The Butts (12 Viewers)
- Thread starter Generally Midfield
- Start date
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
It's as plain as the nose on your face... To me it says f**k off SISU, then we'll deal with CCFC with new owners... You know, ones that won't "Mug us off" at the first opportunity.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
why weird ? just seems like common senseIt is weird he says that.
Would be good to know the question put to him
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Would anyone on this forum deal with them .If I was there milkman I would ask for money up front.
Explains Mutton's attitude.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't want to be a milkman to Sisu if they are creaming everything off.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
So you want to know what was he asked 'exactly' in order to say we won't work with SISU
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
"Break even is all that matters"
If the Ricoh doesn't suit that aim.
Does it matter massively if you 'breakeven' in division 4 in front of Less than 10000 fans.
Or in the bottom halve of division 3
In front of 11-15k fans.
Whichever guarantees you breakeven you will choose.
The only way that would make sense to me is they don't believe the Wasps model is sustainable. So you either get CCFc to a point where you can sit and wait till Wasps break.
Or
You convince everyone you are ok to sit as you are forever as you are at 'breakeven'. Whilst you wait for something to happen because Wasps can't maintain what they are doing. I.E who blinks first.
No idea which it is. Very hard to work out what our owners' long term plan is.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
How much are they creaming from CCFC exactly?
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
Nick,, this is getting embarrassing, stop clutching at SISU.:emoji_rolling_eyes:
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Sorry to say this but he lost all credibility just by becoming someone else's' mouth piece and PR. When apparently fighting to expose the truth and do investigative journalism.
Surely to do that you dig into every area of the topic you are investigating.
Not just investigate Wasps, Council and the CET. Whilst repeating at all costs the mantra of SISU.
Investigate everyone and dig and dig.
Get your own reputation for your own digging.
Not living if the scraps fed to you by one side.
Shame really.
Surely to do that you dig into every area of the topic you are investigating.
Not just investigate Wasps, Council and the CET. Whilst repeating at all costs the mantra of SISU.
Investigate everyone and dig and dig.
Get your own reputation for your own digging.
Not living if the scraps fed to you by one side.
Shame really.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Frankly pissed off with much/all of this. In particular.......
I wish that CCFC and CRFC would simply state what the plan is, make it clear to everyone and stick to it. Forget all the clever talk, in plain English what is the plan and with who & when, how will it work or be funded. A plan we can get behind and help drive through
It is clear that now any thing goes wrong the implication it is because the fans don't simply just support the team/club protests damage the club. Do they really think most fans are that gullible. Team form affected by protests, results affected by protests, fans aren't spending enough because of protests, fans don't have blind faith and ask questions( how dare they), the owners are upset because they cant get their own way because of the fans and others, a new ground at the BPA for CCFC is at risk because of fans protests. I assume new owners are at risk because of the fans etc................. how many excuses do TF JS and SISU need for totally screwing up..... it is always someone elses fault. It was CCC, ACL, Wasps now its the fans their major source of income. Perhaps if our owners cared, had a plan and knew how to run a football club not drive in to the ground, didn't prioritise investment losses for unknown money men above all else in managing CCFC then the fans might not feel a great and often desperate need to protest. I have never seen owners of any business try so hard to alienate its customers
Wouldn't be protests if the owners and directors were not calamitous in running the club from day 1. The fans are entitled to their say, they provide the funds that keep the club afloat
and finally this constant dick waving between the CT & Observer in the shape of the respective hacks involved. Grow up and get the real questions asked and answered in clear language, I don't care who is gods gift to reporting get some proper answers on player sales, new grounds, academy, Ryton, training grounds, the plan and not least WHY
and breathe
My thoughts exactly about to have a similar rant but this is far more eloquently put!!!
Well said.
singers_pore
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's really weird how no one seems to want to do business with SISU. It's almost as if people don't trust them. How weird is that? Personally I blame the CT!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
The shafting of the fans ......
