Statement from Cov Rugby (13 Viewers)

[oldfiver]

So long as he doesn't ask for proof of funds with traceability all the way through like SISU want with anyone interested in CCFC.

Proof of funds to do what?

 

---

[Astute]

That's the thing isn't it, they are obviously working together on it as one night fisher says that Sharpe will confirm it and the next day he has.

He has added more questions than he has answered though.

 

[dongonzalos]

Think you can read it either way you want. If it was a non-starter it would be a short statement saying Fisher is full of BS and there's no chance of it happening. What he actually says is that a groundshare with CCFC is one of the options under consideration but there are, quite rightly, conditions from CRFC's side to ensure they don't get screwed over.

At this stage I wouldn't get too hung up on the 12K. Sharp has commented before about an initial capacity in that region but able to rise should CCFC rise up the leagues. From what he said then it was a case off building one stand at a time so at a guess you'd start with a 3 sided ground like Bournemouth then add in the 4th side and finally replace the existing stand.

So we just need SISU to leave abdcto convince him that a grass pitch is required and we will pay to relay it 3 times a year?
Or are we not planning to return to the championship?

 

[oldfiver]

Exactly, set up a joint venture prop co owned by Otium and CRFC. He's not dealing with SISU then.

To be a joint venture prop co would mean giving up ( in some way ) their control of BPA - but he says" CRL would retain control and ownership of the site"
So that is out from that

 

[letsallsingtogether]

For me.


I'd love this to happen, but I wouldn't be happy with it if it was only 12000.

Same for me I have been to Doncaster

1, Does he count Fisher as CCFC or SISU? To me most probably CCFC or he wouldn't have bothered talking to CCC about it or release a statement saying happy to work with CCFC at this present moment.

2, How would it be paid for without input from SISU?

3, Why would SISU invest in any form into something that they would never own?

4, 12,000 max? Blows Fishers bullshit out of the water about extending up to 25,000.

To me it is a great location for us as supporters for a stadium. But I can't think of anything else good about it. And that statement tells us all we need to know. Either Fisher is bullshitting about the size of any stadium or Fisher is bullshitting about wanting a stadium there and having to pay for it when they won't own it.

Maybe they could recoup any money spent with the proceeds of wedding functions and pie money

 

[Astute]

1. Clearly he seperates them as can be seen
2. What difference does it make to you. He is not got to tell you is he? Did he consult you when he bought the headlease?
3. It says no dealings with SISU so that is out
4. 12000 max is their preferred in the absence of any other requirement

Fisher simply said there are investors for the stadium - he did not say who

2 again. What difference does it make to me? Was that an attempt at a joke?

If he won't allow any input from SISU he certainly wouldn't allow them to invest in his stadium.

 

[oldskyblue58]

"The City Council and the RFU have been involved in those discussions and the City Council in particular have expressed themselves most supportive"

So as far as developing BPA goes the Council has been "most supportive". Would imply no block coming from Council in terms of the development project as it stands wouldn't it?

It is also clearly a CRFC project from what he says that CCFC could benefit from by becoming a tenant.

Seems at odds with Fishers comments to me - I am sure someone will be along shortly to correct me

 

[chiefdave]

To be a joint venture prop co would mean giving up ( in some way ) their control of BPA - but he says" CRL would retain control and ownership of the site"
So that is out from that

not if CRFC have 51% of the prop co

 

[Captain Dart]

He is dealing with CCFC though !!

Who says & WTF does that actually mean?

 

[oldfiver]

And what would the prop co own?

 

[albatross]

Seems to say "Happy to help...... on our terms ....oh and by the way we are not paying"

 

[oldfiver]

Who says & WTF does that actually mean?

He is dealing with the Directors of CCFC not SISU - he knows what he is saying

 

[chiefdave]

o we just need SISU to leave abdcto convince him that a grass pitch is required and we will pay to relay it 3 times a year?

I doubt Sharp is an idiot so if one of the options under consideration is CCFC playing there he will be aware of the pitch requirements.

SISU don't need to leave for them not to be involved at least technically. The precise way he's phrased it, several times now, makes me think it is deliberate.

 

[chiefdave]

And what would the prop co own?

sub lease at a guess.

 

[oldfiver]

2 again. What difference does it make to me? Was that an attempt at a joke?
You asked teh question

If he won't allow any input from SISU he certainly wouldn't allow them to invest in his stadium.

Well spotted!

 

[oldskyblue58]

o remind me who has charge over all of the Otium Entertainment Group assets present and future?. Who controls ARVO? Who "back stops" the finances at CCFC? What finance has Otium Entertainment Group itself got to contribute to a capital scheme? Who controls Otium Entertainment Group Limited? Who has an employee attending the Board of directors? Who authorises the directors to sign off on the major contracts like leases

Then tell me which company owns the trade marks of CCFC? Who is listed as having the EFL share? Who pays the players wages? Which company receives all the football income and pays the football liabilities?

