Nick
Administrator
There is no logic at all by trying to spin the blame and close it down on to CSF by requesting things in writing. It leaves them too wide open.
Formal Planning Objection from CCFC (20 Viewers)
- Thread starter Orca
- Start date
There is no logic at all by trying to spin the blame and close it down on to CSF by requesting things in writing. It leaves them too wide open.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
What you mean is your previous point was bollocks so you change the conversation.
Nick
Administrator
Yeah, change the conversation onto pretty much saying we have been kicked out... How else does "moving on without us" sound?
Pretty sure there's a good deal of PR bs being served from all sides.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Yes probably right - but as usual CCFC's is called out and Wasps is lapped up.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Bang on, they know they can't offer what the football club need, they admitted it right at the start. Talks are just a PR stunt.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Nick
Administrator
I agree with that.
The only thing is, CCFC would be playing a massive schoolboy PR error by demanding things in writing if they wanted to close it but divert the blame wouldn't they? If I was CSF / Wasps I'd be having an open letter drafted as we speak and practising my smug face for the article.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Mostly funded by the club though. The gamble I guess is can you still turn out a Wilson or Maddison every couple of years without the Cat 2 status? That's alot of money saved if you believe you can, especially at league one level. There's also the other cost, time. The academy is very time consuming and involved and that's a commodity that the club has been offloading in every area from the club shop to the tickets to the programs. It's not beyond the realm's of possibility that downgrading the academy is an extension of this philosophy. Less involvement, less staff and less outlay.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Spin on both sides Italia
I am increasingly coming round to the opinion that the situation is not about SISU wanting to close the Academy but that it is simply a monumental cock up on the part of the CCFC directors that Wasps and CSF have exploited fully and coldly. The only way to add weight to that however is to find out what date CA first formally asked for a new deal at the AHC - got a feeling it will have been in April 2016. Strangely with all the emails and letters that do get released that one hasn't been or been asked for. Someone took their eye off what was vital for the club and now the panic is to try to rectify that.
It isn't the Wasps development that could kill the Academy, there are ways round that if you are flexible, it is the swimming pool and that's been out there in the public domain since what July 2013?
Just an opinion though
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yep, there is indeed. Don't know why people have to nail their flags to one particular side all the time.
It's all getting very petty and very silly. A won't talk to B because of legal noise, B wants things in writing from A, A won't give things in writing, B invited to meeting to talk, B refuses.
It's all rather childish and the only party being hurt is Coventry City FC.
Nick
Administrator
I'd agree with that as well, I don't think it is about them trying to close it down and divert the blame. I think they are just in a world of shit.
I think that objection is to try and win fans over, I don't think they think it will make a bit of difference.
Is anybody expecting planning to be turned down?
My "Opinion" is that Wasps and CSF don't want us there, they are just going through the PR motions now to soften the blow as if they are really trying to help.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
agreed. I just want to see my club doing all it can to save the academy.
When I see they wont attend a meeting, which at the very worst would be a waste of time, but at the best may keep us open, its frustrating. My flag is firmly on the CCFC side and I want them to leave no stone unturned with negotiations before this ends up in court and time has ran out, waiting for months for an email that wont come isn't time we have..
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
I don't think there is a commercial argument to downgrade academy. I also don't think you can compare ticketing and retail reorganisations to it.
If you can produce regular talent - which we have done consistently even down in 2nd and 3rd tier there is a regular funding stream to support the first team.
Nick
Administrator
But then even downgrading to the next teir isn't going to be free is it? Unless they fully close it.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Said the other day the objection and the Reid articles have no planning substance and are simply PR pieces in my opinion. They are aimed at the fans really, the decision makers will largely ignore the content because it doesn't deal with planning issues. But like I said it isn't the Wasps development that is killing the Academy (not helping though) - its gross mis-management and 50m bath
No I don't expect anything than the plans to be approved
No I don't expect anything than the plans to be approved
Nick
Administrator
I think CCFC indicating they DO want the academy would be a good start!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Like I said. That would be the gamble.
skybluebeduff
Well-Known Member
I refuse to read anything that Simon Clickbaitbert publishes, so on that note, i'm out!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Never said it would be. It would however save money, time and resources. That's also a precedent that the club have set over the last 12 and a bit months. Not saying it is the case, just saying that it's not beyond the realms of possibilities.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
I agree why not at least attend the meeting? Worst case scenario is it's a waste of time and best case scenario is we stay.
I have no doubts wasps don't particularly want us there but then we aren't helping ourselves by not turning up.
