Grendel
Well-Known Member
The pressure needs to be applied to wasps and no one else
The pressure needs to be applied to wasps and no one else
Who is the debt too ?
Not sisu also ?
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
What about those that are taking them to court?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
For what? In the end wasps own the ground and it’s only them who present clear and present danger to the club
The fact is the greater success the club attains on the pitch the less our prospects of staying
The wasps board have a delusional thought process that they are a very big fish in the sporting world.
They offered the club a deal for 10 years when Anderson was here that was just a ridiculous arrangement. Court cases are irrelevant to them - it’s a smokescreen disguising their true intent.
That’s a view but I’d say this here and now imo no way will Wasps kick us out, going on a lot you have said and I see the points booting us out would rebound massively on Wasps, they know that.
Nick
Administrator
Like they did this season when there was legal action?
It does depend on the pr, exactly the same as the higgs. Was there legal action against them then too?
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
I get the impression they’re sticking to their word.
Nick
Administrator
Of course.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Which is exactly why Grendel is correct to say the pressure needs to be applied to Wasps.
You can see the PR already cranking up and clearly it works as we've got people posting in this thread already defending Wasps.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I agree. tbh it's the same bluster as last year, and it'll end up the same result, I expect.
(Only thing stopping me being 110% certain is the fact we did actually end up at Sixfields!)
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
Why not put pressure on the owners of our own club to stop the legal action?
Nick
Administrator
Why not put pressure on everybody?
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
I'm all for that.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Why not tell Grendull? He’s the one saying only one organisation needs pressure putting on the “and no one else”.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It’s irrelevant
Hobo
Well-Known Member
Because they haven't got a chance of winning
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
It’s the complete opposite of that.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It isn’t as you are believing the wasps stance which is not true.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
Perhaps all the more reason to stop legals and call their bluff?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well there will not be a bluff will there. They’ll offer the outrageous deal that they’ve already put on the table and say that details are confidential
The club will say it’s financial unviable and the majority will say it’s akk the club’s fault
It’s also probably illegal isn’t it? Yes they can drop legal appeals but the day the club signed any deal why can’t they resume legal action? I really can’t see how a clause can be inserted saying no future legal action.
The bottom line is if wasps remain here the football club has no medium to long term future in Coventry
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
Actually it’s the complete opposite of that.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Ultimately that is what it comes down to and it's shocking so many fail to realise that and still fall for the PR that gets churned out and spout about it being great business sense for them.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf, I wouldn't believe anything that comes from the mouths of *any* of them.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
I'm not looking to disagree with you G, far from it. I agree that WASPs remaining long term is bad for the club, but SISU are not doing anything to alter that. While SISU continue on a course that historically hasn't benefitted either them or CCFC in the courts, and probably not likely to reap any legal bounty, why risk the good work done so far by Robbins, by chancing another "forced" ground move and the PR and financial harm it caused last time?
You're assuming people will blame the club if they say it's financially unviable, I don't believe this is the case, I think most fans are quite aware that while our owners are ruthless twats, WASPs and the council are far from being saints. If the terms offered were indeed "outrageous", no doubt details would be leaked via a 3rd party to whip up support for the club ... and seeing as WASPs are supposed to be worried about bad PR, this is something they would presumably fear.
I have no idea about clauses in contracts, but if as you say you can't see how a clause can be inserted, then why don't SISU just play their game for now and be whiter than white? It's WASPs who are saying its a sticking point to a deal, so then call their hand and get them to put their cards on the table.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Because at the moment my primary concern is where we are going to play next season and the route to resolve that issue is through Wasps, unless people believe there is a viable option other than the Ricoh.
As a fan base there is a limited resource, be it the amount of time people will put into the off the field situation, the cost of any action or pretty much any other metric you can think off. Given there is a finite resource it is best concentrated on areas that can create the desired outcome.
CCFC - think by now everyone is aware that those running the club on a day to day basis are powerless with regard to the legal action.
Therefore no amount of protesting, marches with coffins to the ground, throwing things on the pitch, pitch invasions or NOPM campaigns are going to make the slightest difference.
SISU - they couldn't care less to the extent it wouldn't bother them if the club went out of business, in fact you can make an argument that the club ceasing to exist could increase any claim they make for damages. Besides which there is no effective way to protest them.