Man in power thinks a 25k stadium near the centre isn't good enough and gambles on plans for one of the best stadiums in the country at the time. Despite the fact there was no waiting list or excess demand at Highfield Road at that time.
(Fans opinion irrelevant)
His plans go spectacularly wrong and the plans get downscaled. The council and a local charity step in to save the day. The stadium is still very impressive. However now two other parties have saved they day and expect to be compensated for doing so in the future.
The club is then about to enter adminstration.
SISU come in to save the day. Their plan invest get a quick return to the premier league then sell for a quick profit.
This plan goes spectacularly wrong.
They decide to deviate from the original plan and bring in new people with a new plan of stop haemorrhaging money.
Under the new plan they decide to distress the business the charity and council set up and then purchase it below the original value in order to merge it with the football club getting back to the idea the original man who had built the stadium.
However by trying to devalue it that meant they upset the council and the local charity who would both lose money.
In order to devalue it there was prolonged rental negotiations and a lot of uncertainty at the club at the same time investment in the football was cut as were costs. (Fans shafted)
Then to really put the pressure on ACL and devalue it the football team were moved to another town.
(fans shafted)
Somewhere over this time period fans are told owner of SISU is now hands on with making decisions over the club and learning more about football. She left others to make decisions before but now she is making the decisions.
Council helps out company to derail the devaluation. Owners sue the council for doing what they did.
Owner promises fans new stadium will be built in 3-5 years. In the Coventry Area. Land will be bought immently.
The promise did not happen
(fans shafted)
Owners state they will not return to the Ricoh unless they are owners of the Freehold.
Council repeatedly warns owners that they will move on if owners don't bid for company. However that bid never materialised.
(Fans shafted)
Football club out of blue returns
(Fans given hope)
Turns out Council had actually already moved on and sells to a different franchise club.
(fans shafted).
Owners lose legal battle at numerous stages. All judges tell them the council were just protecting their own business that you were trying to devalue. People running club support legal action at all stages and attend court.
Owners threaten legal action over sale to franchise club.
Franchise club stop negotions over stay at Ricoh until legal action is over
(fans shafted)
Franchise club buy the academy facility that was owned by the charity the owners became in dispute with.
(Fans shafted)
Owners announce they want to join up with local rugby team to built new stadium in the city
(Fans given hope)
People running football club start to distance themselves from the owners and the legal action that they were originally very supportive of. Also very different to the suggestion that the owner is now very hands on.
Deal with rugby club seems to be off. Explanation that rugby club won't deal with owners of the football club.
(Fans shafted)
So with all of the above in mind.
All the way through the owners have been told that fans just want better communication. They want to be told the truth. They want to be told what the short and long term plans are. Also for those plans to make sense and be believable.
Instead this is the message from the people running the club..
Fans protesting and media from local paper requesting the owners move on are
Putting off potential investors.
Stopping the local rugby club from dealing with the owners.
Fans staying away as a protest are hurting the club and not encouraging the owners to move on.
Fans protesting are causing defeats.
(Fans shafted for trying to save the club they love)
You really could not make it up.
Diplomacy does not exist in the running of CCFC.
Man in power thinks a 25k stadium near the centre isn't good enough and gambles on plans for one of the best stadiums in the country at the time. Despite the fact there was no waiting list or excess demand at Highfield Road at that time.
(Fans opinion irrelevant)
His plans go spectacularly wrong and the plans get downscaled. The council and a local charity step in to save the day. The stadium is still very impressive. However now two other parties have saved they day and expect to be compensated for doing so in the future.
The club is then about to enter adminstration.
SISU come in to save the day. Their plan invest get a quick return to the premier league then sell for a quick profit.
This plan goes spectacularly wrong.
They decide to deviate from the original plan and bring in new people with a new plan of stop haemorrhaging money.
Under the new plan they decide to distress the business the charity and council set up and then purchase it below the original value in order to merge it with the football club getting back to the idea the original man who had built the stadium.
However by trying to devalue it that meant they upset the council and the local charity who would both lose money.
