Time for a trust statement (15 Viewers)

[chiefdave]

2 was only confirmed in April 2014

It was 2013 when it was confirmed wasn't it after being provisionally agreed in 2012? Seem to recall the initial process was 2 years and the EPPP was voted in back in 2012.

Of course the cat 2 award was really a culmination of work started by Gregor Rioch from 2007.

 

---

[Astute]

I would of thought all parties concerned want rid of SISU, the reasons
being self evident.
Unbelievably it's the fans that seem to have a place in there heart for
these unscrupulous, lying bastards. Well oh here anyway.

You won't find many people more vocal against SISU than myself. The problem is that Wasps are using our hatred of SISU to their advantage. And as you can see with the arena once it is gone......

CCFC is not SISU. CCFC are getting shafted by Wasps. But Wasps are having an easy time taking over what our football club needs to survive and prosper because the supporters are too busy blaming everyone else for what is happening.

It isn't defending SISU. It is having a reality check on what is occurring to the future of our football club. We are getting screwed by a rugger club from London.

BTW arm is recovering a bit thanks. Looks like I might get full use of my hand back within next 3 years.

 

[stupot07]

It was 2013 when it was confirmed wasn't it after being provisionally agreed in 2012? Seem to recall the initial process was 2 years and the EPPP was voted in back in 2012.

Of course the cat 2 award was really a culmination of work started by Gregor Rioch from 2007.

And we've been doing the academy stuff at the higgs since 2004, we've had a decent academy for a long time, which means the football had probably been investing way above the £600k they contribute now before EPPP came along, delivering something not to dissimilar to a cat 2 academy, ehicbis why we've had so many players come through.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[albatross]

And we've been doing the academy stuff at the higgs since 2004, we've had a decent academy for a long time, which means the football had probably been investing way above the £600k they contribute now before EPPP came along, delivering something not to dissimilar to a cat 2 academy, ehicbis why we've had so many players come through.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I don't disagree with the fact that it was exceeding the cat 3 for a long time. The academy has been excellent for many many years and I suspect that irrespective of our classification but with the excellent staff and work ethic with the academy they delivered some real talent to the first team that was immediately sold without progressing the club as a whole. Pretty much every player produced had come out of the Cat 3 academy, even if it was delivering more in terms of facilities and staff than required. I believe Cat 2 was confirmed as official in April 2014 after a number of Audits in 2013. You can have the best facilities in the world but if it is run by idiots you won't achieve anything.

My point has always been that the academy has been capable whether its is a cat 2 or cat 3 of producing these results due to the people (coaches) running it. Cat 2 however is prescriptive in what you have to have as a minimum and to a large degree that will dictate how you have to spend the cash. Maybe the club need some flexibility as cash is obviously tight.

Think SISU are using this as a diversionary tactic as the history shows that good players have been produced out of our academy irrespective of what FA classification it holds. The biggest draw to the best young players is a successful club heading in the right direction.

 

[Astute]

The biggest draw to the best young players is a successful club heading in the right direction.

That is us fucked then.

 

[Captain Dart]

That is us fucked then.

Not held the academy back yet. :cigar:

 

[stupot07]

I don't disagree with the fact that it was exceeding the cat 3 for a long time. The academy has been excellent for many many years and I suspect that irrespective of our classification but with the excellent staff and work ethic with the academy they delivered some real talent to the first team that was immediately sold without progressing the club as a whole. Pretty much every player produced had come out of the Cat 3 academy, even if it was delivering more in terms of facilities and staff than required. I believe Cat 2 was confirmed as official in April 2014 after a number of Audits in 2013. You can have the best facilities in the world but if it is run by idiots you won't achieve anything.

My point has always been that the academy has been capable whether its is a cat 2 or cat 3 of producing these results due to the people (coaches) running it. Cat 2 however is prescriptive in what you have to have as a minimum and to a large degree that will dictate how you have to spend the cash. Maybe the club need some flexibility as cash is obviously tight.

Think SISU are using this as a diversionary tactic as the history shows that good players have been produced out of our academy irrespective of what FA classification it holds. The biggest draw to the best young players is a successful club heading in the right direction.

