Old Warwickshire lad
Well-Known Member
Three quarters of a page dedicated to our plight. Not very accurate or detailed,but at least it’s something.
This mornings Sunday Mail (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Old Warwickshire lad
- Start date
What does it say about them, anything good ?
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
Cup winners face league axe: Sad Coventry City on the brink after toxic legal row over Ricoh Arena | Daily Mail Online
Cup winners face league axe: Sad Coventry City on the brink after toxic legal row over Ricoh Arena and catastrophic finances
On Tuesday Coventry, who famously beat Tottenham to win the FA Cup in 1987, must tell the Football League where they will be playing next season — against the backdrop of a vicious legal battle over the Ricoh Arena and catastrophic finances.
Fail to do so, and the League have said they will expel them.
+4
Coventry City are facing a vicious legal battle over the Ricoh Arena - their home stadium
Stadium owners Wasps Rugby Club say they will not strike a deal to extend Coventry’s stadium lease unless the club owners Sisu drop their legal fight over the stadium.
However, hedge fund Sisu have made it clear they have no intention of dropping their legal action against Coventry City Council over the sale of the stadium to Wasps.
Former Sky Blues shareholder Lionel Bird said: ‘I am not confident the club will survive. At some point this has to stop and the March 5 deadline brings up the realistic prospect that Coventry City Football Club will go out of business by the end of the season.
‘Since the League announced the deadline the fans have begun to realise how serious this is.’
Moz Baker, of the supporters group the Sky Blue Trust, said: ‘Coventry is a great city, Coventry City remains a big football club. The thought of there not being a club in this city is unthinkable but this situation, with no deal looking remotely likely, is as stark and as threatening as we’ve ever faced.’
+4
The Sky Blues currently play at the Ricoh Arena but their existing rent deal runs out in May
The League ultimatum came at the end of last month and makes clear that without a satisfactory resolution they will ‘consider expulsion from the League’.
League One Coventry are short-term tenants at the stadium, with their lease due to run out at the end of this season and attendances around the 10,000 mark.
The 135-year-old club’s precipitous downfall has its roots in relegation from the Premier League in 2001, with the club massively in debt. In 2005 they played their last game at Highfield Road, having sold the land to developers, and subsequently moved into the state-of-the-art Ricoh Area, jointly owned by Coventry City Council and the Higgs Charity through stadium operator Arena Coventry Limited (ACL).
In 2007 hedge fund Sisu bought the club when it was still in the Championship and they had the right to buy back 50 per cent of ACL from the charity.
For several years the club burnt through millions that the notoriously secretive Sisu chief executive Joy Seppala said largely came from overseas investors.
+4
Coventry have urged Wasps to enter talks amid their uncertainty but the rugby club will not do so until an ongoing legal dispute regarding the sale of the stadium comes to a close
This bid to buy their way back into the Premier League, however, failed miserably, with the club relegated to League One in 2012 and five years later they were in the bottom tier.
But the plight of the club off the pitch was arguably more catastrophic, with Sisu withholding rent from ACL and moving to Northampton in 2013. However, when the Sky Blues moved back to the Ricoh, after the intervention of the Very Rev John Witcombe, Dean of Coventry, the club were confronted by the fact that Coventry council and the charity had sold their interest in ACL and with it the stadium to Wasps.
In the same year they moved back into the stadium, Sisu, which club chairman Tim Fisher once told fans ‘batters people in court’, suffered an embarrassing legal defeat in the High Court.
Sisu and Seppala claimed that a £14million council loan to ACL was illegal but Justice Hickinbottom ruled Sisu had decided on the rent strike to make ACL ‘weak and commercially vulnerable’ to buy ACL on the cheap.
+4
Mark Robins' side might be expelled from the football league if they can't settle legal dispute
Last summer Sisu’s challenge to the legality of the council decision to sell its 50 per cent share in the stadium and extending the lease to Wasps was rejected by the courts. Now Sisu are trying to take the case to the Supreme Court.
The League have said that if Coventry City fail to meet the March 5 deadline an extraordinary general meeting will be held in late April to consider the club’s expulsion.
A Coventry City spokesman said: ‘These dates show how stark the situation facing the club is and that time is running out. All parties now need to work together for the good of Coventry City Football Club.’
A Coventry City Council spokesman said: ‘Coventry City Council has been clear we are willing to talk to the football club once the legal process has ended.’ Sisu were approached for a comment.