In order to devalue it there was prolonged rental negotiations and a lot of uncertainty at the club at the same time investment in the football was cut as were costs. (Fans shafted)
Then to really put the pressure on ACL and devalue it the football team were moved to another town.
(fans shafted)
Somewhere over this time period fans are told owner of SISU is now hands on with making decisions over the club and learning more about football. She left others to make decisions before but now she is making the decisions.
Council helps out company to derail the devaluation. Owners sue the council for doing what they did.
Owner promises fans new stadium will be built in 3-5 years. In the Coventry Area. Land will be bought immently.
The promise did not happen
(fans shafted)
Owners state they will not return to the Ricoh unless they are owners of the Freehold.
Council repeatedly warns owners that they will move on if owners don't bid for company. However that bid never materialised.
(Fans shafted)
Football club out of blue returns
(Fans given hope)
Turns out Council had actually already moved on and sells to a different franchise club.
(fans shafted).
Owners lose legal battle at numerous stages. All judges tell them the council were just protecting their own business that you were trying to devalue. People running club support legal action at all stages and attend court.
Owners threaten legal action over sale to franchise club.
Franchise club stop negotions over stay at Ricoh until legal action is over
(fans shafted)
Franchise club buy the academy facility that was owned by the charity the owners became in dispute with.
(Fans shafted)
Owners announce they want to join up with local rugby team to built new stadium in the city
(Fans given hope)
People running football club start to distance themselves from the owners and the legal action that they were originally very supportive of. Also very different to the suggestion that the owner is now very hands on.
Deal with rugby club seems to be off. Explanation that rugby club won't deal with owners of the football club.
(Fans shafted)
So with all of the above in mind.
All the way through the owners have been told that fans just want better communication. They want to be told the truth. They want to be told what the short and long term plans are. Also for those plans to make sense and be believable.
Instead this is the message from the people running the club..
Fans protesting and media from local paper requesting the owners move on are
Putting off potential investors.
Stopping the local rugby club from dealing with the owners.
Fans staying away as a protest are hurting the club and not encouraging the owners to move on.
Fans protesting are causing defeats.
(Fans shafted for trying to save the club they love)
You really could not make it up.
Diplomacy does not exist in the running of CCFC.
Last edited:
NortonSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
This post should be kept as an aid to all that want a brief run through of where we are as a football club.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
Ay? What are you on about?
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Reid article
Surely if the best interests of CRFC is to deal with SISU then CRFC have to deal with them. In any case who does Sharp think signs off on rent deals, finance etc. He can play with words all he likes but control of CCFC is through SISU. There is a reason that Seppala's assistant is on the board of directors and attends Otium Board meetings. Property deals over £100k also have to be ratified by shareholders at AGM, who are ....... ? Its just playing with words and mugging people off, does no one any favours and frankly just increases the ire felt by many CCFC fans. So increases the thing they all seem to want to defuse - fans protests, its counter productive
The main thing driving the SISU out campaign is the management and attitude of SISU over 9 years at CCFC. Yes the CT have jumped on the bandwagon but their stories would gain no traction if the fans frustration and animosity to SISU wasn't already there. The reason no one seems to succeed in acquiring the club (fans leaders or not) is it isn't for sale, at least publically. As for the plan has Mr Reid spoken to the Trust or any other potential interested party? Would anyone reveal their plan before agreeing something in general terms with the key party in this - SISU. He is fishing I feel
The protests are aimed at the owners not the club. According to TF the two are completely separate - well it is when he chooses. SISU control the major decisions at CCFC. The fans do get behind the team, look how many travel to away games, look how many teams get smaller home gates, despite seasons of dismal football and results put on by CCFC. TF and SISU continue to alienate the fans, even seem to make a point of doing it. Every time TF comments on the fans and it is reported it drives a bigger wedge through the fans relationship with the club. Why do SISU & TF feel the need to alienate the fans and £2m of income, this is not a new thing but a continuing theme over seasons
The BPA is a joint venture which means splitting income & costs doesn't it at a much smaller venue that is not even suitable for CCFC usage as it stands. Yet current protests endanger something that may never happen or will take years to achieve? That on the face of it will show further reduction in income potential. But if it doesn't happen it will be the fans fault. How convenient
The worrying paragraph in the article is about JR2, given that the assumed source of what Reid writes is from the CCFC/SISU side of things - is this a heavy hint that JR2 is about to be started? Going to be hard to claim CCFC is not involved with SISU & ARVO on that one because Otium is named on the front sheet as jointly bringing the action.