Whichever way you look at it wasps and csf hold all the cards and we have to admit to doing things we don't want to do like attend a meeting. I get why he wouldn't but then we certainly lose the academy. Can't have your cake and eat it Anderson.
I have no doubts wasps don't particularly want us there but then we aren't helping ourselves by not turning up.
Whichever way you look at it wasps and csf hold all the cards and we have to admit to doing things we don't want to do like attend a meeting. I get why he wouldn't but then we certainly lose the academy. Can't have your cake and eat it Anderson.
Nick
Administrator
No I can see why people might think CCFC want to close it down etc but spin the blame.
Don't you think by doing that by insisting on it being in writing with how good Wasps PR is, is a bit of a death wish if it is them who want to close it down?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Again if that's so why not just say it. Who would care?
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Here is what is happening. Take your pick:
1. Ccfc don't want to stay and want to cut costs and move the academy and knock down the running costs.
2. Wasps/csf want us gone and can't offer us anything to standard anyway.
3. Both 1 and 2 and the fans know none the wiser.
1. Ccfc don't want to stay and want to cut costs and move the academy and knock down the running costs.
2. Wasps/csf want us gone and can't offer us anything to standard anyway.
3. Both 1 and 2 and the fans know none the wiser.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
That's very true and why did we leave the Higgs only to come back again only 3 years ago was it? Then surely was the time to leave for good no? We have already left it once
Nick
Administrator
They are both viable, I still don't get the logic behind demanding things in writing for 1. Way too risky.
Moff
Well-Known Member
So in one post for say with certainty (your own opinion) that SISU are trying to close the academy, and then they have been outmanoeuvred and we should just move on.
I take it by that that you want the academy to close, agree with SISU and we should move on.
Forgive those that disagree and don't want the club to lose the academy, we don't want to move on. Perhaps you will be pleased only when CCFC are long gone, and Coventry is a Wasps only City?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Depends what's on the list. Has CA ever gone public with what's on the list?
Plus let's face it. When it comes to PR Wasps haven't really got to do a lot to look better than us. CA has pulled a blinder for them by not attending the meeting. He's lost out twice in the PR games with that. If he had have attended the meeting and all that happened was Wasps and CSF tried to find excuses not to accommodate the academy he could have come out and said so and then referred back to the lack of reply to his letter as further confirmation that we're being forced out. The only two reasons that I can think of why CA couldn't legitimately attend the meeting is either because of the planning objection or the danger that the answers might have been yes to everything or yes to enough so that the academy could continue with it's current status albeit on more than one site. I'm willing to give CA the benefit of doubt in light of the planning objection and say it's about the planning objection but I ain't 100% convinced.
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
Calm down, I must be one of the most vocal against SISU and what they stand for on
This forum, think maybe you've taken my text out of context or something.
What I mean is any supporters hoping and wishing the team to perform badly, and as a
result aren't successful, are not real fans.
As you say you hate SISU' so do I,but you still want the team to win, so do I
Nick
Administrator
Not really, if they didn't have to do anything your thread wouldn't have been hammered
If he was scared about the answers being yes to everything, why would he demand it in writing? That doesn't make sense.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If no one cared there wouldn't be all this fuss in the first place and your only comment on it would be just close it, it's not needed anyway. As there is a fuss and you have plenty to say about it clearly people do care.
skyblueinBaku
Well-Known Member
I'm sure that all of the information that CA wants in writing would have been forthcoming at the meeting. It would then be in the minutes. If CA had bothered attending, he would now have the information he wants and could plan accordingly. This type of nonsense between the two parties beggars belief.
Nick
Administrator
Are there minutes out from when the sky Blue Trust met them then?
I think people are being a bit naive on it all
If the information he wants is all there, why not send it to him and blow him out of the water? That would put him on the spot.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Not really, if they didn't have to do anything your thread wouldn't have been hammered
If he was scared about the answers being yes to everything, why would he demand it in writing? That doesn't make sense.
Probably because he knew he wouldn't get it.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Are there minutes out from when the sky Blue Trust met them then?
I think people are being a bit naive on it all
If the information he wants is all there, why not send it to him and blow him out of the water? That would put him on the spot.
As the trust weren't negotiating a commercial agreement I doubt it.
Nick
Administrator
That would be a big gamble wouldn't it? IF the answers were all yes why wouldn't they be on the front page of the telegraph?
How could he be scared the answers we yes, but so sure he wouldn't get it in writing?
Especially with the PR stuff? People would be scrambling to prove him wrong and show him up...