Supporters' group tells Coventry City FC owners to clarify stadium plans (19 Viewers)

smouch1975

Well-Known Member
421582b38a9cbc13c6173566c8e95c12.jpg


Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Latter got Wingy syndrome
Haha I've nearly got it sussed now
Contacts in and cheap reading glasses +3-5 over the top
Have also gone to the desktop version which I can zoom in or out
Weird stuff happening though replies and thread posts back to front
Was going to try desktop to see if I could avoid this thread, working well isn't it. Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.
Latter got Wingy syndrome
Haha I've nearly got it sussed now
Contacts in and cheap reading glasses +3-5 over the top
Have also gone to the desktop version which I can zoom in or out
Weird stuff happening though replies and thread posts back to front
Was going to try desktop to see if I could avoid this thread, working well isn't it. Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
He was one of many who wouldnt believe that the Council would sell to a franchise sports team from another City.

Rather than crowing about it, in order to get some brinksmanship over Grendel, look at how many people did believe it might be true. Very few.

I was one of them that thought someone would be interested. Didn't have a clue who thought. And when I wanted SISU to sit down and negotiate before it was too late Grendel started calling it a white elephant that nobody would be interested in.
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
I was one of them that thought someone would be interested. Didn't have a clue who thought. And when I wanted SISU to sit down and negotiate before it was too late Grendel started calling it a white elephant that nobody would be interested in.

I feel like Fisher about this – something along the lines of “I get the anger but I don’t understand the surprise”.

From around Christmas time before the Wasps sale, Lucas made it absolutely obvious that another buyer was interested and was prepared to meet the Council’s expectations far more closely than CCFC. At the time, I actually wondered if it was an American Football consortium or something – big stadium with all mod cons, in a fantastic central location. Anyway, if it was obvious to me I’m damn sure it was obvious to SISU, who will definitely have sussed out the opposition. They may be incompetent, but they’re not THAT incompetent. Yet still they stuck to the “unencumbered freehold” line - and if someone else wanted to take on the loans and contracts, more fool them. They gave Wasps a free run because Tim’s spreadsheets placed a very low value on the stadium (even though ownership of it is apparently vital to the survival of the club).

I’m definitely no financial guru and I’m probably thick, but it still confuses me that the people who think the Ricoh is a loss-making white elephant are also the ones who say that Wasps got a priceless asset far too cheaply.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I feel like Fisher about this – something along the lines of “I get the anger but I don’t understand the surprise”.

From around Christmas time before the Wasps sale, Lucas made it absolutely obvious that another buyer was interested and was prepared to meet the Council’s expectations far more closely than CCFC. At the time, I actually wondered if it was an American Football consortium or something – big stadium with all mod cons, in a fantastic central location. Anyway, if it was obvious to me I’m damn sure it was obvious to SISU, who will definitely have sussed out the opposition. They may be incompetent, but they’re not THAT incompetent. Yet still they stuck to the “unencumbered freehold” line - and if someone else wanted to take on the loans and contracts, more fool them. They gave Wasps a free run because Tim’s spreadsheets placed a very low value on the stadium (even though ownership of it is apparently vital to the survival of the club).

I’m definitely no financial guru and I’m probably thick, but it still confuses me that the people who think the Ricoh is a loss-making white elephant are also the ones who say that Wasps got a priceless asset far too cheaply.

The signs were all there that the iron was hot and now was the time to strike. ACL were suitably distressed, ACL's owners had been run through the mill and had openly said that they'd listen to any reasonable offer so it only begs the question why no reasonable offer was coming from SISU? A question on here many like to dodge with the old "why weren't they offered the same deal as Wasps" line ignoring the fact that SISU had months to get their offer yet none came. Which is just BS, that simply doesn't happen in the real world and only serves to let SISU of the hook for what they failed to do.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Funny that but the ones that have been moaning the most about that are the ones who were happy at Shitfields.
I am not happy we moved away, I am not happy that Wasps are here, I am not happy the the 2 bitches wouldn't speak to one anotber.
But hey I am just a simple football fan.
Who was happy at Sixfields? Rather than being vague, name them and show some proof.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
 

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
If ccfc had been offered the stadium for the same price as the franchise, we would have bought it.