He keeps making the point about the Wasps 43m debt and annual losses. Yes they do carry the bond liability with interest at 6.75% but they also have fixed assets totalling £68m. On the other hand SBS&L has loans of 36m with interest at 18% accruing preference shares £7m, with fixed assets of £450k. I think it is reasonably accepted that Wasps have proven to be sharp operators, have a plan and drive to achieve it, so why with something so fundamental is it assumed they have no plan to deal with the bond debt? Which company, forget the morals about franchise, would you choose from the two
£73k incomes, non match day incomes. They get F&B income for no cost or risk, and to some degree reflects fans not spending or being there (sorry it might look like I am blaming fans there too but I am certainly not trying to). They do not get access to non match day incomes because they have never, for what ever reason, agreed a deal to have that access. Of course to gain access is going to cost money and commitment, to build relationships - but I guess that's the real problem isn't it
Not true that there is no willing buyer there would seem plenty of interest, there is apparently no willing seller or a seller willing to talk about options. The problem is, it seems to me, there is interest but not at the price that SISU & ARVO need
Having said all this the thought is that something is going on behind the scenes and that interest is spooked by the league position and the yawning chasm between owners and fans and it has been dressed up to them as everybody else's fault but the owners. Of course you spin it as fans having passion for the team and the owners recognise this and the poor job done and want out from what could be a fantastic project - all in the spin isn't it, how you sell it or take responsibility. It has to be something like that going on because of the way they all get spooked by any set back or negative press
Just a final thought. Do the two reporters actually get to discuss what they put out with all sides to get a balanced view? It would seem doubtful Gilbert has access to CCFC/SISU etc and I doubt Reid has access to the other side of things CCC/Wasps/ACL/Charity/Trust etc to any great degree. Just my opinion and we will never know, but I don't find either reports put out by them as balanced, more one sided ego massaging - again just an opinion
Surely if the best interests of CRFC is to deal with SISU then CRFC have to deal with them. In any case who does Sharp think signs off on rent deals, finance etc. He can play with words all he likes but control of CCFC is through SISU. There is a reason that Seppala's assistant is on the board of directors and attends Otium Board meetings. Property deals over £100k also have to be ratified by shareholders at AGM, who are ....... ? Its just playing with words and mugging people off, does no one any favours and frankly just increases the ire felt by many CCFC fans. So increases the thing they all seem to want to defuse - fans protests, its counter productive
The main thing driving the SISU out campaign is the management and attitude of SISU over 9 years at CCFC. Yes the CT have jumped on the bandwagon but their stories would gain no traction if the fans frustration and animosity to SISU wasn't already there. The reason no one seems to succeed in acquiring the club (fans leaders or not) is it isn't for sale, at least publically. As for the plan has Mr Reid spoken to the Trust or any other potential interested party? Would anyone reveal their plan before agreeing something in general terms with the key party in this - SISU. He is fishing I feel
The protests are aimed at the owners not the club. According to TF the two are completely separate - well it is when he chooses. SISU control the major decisions at CCFC. The fans do get behind the team, look how many travel to away games, look how many teams get smaller home gates, despite seasons of dismal football and results put on by CCFC. TF and SISU continue to alienate the fans, even seem to make a point of doing it. Every time TF comments on the fans and it is reported it drives a bigger wedge through the fans relationship with the club. Why do SISU & TF feel the need to alienate the fans and £2m of income, this is not a new thing but a continuing theme over seasons
The BPA is a joint venture which means splitting income & costs doesn't it at a much smaller venue that is not even suitable for CCFC usage as it stands. Yet current protests endanger something that may never happen or will take years to achieve? That on the face of it will show further reduction in income potential. But if it doesn't happen it will be the fans fault. How convenient
The worrying paragraph in the article is about JR2, given that the assumed source of what Reid writes is from the CCFC/SISU side of things - is this a heavy hint that JR2 is about to be started? Going to be hard to claim CCFC is not involved with SISU & ARVO on that one because Otium is named on the front sheet as jointly bringing the action.