Cup winners face league axe: Sad Coventry City on the brink after toxic legal row over Ricoh Arena and catastrophic finances
- Coventry must tell the Football League where they will be playing next season
- The club face a legal battle over the Ricoh Arena and catastrophic finances
- Stadium owners Wasps Rugby Club say they will not strike a deal with Coventry
On Tuesday Coventry, who famously beat Tottenham to win the FA Cup in 1987, must tell the Football League where they will be playing next season — against the backdrop of a vicious legal battle over the Ricoh Arena and catastrophic finances.
Fail to do so, and the League have said they will expel them.
+4
Coventry City are facing a vicious legal battle over the Ricoh Arena - their home stadium
Stadium owners Wasps Rugby Club say they will not strike a deal to extend Coventry’s stadium lease unless the club owners Sisu drop their legal fight over the stadium.
However, hedge fund Sisu have made it clear they have no intention of dropping their legal action against Coventry City Council over the sale of the stadium to Wasps.
Former Sky Blues shareholder Lionel Bird said: ‘I am not confident the club will survive. At some point this has to stop and the March 5 deadline brings up the realistic prospect that Coventry City Football Club will go out of business by the end of the season.
‘Since the League announced the deadline the fans have begun to realise how serious this is.’
Moz Baker, of the supporters group the Sky Blue Trust, said: ‘Coventry is a great city, Coventry City remains a big football club. The thought of there not being a club in this city is unthinkable but this situation, with no deal looking remotely likely, is as stark and as threatening as we’ve ever faced.’
+4
The Sky Blues currently play at the Ricoh Arena but their existing rent deal runs out in May
The League ultimatum came at the end of last month and makes clear that without a satisfactory resolution they will ‘consider expulsion from the League’.
League One Coventry are short-term tenants at the stadium, with their lease due to run out at the end of this season and attendances around the 10,000 mark.
The 135-year-old club’s precipitous downfall has its roots in relegation from the Premier League in 2001, with the club massively in debt. In 2005 they played their last game at Highfield Road, having sold the land to developers, and subsequently moved into the state-of-the-art Ricoh Area, jointly owned by Coventry City Council and the Higgs Charity through stadium operator Arena Coventry Limited (ACL).
In 2007 hedge fund Sisu bought the club when it was still in the Championship and they had the right to buy back 50 per cent of ACL from the charity.
For several years the club burnt through millions that the notoriously secretive Sisu chief executive Joy Seppala said largely came from overseas investors.
+4
Coventry have urged Wasps to enter talks amid their uncertainty but the rugby club will not do so until an ongoing legal dispute regarding the sale of the stadium comes to a close
This bid to buy their way back into the Premier League, however, failed miserably, with the club relegated to League One in 2012 and five years later they were in the bottom tier.
But the plight of the club off the pitch was arguably more catastrophic, with Sisu withholding rent from ACL and moving to Northampton in 2013. However, when the Sky Blues moved back to the Ricoh, after the intervention of the Very Rev John Witcombe, Dean of Coventry, the club were confronted by the fact that Coventry council and the charity had sold their interest in ACL and with it the stadium to Wasps.
In the same year they moved back into the stadium, Sisu, which club chairman Tim Fisher once told fans ‘batters people in court’, suffered an embarrassing legal defeat in the High Court.
Sisu and Seppala claimed that a £14million council loan to ACL was illegal but Justice Hickinbottom ruled Sisu had decided on the rent strike to make ACL ‘weak and commercially vulnerable’ to buy ACL on the cheap.
+4
Mark Robins' side might be expelled from the football league if they can't settle legal dispute
Last summer Sisu’s challenge to the legality of the council decision to sell its 50 per cent share in the stadium and extending the lease to Wasps was rejected by the courts. Now Sisu are trying to take the case to the Supreme Court.
The League have said that if Coventry City fail to meet the March 5 deadline an extraordinary general meeting will be held in late April to consider the club’s expulsion.
A Coventry City spokesman said: ‘These dates show how stark the situation facing the club is and that time is running out. All parties now need to work together for the good of Coventry City Football Club.’
A Coventry City Council spokesman said: ‘Coventry City Council has been clear we are willing to talk to the football club once the legal process has ended.’ Sisu were approached for a comment.
skyblue025
Well-Known Member
All bad publicity for SISU. If you were a potential investor and started researching them the past few years aren't going to look good.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Is it? Or does it show them as a fund who will fight tooth and nail to retrieve every penny from an investment go wrong?