It's still bizarre that some still deem the council as an innocent party in all of this
 

Nick

Administrator
If ccfc had been offered the stadium for the same price as the franchise, we would have bought it.

It's still bizarre that some still deem the council as an innocent party in all of this
Weirdly most of them have vanished, maybe the pr budget has fallen?
 

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Weirdly most of them have vanished, maybe the pr budget has fallen?

Yes it is, it's unbelievable to think how many posters on here turned out to be plants. If the football club had employed such a tactic I'm sure there would be more complaints about it.
 

tisza

Well-Known Member
If ccfc had been offered the stadium for the same price as the franchise, we would have bought it.

It's still bizarre that some still deem the council as an innocent party in all of this
where's the evidence for this?
SISU put a value on the Ricoh (as they stated in the Higgs case and the jr) and it was certainly far less than Wasps have ended up paying.
Also as messed up as the situation is we would never have bought it but a 3rd party SISU company would have bought it. The stated aim was to give the club greater access to revenues - not total access.
It is a seemingly pointless exercise in trying to second guess SISU's actions & motives because nobody seems to get it right.
Also if memory serves me right didn't either CCFC or holdings hold an option on the ACL that somehow was allowed to expire under SISU management?
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
The big difference is the £14.4m loan. Once the council had taken it on it wasn't something that could be distressed like the one from the YB perhaps could have been. Why would you buy a loan that isn't really worth anything?
 

Nick

Administrator
where's the evidence for this?
SISU put a value on the Ricoh (as they stated in the Higgs case and the jr) and it was certainly far less than Wasps have ended up paying.
Also as messed up as the situation is we would never have bought it but a 3rd party SISU company would have bought it. The stated aim was to give the club greater access to revenues - not total access.
It is a seemingly pointless exercise in trying to second guess SISU's actions & motives because nobody seems to get it right.
Also if memory serves me right didn't either CCFC or holdings hold an option on the ACL that somehow was allowed to expire under SISU management?
Far less? It wasn't much was it for 50%?
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
The big difference is the £14.4m loan. Once the council had taken it on it wasn't something that could be distressed like the one from the YB perhaps could have been. Why would you buy a loan that isn't really worth anything?

I think SISU believed they could buy the loan for a fraction of its value and that thinking persisted through the sales process, then they were out flanked (again) as it was paid up by Wasps at full value. Well at least the club is not another £20M deeper in debt, which as they can't raise that sum for a finished stadium only 10 years old presumably means that they will not be paying £30M to build another smaller stadium, they will (like Wasps with their proposed training ground) be getting funding from elsewhere.

The finances in SISU world do not make sense do they.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Snap. Similar to CCC letting Wasps having the Arena for 250 years for a fraction of its value.

I think SISU believed they could buy the loan for a fraction of its value
 

SkyBlueZack

Well-Known Member
The council were aware of buying the loan off YB in a distressed state at a reduced price. I shall keep posting this until those that are unwilling to comprehend it have no other option ;)
 

Moff

Well-Known Member
Funny that but the ones that have been moaning the most about that are the ones who were happy at Shitfields.
I am not happy we moved away, I am not happy that Wasps are here, I am not happy the the 2 bitches wouldn't speak to one anotber.
But hey I am just a simple football fan.

Its funny you say that, as many like me, couldnt stand 'shitfields' as you put it, and never set foot there, so not everyone who hates Wasps went to Northampton. I didnt realise that whether you went to Northampton or not makes a difference?

