OPINION: SAVE OUR CITY: Flaws in council support for Wasps move into CCFC academy (10 Viewers)

[stupot07]

PLCs tend to trade in order to make a return on their investment. If that means making a commercial deal that benefits their shareholders, then I don't think we should be too surprised,. Wasps may be opportunists (they probably can't believe their luck)
In the same way that we can't believe our beloved football club failed to sieze such an opportunity. But they don't think like we do.
I still expect them to cash in on Ryton for development, and I think they are spiteful enough to call in the debt next year and wind the football club up. They still regard investment to date as being owed back to them by the football club.
And if by some miracle they were successful in acquiring the Ricoh they would most definitely be charging a significant rent for the lab to use it....IT WILL NEVER be owned BY the football club.

New season?

Not hopeful, need an entire back four, another midfielder and a striker.
Midtable at best, fear much worse.

Oh and ticketing? Too painful to waste my time on. May get to a few away games. Would rather watch local non league football Saturdays...and the Ladies on Sundays. More entertaining.



Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Who's the PLC? The land is owned by thr higgs charity not a PLC, the lease was transfered to Coventry and Warwickshire award trust another charity, and the site is run by Coventry sports foundation another charity.

So who are these share holders?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

---

[Hobo]

The land will still be owned by the LA. I don't think they've sold the school land on charter avenue, or the old deedmore school site on Henley road, and they kepts wood end as adult learning centre.

It will likely cost a lot more to.buy and develop than wasps higgs developments.

We're truly fucked.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It maybe costly, but it is prime land and can give a development return. It's future is undecided. It fits the profile. Someone will turn a profit from it.

 

[tim07]

That land is owned by sports connection its probably not for sale.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Wait. The independently owned leisure centre at allard way can and should step aside to secure the academy, but the independently owned leisure centre at Ryton (once owned by CCFC) can't and shouldn't be expected to?


Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

Wait. The independently owned leisure centre at allard way can and should step aside to secure the academy, but the independently owned leisure centre at Ryton (once owned by CCFC) can't and shouldn't be expected to?


Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Who has said it should?

 

[tim07]

Who's the PLC? The land is owned by thr higgs charity not a PLC, the lease was transfered to Coventry and Warwickshire award trust another charity, and the site is run by Coventry sports foundation another charity.

So who are these share holders?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

The Higgs IS a PLC

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

It maybe costly, but it is prime land and can give a development return. It's future is undecided. It fits the profile. Someone will turn a profit from it.

Yep, although money aside, the relationship with the council has completely broken down, and given the tricks they tried with the butts and them giving preferential treatment to wasps through thr planning, I can't see the council making it easy for thr club if they did buy it, so for that reason (if they had thr money) I don't think sisu would even entertain it. In fact its almost in the councils interest to make it as difficult as possible to force us to stay at the Ricoh.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

Looks like even you realise your argument has fallen apart. You're meandering all over the place with this, what ARE you on about?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Really? If you are having an issue following you might want to read it through in the morning.

 

[stupot07]

The Higgs IS a PLC

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

The Higgs IS a PLC

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Pardon, the Alan Higgs Centre Trust is a PLC
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04692729

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

This charity is set up to fund local good causes. Not sure that The Higgs Centre Trust has the same stated aim and status

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

I thought csf had it now?

 

[tim07]

I thought csf had it now?

Manage it. Always have, haven't they?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

This charity is set up to fund local good causes. Not sure that The Higgs Centre Trust has the same stated aim and status

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Happy to be corrected though. Pretty sure it was a PLC when the centre was constructed

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

This charity is set up to fund local good causes. Not sure that The Higgs Centre Trust has the same stated aim and status

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Does it really make much difference?. Charities seek to maximise their revenues and appreciate their assets. PLCs seek to make a profit. Don't see either turning away £7 mill investment

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

He's offside...

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[Grendel]

Wasps have said they are investing 7m in the new academy at the Higgs site. Anyway, unlike you, I don't give a stuff about Wasps. I only care about CCFC and its future. It's a pity that you and SISU don't share the same care for the future of our football club.

Wasps have admitted they want be spending a penny.

It's a pity your blind hatred for sisu means you are taken in by wasps spin. You say your not bothered by wasps but said unlike them our owners aren't spending. Well they are not someone else will. Could be the city of rugby initiative sponsors - no doubt if sisu had said they were going to find £7 million of someone else's money your reaction would have been someone different.

 

[Grendel]

It maybe costly, but it is prime land and can give a development return. It's future is undecided. It fits the profile. Someone will turn a profit from it.

Probably one of the 17 sites wasps looked at. Can't be much good oh they didn't want it.