He keeps making the point about the Wasps 43m debt and annual losses. Yes they do carry the bond liability with interest at 6.75% but they also have fixed assets totalling £68m. On the other hand SBS&L has loans of 36m with interest at 18% accruing preference shares £7m, with fixed assets of £450k. I think it is reasonably accepted that Wasps have proven to be sharp operators, have a plan and drive to achieve it, so why with something so fundamental is it assumed they have no plan to deal with the bond debt? Which company, forget the morals about franchise, would you choose from the two
£73k incomes, non match day incomes. They get F&B income for no cost or risk, and to some degree reflects fans not spending or being there (sorry it might look like I am blaming fans there too but I am certainly not trying to). They do not get access to non match day incomes because they have never, for what ever reason, agreed a deal to have that access. Of course to gain access is going to cost money and commitment, to build relationships - but I guess that's the real problem isn't it
Not true that there is no willing buyer there would seem plenty of interest, there is apparently no willing seller or a seller willing to talk about options. The problem is, it seems to me, there is interest but not at the price that SISU & ARVO need
Having said all this the thought is that something is going on behind the scenes and that interest is spooked by the league position and the yawning chasm between owners and fans and it has been dressed up to them as everybody else's fault but the owners. Of course you spin it as fans having passion for the team and the owners recognise this and the poor job done and want out from what could be a fantastic project - all in the spin isn't it, how you sell it or take responsibility. It has to be something like that going on because of the way they all get spooked by any set back or negative press
Just a final thought. Do the two reporters actually get to discuss what they put out with all sides to get a balanced view? It would seem doubtful Gilbert has access to CCFC/SISU etc and I doubt Reid has access to the other side of things CCC/Wasps/ACL/Charity/Trust etc to any great degree. Just my opinion and we will never know, but I don't find either reports put out by them as balanced, more one sided ego massaging - again just an opinion
Last edited:
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
What's that old phrase about being balanced because you have a chip on each shoulder?
Seems appropriate when talking about the press here. The CT are obviously pissed the club has cut them off. Reid's pieces are so hilariously biased the other way as to question whether he's even heard of journalistic ethics.
Both papers exist as nothing more than click bait advertising vehicles, with which one you believe depending entirely on your pre-existing views.
Which thinking about it, fits the audiences pretty well from what we see on here.
Seems appropriate when talking about the press here. The CT are obviously pissed the club has cut them off. Reid's pieces are so hilariously biased the other way as to question whether he's even heard of journalistic ethics.
Both papers exist as nothing more than click bait advertising vehicles, with which one you believe depending entirely on your pre-existing views.
Which thinking about it, fits the audiences pretty well from what we see on here.
Generally Midfield
Well-Known Member
OldSkyBlue58's post #170 and Dongonzalos #189 are both really great explanations of things - thanks! (is there any way they can be given prominence for people to refer back to in future?)
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Philosophically, that's probably not a problem in itself though. As long as boh 'sides' get a voice, then the pretence of journalistic 'balance' doesn't have to be played out.
The concern I have with all the reporting is the lack of digging, if honest. It seems to consist of throw a few FOIs in, and have a chat to a couple of people. Not sure that helps... although rather than go at individuals for that, I'd rather go at the shoddy state of local journalism and its funding, that stops people having the resources to do what's needed (on all sides!) and that's some proper digging, to find out the story beneath the sheen.
olderskyblue
Well-Known Member
Well, at least Les' exclusive got more information than Simon's...