I agree, I was not happy we moved away, thats Wasps are here, or that Ann and Joy are such useless fekkers.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Actually maybe the Trust got a kick out of Sixfields, the whole Dunkirk Spirit thing. People actually interested in the Trust for a change; what with them being on tele all the time...Maybe that's who LAST (his name is so ironic given his posting style) means? ;)

Its funny you say that, as many like me, couldnt stand 'shitfields' as you put it, and never set foot there, so not everyone who hates Wasps went to Northampton. I didnt realise that whether you went to Northampton or not makes a difference?

I agree, I was not happy we moved away, thats Wasps are here, or that Ann and Joy are such useless fekkers.
 
Last edited:

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
The big difference is the £14.4m loan. Once the council had taken it on it wasn't something that could be distressed like the one from the YB perhaps could have been. Why would you buy a loan that isn't really worth anything?

You'd have to ask Wasps that although I think you've hit the nail on the head as to why SISU wouldn't have took the Wasps deal for the Ricoh despite many insisting on here (without any proof) that they would have if it had been offered.

Taking on the loan would have served in the best interest (long term) of CCFC but wouldn't have served the interest of SISU's investors that's exactly why SISU wouldn't have done the Wasps deal if they were offered and why they didn't put together a bid the moment they found out that Wasps were putting a bid together which in all likelyhood was as early as the previous easter (according to some) if not sooner.
 

SkyBlueZack

Well-Known Member
We have seen evidence of a SISU bid though. For 50% of ACL, the Higgs share, remember? Based on the deal Wasps were negotiating at the same/similar price. Albeit with conditions attached.
 

rondog1973

Well-Known Member
If ccfc had been offered the stadium for the same price as the franchise, we would have bought it.

It's still bizarre that some still deem the council as an innocent party in all of this
Then why didn't they publicly match the bid or put in a slightly better offer (they successfully reduced its value drastically remember via their distressing tactics) instead of the repeated public insistence they were intent on building their own?

My theory is they simply didn't believe the council had the balls to sell to Wasps and played their game of brinkmanship too far.

The council had to sell in the end as to renege at that point would have seen Wasps pull out leaving Sisu as the only interested party, free to continue the devaluing process they'd long engaged in.

Wasps were used as leverage. Sisu still weren't playing ball so it had to be sold to them.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
You'd have to ask Wasps that although I think you've hit the nail on the head as to why SISU wouldn't have took the Wasps deal for the Ricoh despite many insisting on here (without any proof) that they would have if it had been offered.

Taking on the loan would have served in the best interest (long term) of CCFC but wouldn't have served the interest of SISU's investors that's exactly why SISU wouldn't have done the Wasps deal if they were offered and why they didn't put together a bid the moment they found out that Wasps were putting a bid together which in all likelyhood was as early as the previous easter (according to some) if not sooner.

They made a bid including the paying off of the loan.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
I’m definitely no financial guru and I’m probably thick, but it still confuses me that the people who think the Ricoh is a loss-making white elephant are also the ones who say that Wasps got a priceless asset far too cheaply.

You will find that those that have a go at you for taking something that Fisher says as the truth because you don't believe the 3 week comment are the ones saying that CCC wanted to charge our club too much....although it was the Higgs share that was for sale......let it go very cheaply to Wasps although SISU had reduced it's value by taking us to Northampton.
 

Nick

Administrator
You will find that those that have a go at you for taking something that Fisher says as the truth because you don't believe the 3 week comment are the ones saying that CCC wanted to charge our club too much....although it was the Higgs share that was for sale......let it go very cheaply to Wasps although SISU had reduced it's value by taking us to Northampton.
So ccc had no input in the higgs stuff? Apart from the veto.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
They made a bid including the paying off of the loan.

Sorry. I should have said a serious bid.

Clearly it didn't match the Wasps bid which is also further proof that they wouldn't have done the Wasps deal. Which is the deal I was talking about.
 
Last edited:

Grendel

Well-Known Member
right help me with this was this bid the one disclosed at the court cases etc. or another one once Wasps got involved?

It was in a letter dated 13 November 2013 referring to a proposed deal in 2012 of paying off the entirety of the bank loan and buying 50% of ACL on the proviso the lease was extended to 125 years.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top