC nearly lost the stadium for the ratepayers of Coventry and that is wrong.
Sisu are good at what they do but never saw Wasps in the equation.
I can understand from a CCFC fans point of view that getting the Ricoh for CCFC cheaply at the ratepayers expense, but it's not right.
Sisu should have settled on a fair figure, if in reality they could afford to run it.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
When that lunatic Orange Ken left I would have requested a meeting with SISU. Drawn a line under everything that had gone before and started from scratch. I would have been tempted to replace Reeves and West so it was new faces all round.
The council should have asked SISU what their long term plans were and what they could do to assist the football club as a top level football club is worth far more to the city than a top level rugby club.
When Fisher stated that ACL were over reliant on CCFC and that the bank were nervous about the loan instead of outright lying there should have been an open, honest and frank discussion. That doesn't mean handing the Ricoh to CCFC for nothing.
If that had failed and there was a need to sell ACL it should have been placed on the open market to achieve best return for the taxpayer and also allow any potentially impacted stakeholder, such as CCFC and CRFC to raise the appropriate objections when a London rugby club places a bid.
Nick
Administrator
Case closed then!
SISU did make an offer didn't they? It is like going round in circles.
Wasps got the Ricoh Cheaply at the ratepayers expense didn't they?
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
Where do you get this ridiculous notion that SISU couldn't afford to run it? Wasps bought it and immeadiately mortgaged it yet you believe they can afford it? SISU did make a reasonable offer of 2 million without the lease extension given to Wasps who paid 2.77 million. You see and hear what you want. You believe what you want. You're not open to new information or even existing information.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
It will now fulfill it's 'full' potential and you will see this over the next year with further developments in and around the stadium.
It had almost 2 years in the wilderness and several on here lapped it up with their white elephant posts.
Ask ML about spin, but I would have come to Cov, as Joy, with TF straight after the demise of Dulux. I would have apologised for the mistakes to date and asked what was needed from both sides to move forward. I would have praised the council and looked forward to a successful cooperation in the future. At the same time I would have asked my staff for a costing and plausibility of a new stadium build. Knowing what the potential costs and risks were, I would have based my offer on that. If it costs 30m for an inferior stadium, then I can go that high to secure an existing stadium which has everything I want and is in Coventry. Offering 2m for Higgs' as a charitable gesture was a joke and has cost us and Joy dearly. It costs nothing to be nice. Coming in with all guns blazing and Tim storming out of the Ricoh, followed by ML and his wearing different hats stint was never going to achieve getting the Ricoh for under a new build cost.
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
Full potential? There going back to having concerts in the summer? They might use the exhibition hall bit more? You don't get much bigger than the Olympics. It will never realise it's full potential with Wasps in charge. That is because they are a franchise. That is because ethically and morally franchising is wrong. That is because the only reason they are here is financial greed. Not for their love of Coventry or wanting the Ricoh to fulfill it's 'full' potential. Therefore that will diminish the achievements if there are any. Thankfully not all people are like you. I would like to believe that people like you are in the minority.