Agree with this. They report on sound bites and little else. You would have thought that with Les' history with the CT, there would have been lots of stories to come out of that,maybe not a smoking gun, but some damning stuff. And if he hadn't aligned himself with SISU, surely there could have been a lot more stuff he could have found out?
I'm more disappointed in him as I expected more from him tbh...
Simon made a decent start (eg coming on here to debate) but retreated very quickly, and his immature tweets, and blocking people for questioning him leave a lot to be desired. I'm not sure he has it in him to do any real "digging"
Agree with this. They report on sound bites and little else. You would have thought that with Les' history with the CT, there would have been lots of stories to come out of that,maybe not a smoking gun, but some damning stuff. And if he hadn't aligned himself with SISU, surely there could have been a lot more stuff he could have found out?
I'm more disappointed in him as I expected more from him tbh...
Simon made a decent start (eg coming on here to debate) but retreated very quickly, and his immature tweets, and blocking people for questioning him leave a lot to be desired. I'm not sure he has it in him to do any real "digging"
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yup, that's absolutely feeble and pathetic. It all reads like it's about him, rather than anything else and that's just immature in the extreme.
In fact again what bothers me with both is how over-sensitive to criticism they seem to be. I understand on a personal level (ain't we all!) but they're journalists ffs! I thought the whole point was you were hard-nosed and able to shrug things off?!? And I don;t mean the personal abuse (there's no place for that he said, calling one of them immature
) but the criticism and questioning about what they wrote... surely that's what happens when you publish publically?!?
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
I'm not too sure Nick, took staff out for (late) Christmas meal and piss-up, normally on Such
occasions my wife 'under my instruction" hides my iPad to prevent embarrassment.
She forgot last night, TBF I've checked all the threads and to my relief on this occasion I
Wasn't too bad. :emoji_disappointed_relieved:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
His dad was leader of the council.
Last edited by a moderator:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So explain to me how investing £20 million of taxpayers money into a pool complex and an Olympic pool in the outskirts of Coventry is actually thinking of the whole of the population?
Also why then did Nottingham effectively write of a £6 million loan to their main football club and Swansea build a ground for theirs?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Strange you quote me but never have the balls to actually debate anyone who argues against your obvious hatred of the club.
Same as when you were jack griffin. Always up the councils arse - never posting about football
You don't even have the balls to answer nicks Pm's
You won't have the balls to answer this will you Council boy?
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
Grendel, just lately I've had the feeling you've been a bit jaded, lacking ferocity
In your bite.
But it seems you've rediscovered your Venom. :emoji_dragon:
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
I would have sworn you were talking about "Les... The award winning journalist ... Reid" then!
Well,if SISU were sniffing around in Nottingham, we would be having a JR to find out.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If he's on about what I think he's on about you can knock a couple of million of the amount and it wasn't a bail out. Nottingham council were guarantor on a loan for forest and when the club defaulted it left the council carrying the can. I seem to remember that the council got in trouble for it, something to do with money that was supposed to be used for something else had to go on the loan. I could be wrong but I have a feeling that forest have since paid the council back as well.
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
No they would expect the milkman to pay them for delivery,
And if he doesn't pay, SISU will batter him in COURT. :wacky:
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
COVENTRY City remain ‘hopeful’ of a groundshare at an expanded Butts Park Arena following a decision by Cov rugby’s board not to deal with Sisu amid anti-Sisu campaigning – which the Sky Blues warned today could end up ‘damaging’ the football club.
To be fair, that seems the club/SISU saying that, not LR.
To be fair, that seems the club/SISU saying that, not LR.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Cov rugby’s chairman Jon Sharp, asked today to clarify whether discussions will continue with Coventry City rather than its parent company Sisu, told the Coventry Observer only: “The board of Coventry rugby cannot deal with Sisu given the anti-Sisu sentiment in the city.”
Nice to see Cov Rugby looking out for Coventry citizens though
Nice to see Cov Rugby looking out for Coventry citizens though