 

[Grendel]

Does it really make much difference?. Charities seek to maximise their revenues and appreciate their assets. PLCs seek to make a profit. Don't see either turning away £7 mill investment

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

The £7 million investment isn't very clear and is not a pre condition to any deal. The £35 million investment by the tax payer in the guise of a pool development is I'm sure an influencer into the decision.

There's not going to be a £7 million investment by anyone and certainly no commitment made.

Why everytime you get a fact wrong to do move the subject along to something else - and then get that wrong?

 

[tim07]

Wasps have admitted they want be spending a penny.

It's a pity your blind hatred for sisu means you are taken in by wasps spin. You say your not bothered by wasps but said unlike them our owners aren't spending. Well they are not someone else will. Could be the city of rugby initiative sponsors - no doubt if sisu had said they were going to find £7 million of someone else's money your reaction would have been someone different.

Please reference the source of this 'wont be spending a penny' so I can look it up.
You seem to be inferring that some shadowy local consortium (which will no doubt include the local authority) are going to fund it?
Or do you mean that the RFU and/or Sport England are going to fund it.
Interesting to hear you don't have a problem with SISU helping themselves to other people's (our) money.
Do you sit on their board, or are you Less Read (I wish)'s love child?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[tim07]

The £7 million investment isn't very clear and is not a pre condition to any deal. The £35 million investment by the tax payer in the guise of a pool development is I'm sure an influencer into the decision.

There's not going to be a £7 million investment by anyone and certainly no commitment made.

Why everytime you get a fact wrong to do move the subject along to something else - and then get that wrong?

This doesn't say anything. Please reference the source...who said it and where is it recorded, by whom?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

Please reference the source of this 'wont be spending a penny' so I can look it up.
You seem to be inferring that some shadowy local consortium (which will no doubt include the local authority) are going to fund it?
Or do you mean that the RFU and/or Sport England are going to fund it.
Interesting to hear you don't have a problem with SISU helping themselves to other people's (our) money.
Do you sit on their board, or are you Less Read (I wish)'s love child?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Where have SISU taken (our) money?

Interesting to hear you you won't bother with CCFC this season.

 

[Grendel]

This doesn't say anything. Please reference the source...who said it and where is it recorded, by whom?

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

Lol you make up all sorts of unfounded crap and then ask for a link.

There have been several articles in the telegraph that say that - one Armstrong tries to claim a funding for building cost but then there is a curious follow up statement - perhaps you explain what that means.

Tell you what I'll provide a link if you explain and provide proof how sisu take money out the club.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Pardon, the Alan Higgs Centre Trust is a PLC
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04692729

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

The AHCT is not a PLC never has been

PLC means Public Limited Company

 

[oldskyblue58]

Don't think there has been any clarity on the funding of the pool or the Wasps set so it is not possible to say one way or the other who is funding the Wasps part of it

 

[oldskyblue58]

AEHC provided 12m to build the AHC

AHCT leased the property from CCC. AEHC had a charge over the property & lease to secure the 12m it provided. CSF managed the centre's operation and still does.

AHCT ceased to operate and the lease was transferred to Coventry & Warwickshire Centre Trust and a new charge in favour of AEHC went with it.

CCFC paid AHCT but CSF managed the bookings. The CCFC agreement was novated with the lease and charge

CCFC have had, since 2013, a 4 year user agreement that gave them the right to book facility usage 3 months in advance (if they paid 3mths up front). The longest "tenure" or right to occupy that CCFC had during the last three years is 3 months. If they didn't book and pay 3 months in advance then they were not guaranteed to be there. As far as I know it was Waggott that insisted on the 4 years........ because?

At least that's how I understand it

 

[Captain Dart]

No, Tim was adament that they can have the academy at the ryton, but they won't as they will sell it for housing. The truth is they can't have the academy AF ryton because the site isnt big enough.

Great build the indoor football pitch at ryton...where rbe first team go?


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

This article says upto £1M per acre for housing land near the edge of Urban areas.
http://www.fwi.co.uk/business/farmland-hits-1m-acre-for-housing.htm
Mark my words, the motivation behind wanting the Academy at Higgs is about cashing in on Ryton.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think the club is going to have to deal with what is, especially after the planning meeting this Thursday. That means if committed to a Cat 2 then working it in a different way. Yes it should be our Academy base (I have no doubt on that) but at no time have the club actually had a right to be there longer than 3 months in the last 3 years. At no time have they owned any of it, the finance came from the Charity, who for whatever reason (we all have various opinions) want minimal or no contact with CCFC moving forward.

Yes the centre was intended for the Academy, but without the backing of the Charity and CCC originally there would have been no Academy. The powers that be under leadership of Doug Ellis were going to pull the plug on the CCFC Academy until the AHC idea was put forward. It got built because of the community usage, had it just been the CCFC Academy it would have not.