But it is possible to deal with CCFC and not SISU in any way? ....... yes of course it is :facepalm:

 

[oldfiver]

sub lease at a guess.

He refers to the "owners" of CCFC somewhere and that means SISU upwards I am certain

 

[dongonzalos]

I doubt Sharp is an idiot so if one of the options under consideration is CCFC playing there he will be aware of the pitch requirements.

SISU don't need to leave for them not to be involved at least technically. The precise way he's phrased it, several times now, makes me think it is deliberate.

He is far far from an idiot. He us the exact opposite I would say.
So what level can we play at with an artificial pitch?

 

[oldfiver]

so remind me who has charge over all of the Otium Entertainment Group assets present and future?. Who controls ARVO? Who "back stops" the finances at CCFC? What finance has Otium Entertainment Group itself got to contribute to a capital scheme? Who controls Otium Entertainment Group Limited? Who has an employee on the Board of directors? Who authorises the directors to sign off on the major contracts like leases

Then tell me which company owns the trade marks of CCFC? Who is listed as having the EFL share? Who pays the players wages? Which company receives all the football income and pays the football liabilities?

But it is possible to deal with CCFC and not SISU in any way ....... yes of course it is

Surely all part of the mediation / negotiation call it what you must. The fact that SISU have agreed to be involved must be taken as far as it can go?
What harm can it do after all this time?

 

[kmj5000]

1. Clearly he seperates them as can be seen
2. What difference does it make to you. He is not got to tell you is he? Did he consult you when he bought the headlease?
3. It says no dealings with SISU so that is out
4. 12000 max is their preferred in the absence of any other requirement

Fisher simply said there are investors for the stadium - he did not say who

Why would anyone invest in a stadium they won't own?

 

[oldfiver]

Why would anyone invest in a stadium they won't own?

If you want a master class in property investment there are people who do that for a fee

 

[Otis]

12k would be enough for 5 years i bet. they probably waiting to see what happens with wasps and ricoh.

i have no idea what i am on about to be fair

No change there then.

 

[Otis]

Timmy's bluff has been called.

"Also, as I have already stated elsewhere, we will not deal with SISU"

I wouldn't either........

Tim Fisher said that?

 

[ajsccfc]

So what level can we play at with an artificial pitch?

In this country it's everything bar the Premier and Football League by the looks of it

 

[Specs WT-R75]

not if CRFC have 51% of the prop co

Could the football club become a minor share holder in the company? You would have thought that this would need to happen if the club was required to fund any development in excess of what the rugby club need...

 

[ccfcricoh]

He is far far from an idiot. He us the exact opposite I would say.
So what level can we play at with an artificial pitch?

As far as i'm aware the rule for artificial pitches is they are ok for FA cup and up to conference level not above

 

[oldskyblue58]

Surely all part of the mediation / negotiation call it what you must. The fact that SISU have agreed to be involved must be taken as far as it can go?
What harm can it do after all this time?

wasn't on about mediation though................... Sharp/CRL/BPAL wont deal with SISU but will deal with CCFC on the BPA project - just exactly how do you keep SISU influencing or agreeing or making decisions for CCFC?

Just to be clear I think Mr Sharps statement is timely and well made so I am not criticising him,

 

[skyblueinBaku]

Perhaps when Mr Sharp mentioned an artificial pitch he meant one like Wasps put down at the Ricoh.

 

[rupert_bear]

Did anybody really believe BPA would happen ? Reading through this post looks to me some still do !!

 

[chiefdave]

just exactly how do you keep SISU influencing or agreeing or making decisions for CCFC?

You don't need to, that's not what he's said. He's selected his language very precisely. As long as he and CRFC only deal with the club he's not dealing with SISU even if they are pulling the strings in the background.

Carefully selected wording so he doesn't piss off the council if a plan not involving CCFC is that way forward for CRFC but leaves the door open if it is.

 

[skybluebeduff]

Pointless debating it when we know that Tim is a consistent and persistent liar. You cannot deal with Tim without SISU having a say on his decisions, shouldn't that put this to bed?

 

[chiefdave]

He is far far from an idiot. He us the exact opposite I would say.
So what level can we play at with an artificial pitch?

You don't think he's an idiot but you think he's spending time evaluating a groundshare with CCFC while insisting on a playing surface we couldn't use?

 

[christonabike]

Fisher was also on about getting non match day revenue from the Butts. How would CRFC agree to letting someone else have revenue that clearly they could keep for themselves?
Also why hasn't Fisher grasped that a large majority of former City season ticket holders will not set foot inside a CCFC ground again until they are gone?
To me it is just stalling the inevitable that we will be homeless in 12 months and trying to keep the pressure off.

 

[chiefdave]

How would CRFC agree to letting someone else have revenue that clearly they could keep for themselves?

Depends on the figures surely. 50% of £5 is better than 100% of £1.

 

[NortonSkyBlue]

I am so against BPA and I can't think of a reason why other than there is a perfectly good stadium up the A444.