The 4 tier system didn't come about until EPPP.

Whilst quality of coaching shousobt vary much between categories, after all they all do the same levels of badges, it is the contact time that makes the big difference. And I've already posted thr figures that a cat 2 player will have had circa x3 coaching contact time then a cat 3 player and that is why cat 2 will consistently produce better players of a standard. If it make no difference, what's the point of EPPP?

It needs to be kept.

On a side note does any remember how much the academy cost a few years back when Joe Elliot and Hoffman wanted to close it?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Brylowes]

You won't find many people more vocal against SISU than myself. The problem is that Wasps are using our hatred of SISU to their advantage. And as you can see with the arena once it is gone......

CCFC is not SISU. CCFC are getting shafted by Wasps. But Wasps are having an easy time taking over what our football club needs to survive and prosper because the supporters are too busy blaming everyone else for what is happening.

It isn't defending SISU. It is having a reality check on what is occurring to the future of our football club. We are getting screwed by a rugger club from London.

BTW arm is recovering a bit thanks. Looks like I might get full use of my hand back within next 3 years.

Whilst CCFC aren't SISU we are inextricably linked, they have to leave, it's the best
Chance for the club to move forward, as all good will between them and others has gone.
We all obviously want the same thing for our club, just all have different ideas about
how to achieve it. I hate the fact Wasps are here , they must think all their Christmas's
came at once, but however much we hate it they are here.

Pressure needs to be applied directly to SISU, you say wasps are using our hatred
of SISU to get what they want, I honestly don't think we count that much,SISU have
shrunk the club to such a level we have become almost insignificant in the eyes of
most. Their time here has seen us lurch from one embarrassing disaster to another,
Wasps are only here as a direct consequence of SISU's actions.

If they leave it would at least give us a chance to pick the bones and see what we
can salvage, I also think some people would be amazed at how helpful concerned
parties would become with them gone.

Astute, glad to hear your on the mend, but "wow" three years that was some injury,
luckily you seem the type to take it in your stride. Good Luck.
.

 

[Nick]

Whilst CCFC aren't SISU we are inextricably linked, they have to leave, it's the best
Chance for the club to move forward, as all good will between them and others has gone.
We all obviously want the same thing for our club, just all have different ideas about
how to achieve it. I hate the fact Wasps are here , they must think all their Christmas's
came at once, but however much we hate it they are here.

Pressure needs to be applied directly to SISU, you say wasps are using our hatred
of SISU to get what they want, I honestly don't think we count that much,SISU have
shrunk the club to such a level we have become almost insignificant in the eyes of
most. Their time here has seen us lurch from one embarrassing disaster to another,
Wasps are only here as a direct consequence of SISU's actions.

If they leave it would at least give us a chance to pick the bones and see what we
can salvage, I also think some people would be amazed at how helpful concerned
parties would become with them gone.

Astute, glad to hear your on the mend, but "wow" three years that was some injury,
luckily you seem the type to take it in your stride. Good Luck.
.

The thing is, if SISU leave then what are the alternatives? It still won't make any difference with the stadium or academy will it? Still playing 2nd fiddle in the city to wasps.

Of course Wasps don't like the hatred, it is obvious by the threads on here and the amount of people who signup to try and ruin them when they talk about Wasps in a bad way and the way they do it on the telegraph. Wasps would hate all of the bad PR, if there had been a bad taste about them from the start and it was treated like people did with Sixfields with the local media and the trust etc then I think things would be different.

 

[Brylowes]

The thing is, if SISU leave then what are the alternatives? It still won't make any difference with the stadium or academy will it? Still playing 2nd fiddle in the city to wasps.

Of course Wasps don't like the hatred, it is obvious by the threads on here and the amount of people who signup to try and ruin them when they talk about Wasps in a bad way and the way they do it on the telegraph. Wasps would hate all of the bad PR, if there had been a bad taste about them from the start and it was treated like people did with Sixfields with the local media and the trust etc then I think things would be different.

Nick, I think if SISU leave everything would change, it's there grip that is slowly
squeezing the life out of CCFC.