Now all parties seem to be either moving away from CCFC or have mismanaged the situation catastrophically to the point there is a risk of no Academy at all.

However there are solutions, moral indignation of it was built for us will not solve this. For there to be an Academy a new set up will need to be negotiated. All sides know this or should do. Time they got past the posturing and set about stopping the ticking clock.

 

[Grendel]

Don't think there has been any clarity on the funding of the pool or the Wasps set so it is not possible to say one way or the other who is funding the Wasps part of it

There hasn't but the estimate the council have given for the combined projects is £55 million. The pool at the centre is supposed to be £14 to £20 million with the rest going on the pool complex in the centre.

The 50m pool is already projected as a loss making enterprise but is to be funded from the profits of the water park - the figures to use that - over a million a year look ambitious.

I struggle to believe the wasps arrival and proposed development are not integrated into this proposal.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think the Reid article is

(a) a reflection of the panic & frustration at CCFC - the other side are playing hard ball, less willing than ever to bend and that's outside the club and owners comfort zone which when added to financial pressures ratchets up the stakes. CSF/Wasps are saying all the right things but no one including them is really talking or compelled to do so. Time is ticking and rather than a plan to get rid of the Academy I increasingly think it is on the club side of things simply a massive cock up. Wasps & CSF clearly had talks and a plan but it wasn't that secret when the CT reported it last November, did that plan set out to exclude CCFC its not hard to argue it could have

(b) indicates the frustration that there is little they can do to stop it. So far there have been no really focussed valid planning grounds put forward that I can see. The best I can see is that they may delay the site build

(c) I think the article clearly hints at what comes next - legal action.

(d) Points the finger at everyone else - which is actually counter productive in terms of building a basis for solution

The biggest weakness is that the club signed up to a 3 month booking agreement not a long term tenancy. There is nothing, except moral indignation, that compels CCC, CSF, CAWAT, AEHC, or Wasps to deal with CCFC at the Alan Higgs Centre past 30-06-2017. SISU/CCFC going legal is not going to change that I feel, only further alienate the club, but it is the only hand they are left with

oh and just to finish off in my opinion both the Reid article and the 3 week late appeal issued amount to PR. Neither offer much in a solution or a way to change hearts and minds of decision makers.

Just my opinion to which I am entitled

 

[oldskyblue58]

I struggle to believe the wasps arrival and proposed development are not integrated into this proposal.

So do I to be honest in some ways but it doesn't necessarily mean there is a crossover on the finances and we don't actually know

 

[fernandopartridge]

I think the Reid article is

(a) a reflection of the panic & frustration at CCFC - the other side are playing hard ball, less willing than ever to bend and that's outside the club and owners comfort zone which when added to financial pressures ratchets up the stakes. Time is ticking and rather than a plan to get rid of the Academy I increasingly think it is on the club side of things simply a massive cock up. Wasps & CSF clearly had talks and a plan but it wasn't that secret when the CT reported it last November, did that plan set out to exclude CCFC its not hard to argue it could have

(b) indicates the frustration that there is little they can do to stop it. So far there have been no really focussed valid planning grounds put forward that I can see. The best I can see is that they may delay the site build

(c) I think the article clearly hints at what comes next - legal action.

(d) Points the finger at everyone else

The biggest weakness is that the club signed up to a 3 month booking agreement not a long term tenancy. There is nothing, except moral indignation, that compels CCC, CSF, CAWAT, AEHC, or Wasps to deal with CCFC at the Alan Higgs Centre past 30-06-2017. SISU/CCFC going legal is not going to change that I feel, only further alienate the club, but it is the only hand they are left with

oh and just to finish off in my opinion both the Reid article and the 3 week late appeal issued amount to PR. Neither offer much in a solution or a way to change hearts and minds of decision makers.

Just my opinion to which I am entitled

Do you know, at the point of CCFC signing a 3 month rolling deal, was a long term deal on the table?

 

[oldskyblue58]

No idea fp, nor do I know if the club asked for that, but a long term lease arrangement would have offered more protection against being displaced

 

[oldskyblue58]

Planning officers report to committee - not sure if it has been posted up on here

http://planning.coventry.gov.uk/portal/servlets/AttachmentShowServlet?ImageName=1290623

 

[Moff]

There is a huge amount of land all around the Ryton training ground including land behind the factory which connects directly to the training ground. All it needs is for SISU to back up their so called "vision" with cold hard cash to purchase the land and develop the academy which is what they claim to have wanted all along.

The land behind the factory (Keller) is covered by two large fishing lakes, which if I am honest might waterlog the pitches, and put off Academy development.