Nothing related to CCFC will bother them so you'd have to target them directly. Protesting at their offices does nothing.
Potentially targeting their clients could work but nobody knows who they are and even if they did the nature of their business is high risk high reward so pointing out to their clients they took a risk that didn't pay off won't do any good.
CCC - they could be pressured over their assurances the sale to Wasps wouldn't impact CCFC but that really needs to be done by local media as my experience is any questions are met with them hiding behind 'commercially confidential'.
Wasps - they are the ones refusing to talk to the club. It is clear 'can't talk while there is legal action ongoing' is rubbish. They knew there was ongoing legal action when they have in the past held advanced discussions on a long term deal before walking away and on another occasion agreed a multi year deal before withdrawing it, they also have agreed a deal while the legals have been ongoing.
Besides that they have shown themselves to be vulnerable to protests. The slightest whisper of a protest and they go in to overdrive on forums such as this trying to extinguish the possibility.
So you have the one group who can actually make a difference being the one that is most responsive to any action. Seems to me an obvious choice where you concentrate efforts.
If Wasps thought their fans would be greeted every week with a couple of hundred CCFC fans protesting their refusal to talk, engaging with Wasps fans asking them to also apply pressure, protesting in the ground at TV games and the media coverage that resulted I am certain they would very quickly be back to the table.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
And you and the person who has given you a like are prepared to do that are you?
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
And as I’ve said I’m all for pressure to applied on them. In fact it’s what we are doing. What you’ve said about those running the club not being involved in the court action simply isn’t true. For example who is the sole director of OEG and who is one of the organisations taking Wasps to court? All I’m saying is the first step should be for the court cases to end. If that happens there are no excuses, negotiations should start at that moment. For the good of the club they need to give it up. They’re the biggest problem right now.
A lot of what you’ve written is spot on. The most frustrating thing is I know it, you know it, most other fans know it and the EFL know it but they’re powerless to do anything about it. If the EFL know one of it’s members are acting in the way you’ve described above (plenty are, not just SISU), then they should have to the power to remove the Golden Share.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Then of course, we have no league club.
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
As it stands right now we wouldn’t have. Things would have to change. Have some kind of system like Ofsted use when a school is being poorly ran. Send someone in to get it running properly, achieve the aim and find new owners who are willing to pay the figure set by an independent valuer. No points deductions or fines. Just remove the catalyst that’s causing the problem. If that had happened in the past there would be two or three clubs that would probably still be in the EFL now.
Nick
Administrator
You can shout to the EFL all you like to try and get them to hand the club over to the Trust / Fans / Hoffman but it really isn't going to happen. The minute they do that they open up a massive can of worms with football as a whole and would get absolutely wiped out with legal action.
Just because the fans are unhappy, they can't then go in and start trying to remove things that people have bought and put money into. At the moment SISU / CCFC would just say "the club is running self sufficient, it isn't relying on money being pumped in to run" and would make out it is a perfect example. Obviously it isn't going to be in the Premier League any time soon because of that though.
Aside from the legal action, take a step back and look at it from the EFL point of view. Is it really being poorly ran at the minute? It isn't leaking money, academy doing well, promotion / checkatrade and holding it's own in League 1.
(That's not saying it is because of SISU before anybody says that, just as a general view of CCFC. I fully understand things like the academy are down to the people there etc etc).
The issue is with money being spent at football clubs that the club doesn't have. I doubt Leyton Orient fans were bothered when they were paying people 5 figures a week in the lower leagues. It all ends up going to shit. All of the issues are about money.
Nick
Administrator
It doesn't work like that though. They are private businesses.
It would need every club to be some sort of Charity / Trust and then have some sort of ombudsman to overlook it all. Even then, what is "not being run properly" based on? Results? Success? Not losing money? Being financially stable? Fan happiness?
Everything would have to be the same for every club, while it sounds perfect in theory it's never going to happen. The same as having every club fan owned isn't.
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
I’m saying they should act as a regulator. As Dave has said the ownership doesn’t care if we survive or not as long as they reach their aims (what those aims are is up for debate). If this is happening the club is poorly ran. The main focus of a football club’s owner should be serving the club’s community and the future sustainability of the club. What SISU are doing right now is hampering the future sustainability.