 

[Captain Dart]

The thing is, if SISU leave then what are the alternatives? It still won't make any difference with the stadium or academy will it? Still playing 2nd fiddle in the city to wasps.

A fear of the unknown is almost tangible in that comment, myself I'd prefer to take a chance believing it can't possibly be any worse.

 

[Nick]

Nick, I think if SISU leave everything would change, it's there grip that is slowly
squeezing the life out of CCFC.

What would change though because of some situations?

Won't we still be renting as Wasps, won't we still be second fiddle for the academy?

Yes different owners, same predicament with the Ricoh etc.

 

[torchomatic]

A fear of the unknown is almost tangible in that comment, myself I'd prefer to take a chance believing it can't possibly be any worse.

Don't disagree. You do have to wonder though who in their right mind is going to invest in a homeless football team

What would change though because of some situations?

Won't we still be renting as Wasps, won't we still be second fiddle for the academy?

Yes different owners, same predicament with the Ricoh etc.

The biggest predicament is getting new owners surely? What is going to attract them? No ground, no future for the academy, no appetite from city to help the club...

 

[Nick]

The biggest predicament is getting new owners surely? What is going to attract them? No ground, no future for the academy, no appetite from city to help the club...

Exactly, the only options I can see are Wasps or somebody that the council want to get in who will work "nicely" with Wasps...

I really can't understand why anybody else would be interested, unless it is a Billionaire.

The whole fan owned thing is pretty much a nono in our situation.

 

[dongonzalos]

If SISU left the only people it would make sense to own the club are either Wasps, the fans a third party who know they can form a successful partnership.
Regarding Wasps you can't have it both ways. Ie they want us out as we are a threat because we will actually be the bigger draw at the stadium when it comes to sponsorship crowds making money ect. Then on the other hand they would never want to own us as we are a waste of time and it's no advantage to them.

 

[Brylowes]

Don't disagree. You do have to wonder though who in their right mind is going to invest in a homeless football team


The biggest predicament is getting new owners surely? What is going to attract them? No ground, no future for the academy, no appetite from city to help the club...

One word, Potentiall

 

[torchomatic]

One word, Potentiall

Another word. Dreamland.

We're talking serious money here. There are plenty of other teams around with assets. I think we'll be pretty close to the bottom of the list.

 

[stupot07]

If SISU left the only people it would make sense to own the club are either Wasps, the fans a third party who know they can form a successful partnership.
Regarding Wasps you can't have it both ways. Ie they want us out as we are a threat because we will actually be the bigger draw at the stadium when it comes to sponsorship crowds making money ect. Then on the other hand they would never want to own us as we are a waste of time and it's no advantage to them.

Wasps won't want to take us on, OSB has outlined the financial reasons why.

So that leaves the fans or a third party.

The fans are another write off, so that leaves a third party, which then goes back to the original question who will want to own us in our current form, at the mercy of renting off wasps matchday only with little access rl revenues with no prospect of ever owning the ground, and a homeless academy?


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

One word, Potentiall

Potential for what though?

 

[stupot07]

Another word. Dreamland.

We're talking serious money here. There are plenty of other teams around with assets. I think we'll be pretty close to the bottom of the list.

Yeah this is the thing, people say "only 2 promotions and its quid's in", but that will take a hell of a lot of money and then without a guarantee of success, plus no assets or real infrastructure to use as security against those investments. Fans always talk about investment/punts as if they're playing with monopoly money. Dreamland

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Grendel]

One word, Potentiall

Every club in league one has potential.

All the others also have full access to revenues all year round, Fixed assets and supportive local authorities.

 

[chiefdave]

Yeah this is the thing, people say "only 2 promotions and its quid's in"

That's the problem isn't it. Lots of teams are only 2 promotions away and they all have a ground.

If we get new owners it will be fans, a rich fan (who doesn't seem to exist), or someone like the group Byng was supposedly talking to. Someone who is moving a business to the city and wants to make a contribution. Although the powers that be would probably try and hijack that and divert the money to Wasps.

 

[Astute]

Nick, I think if SISU leave everything would change, it's there grip that is slowly
squeezing the life out of CCFC.

I think many things. But thinking something doesn't make it happen.

 

[Captain Dart]

I think many things. But thinking something doesn't make it happen.

I'm working on it.

 

[Brylowes]

Every club in league one has potential.

All the others also have full access to revenues all year round, Fixed assets and supportive local authorities.

Not many league 1clubs have a history to match ours, perhaps more importantly not
many are situated at the centre of an urban area with a population of at least
500.000 .
Also any potential investors would be aware of the significant strain Wasps are likely
To find themselves under due to the financial model they are following.

 

[Nick]

Not many league 1clubs have a history to match ours, perhaps more importantly not
many are situated at the centre of an urban area with a population of at least
500.000 .
Also any potential investors would be aware of the significant strain Wasps are likely
To find themselves under due to the financial model they are following.

I don't think thats really potential is it?

 

[Brylowes]

I don't think thats really potential is it?

I'm sure it is.

 

[Nick]

I'm sure it is.

They could take over any other club with a stadium of their own and a local council who will work with them.

Even if Ali Baba from Iran comes in now, we would still be renting off Wasps. Unless of course he builds his own stadium and academy, where would that go? Outside the boundary?

 

[torchomatic]

Not many league 1clubs have a history to match ours, perhaps more importantly not
many are situated at the centre of an urban area with a population of at least
500.000 .
Also any potential investors would be aware of the significant strain Wasps are likely
To find themselves under due to the financial model they are following.

History is important to fans. It don't mean shit for investors unless there's money in it.

 

[dongonzalos]

Wasps won't want to take us on, OSB has outlined the financial reasons why.

So that leaves the fans or a third party.

The fans are another write off, so that leaves a third party, which then goes back to the original question who will want to own us in our current form, at the mercy of renting off wasps matchday only with little access rl revenues with no prospect of ever owning the ground, and a homeless academy?


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

So we are not a threat to Wasps as we are not a bigger draw.
We won't affect sponsorship such as the naming of the stadium.
We won't bring in the bigger crowds ect.

 

[stupot07]

So we are not a threat to Wasps as we are not a bigger draw.
We won't affect sponsorship such as the naming of the stadium.
We won't bring in the bigger crowds ect.

What are you on about? Its not a black or white, either / or situation

We are a threat to wasps, we are bigger draw than wasps, we do bring more crowds into the Ricoh than wasps, and us being there would increase stadium sponsorship.

However, wasps wouldn't want to own us because football clubs lose money, a hell of a lot of money, getting success would require them to invest £50m+ over 3-4 seasons with a hope for thr best. In fact when you consider wasps are loss making, acl is loss making, then factor in that despite being breakeven, sisu have had to fund losses again this season, strongly competing in league one (say top 2-3 wage bill) and treading water in the championship will require significant investment and losses. This as OSB has explained on a number of occasions adds huge risk to the bonds, it also conflicts with their aims of making wasps the biggest club in Europe by divert funds away from them, it brings huge cashflow issues
Hence, wasps won't want to own us. OSB has done a much more indepth analysis on this.

So the 2 things aren't mutually exclusive, you can have it both ways. We are both a threat and competitor to wasps, but on thr other hand they won't /couldn't take the risk of owning us. The risks are huge, and "if we get the PL...." Is not going to pursuade them to take over. Their business model doesn't need us, and doesn't need thr additional cost or risks that owning us would bring.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[dongonzalos]

What are you on about? Its not a black or white, either / or situation

We are a threat to wasps, we are bigger draw than wasps, we do bring more crowds into the Ricoh than wasps, and us being there would increase stadium sponsorship.

However, wasps wouldn't want to own us because football clubs lose money, a hell of a lot of money, getting success would require them to invest £50m+ over 3-4 seasons with a hope for thr best. In fact when you consider wasps are loss making, acl is loss making, then factor in that despite being breakeven, sisu have had to fund losses again this season, strongly competing in league one (say top 2-3 wage bill) and treading water in the championship will require significant investment and losses. This as OSB has explained on a number of occasions adds huge risk to the bonds, it also conflicts with their aims of making wasps the biggest club in Europe by divert funds away from them, it brings huge cashflow issues
Hence, wasps won't want to own us. OSB has done a much more indepth analysis on this.

So the 2 things aren't mutually exclusive, you can have it both ways. We are both a threat and competitor to wasps, but on thr other hand they won't /couldn't take the risk of owning us. The risks are huge, and "if we get the PL...." Is not going to pursuade them to take over. Their business model doesn't need us, and doesn't need thr additional cost or risks that owning us would bring.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

We are break even the football club is paying for itself.
If Wasps owned us the football club would be more than paying for itself as the football club would be owned by the people who own ACL.
Remember owning ACL was the solution to the whole problem with the football club?
This is all very confusing

 

[stupot07]

We are break even the football club is paying for itself.
If Wasps owned us the foitball would be more than paying for itself as the football would be owned by the people who own ACL.
Remember owning ACL was the solution to the whole problem with the football club?
This is all very confusing

I don't know why I bother.

1) we weren't break even, sisu had to but money in - you do remember the old 'we set the budget wrong' don't you?

2) you're forgetting that if wasps own us and acl, they also own a rugby club so thats cash flow across 3 areas not 2. Wasps/acl already lost money last season, you're then adding in a business that has consistently lost money for as far back as I remember.

It really isn't confusing.

- we're a competitor for business
- we consistently make losses
- both organisations have little cash flow for the same 3-4 months of the year
- it adds huge risk to the bonds
- owning ccfc would mean wasps own 3 loss making companies
- if the football club owning acl is the solution to the whole problem, why would wasps want to dilute it by sharing revenues they hope will make them sustainable?
- if goes against wasps business model and aims of making wasps the biggest club in Europe
- how would it pay for itself? If wasps divert funds from acl and rent free for example into the football club, that means taking them away from the rugby club and funding acls operating costs (remember wasps making a loss + £2m pa interest to pay)
- makes management of the company more difficult - what is the priority wasps, acl or ccfc?

Its not confusing, OSB has outlined the reasons a number of times. The risks and costs associated with running a football club are huge. Its too much risk with the bonds. Its not going to happen.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[dongonzalos]

I don't know why I bother.

1) we weren't break even, sisu had to but money in - you do remember the old 'we set the budget wrong' don't you?

2) you're forgetting that if wasps own us and acl, they also own a rugby club so thats cash flow across 3 areas not 2. Wasps/acl already lost money last season, you're then adding in a business that has consistently lost money for as far back as I remember.

It really isn't confusing.

- we're a competitor for business
- we consistently make losses
- both organisations have little cash flow for the same 3-4 months of the year
- it adds huge risk to the bonds
- owning ccfc would mean wasps own 3 loss making companies
- if the football club owning acl is the solution to the whole problem, why would wasps want to dilute it by sharing revenues they hope will make them sustainable?
- if goes against wasps business model and aims of making wasps the biggest club in Europe
- how would it pay for itself? If wasps divert funds from acl and rent free for example into the football club, that means taking them away from the rugby club and funding acls operating costs (remember wasps making a loss + £2m pa interest to pay)
- makes management of the company more difficult - what is the priority wasps, acl or ccfc?

Its not confusing, OSB has outlined the reasons a number of times. The risks and costs associated with running a football club are huge. Its too much risk with the bonds. Its not going to happen.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Don't agree with all of it
But fair play for a well thought out reply cheers

 

[Captain Dart]

About the only assets CCFC have left to bargain with Wasps are:
1) Presence of CCFC at Arena will make sponsorship deal bigger, if Wasps sign off on a new long term deal that is gone & can only be leveraged in a new stadium.
2) CCFC matches bring in F&B and Parking revenue to feed ACL component. Not sure how match day costs are determined.
3) It is possible for CCFC to get other revenue from the stadium if there was access outside the match window, but unless that is a good deal it does not benefit CCFC much and alternative venues could be found.

Other than that there is only the bad PR that could come from dealing with the club unfairly, but while the litigation continues I do not think the general public (and I don't mean poster this forum there are a lot more parties out there who don't see the issues in such a black and white manner as many on here do) is fully behind CCFC, rather they can say (as I do) "I'm not at all surprised Wasps do not want to deal with someone who wants to involve them in litigation".