I don't actually know, just playing devils advocate but they seem to give not a solitary fuck about their public image.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
More likely you'd look at the returns they have provided to their clients than the fortunes of a football club.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Why?
Either way it's all so wrong, that stadium was built for CCFC, The council should be taken to task by the Coventry public and any councillors ever involved should be voted out at the earliest opportunity and Wasps have to see past SISU and start to realise what damage they will also do to themselves if they really do finish the club. I can't tell you how much I hate Seppalla and Co. for what they are gambling with. How is that vile prick Fisher still our Chairman ?!
higgs
Well-Known Member
That’s it though isn’t it councillors can be voted out, Fisher can’t
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
At last time of asking the council were unanimous on this issue, Labour and Tory agreed. So if you want to change them you will have to find candidates who have a different attitude.
It reflects terribly on SISU from an investment perspective. They bought in at rock bottom price, got the investment thesis and execution wrong over multiple years, and somehow have managed to create something with no market value except to some die hard Coventry fans like Gary Hoffman who are prepared to invest to save their club, not because it’s an attractive club to invest in.
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
dont kid yourself - Hoffman will not see it as a loss maker
The club has a value today in terms of
Players
Academy
Sell on clauses
Fan goodwill
The club has potential, as much potential as Bournemouth, Burnley or Brighton all three have had very hard times in the recent past. We can achieve anything they have if managed correct
Nick
Administrator
It has as much potential as the millions whoever owns us wants to write off.
Houchens Head
Fairly well known member from Malvern
I am NOT looking forward to Tuesday. Besides, it's Pancake day. St Pancake will rescue us.
skyblue025
Well-Known Member
Where do you start. Massive losses circa 29 million from first investment no lessons learnt so then a further 16million on a second investment, lost numerous court cases, managed to just about 1\2 the paying customers coming through the door, (Supporters to other clubs) threw away the chance of at least 50% ownership of the stadium and now looking like we will have no where to play in 3 months time. Hardly a glowing report card is it?
Nick
Administrator
Aren't the losses mostly to them?
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
You’re looking at it from a football point of view. If we’re a tax write off we could be part of a successful portfolio. At which point they would show the financial gains.
In the business world, let’s face it, nobody gives a shit about the football club
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
What’s that got to do with anything?
It’s desperate posts like this that earn you the Sisu Apologist tag.
Nick
Administrator
How is it desperate or apologising? Feel free to show your workings out.
Read the thread (mainly what I was replying to) and you will see what it has to do with, their investors. Its relevant because the debt and interest is to them...
Last edited:
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
The point is the business they ran made those losses. And your reaction is to find the most tenuous excuse you can do you can defend them. Barely any Sisu critical post goes by on here without you piping up with some excuse for them. This was just an example and as you’ve been asking why people think you’re pro Sisu I thought I’d point it out.
It’s the same as I get called a Council apologist for pointing out they’re a council and not owners of a football club.
Nick
Administrator
How is it defending them to point out why that would benefit their investors?
If the point was it being great for the club then it absolutely wouldn't be. However, he was talking from an investor point of view (not CCFC's ), which is why I pointed out that the debts and interests would go to them...
Feel free to point out how that is pro sisu or defending them. Somebody else also has mentioned the same thing.
Your posts are the ones looking a bit desperate, you either don't understand the points or just wanted to squeeze in defending sisu.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I would think that where it hits Sisu hardest is their self proclaimed title of batterers of people in court. Non of the court action that they’ve taken surrounding CCFC proves any such thing. Just the opposite if anything. That publicity must be hurting.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Well... it does prove they batter people in court.
The message is loud and clear isn't it - negotiate and give way more than you want, or you risk being tied up in lengthy and costly court action for a number of years.
It actually shows their brand values at their clearest.
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
Sisu’s “investors” might not even know that some of their funds are tied in to CCFC, it may well be that their investments are part of a batch of spread risk.
While ever the investment funds are shown as “live” and “performing” (creating a return via notional interest) then SISU don’t have a huge problem.
Their problem is if the debt is crystallised and they have to write it off and show a loss. Then the investors will have a loss and SISU’s real problems start. At the moment there is a chance (slim) that they may reclaim their losses via the legal system or (eventually) via selling some players for huge money (hence the emphasis on buying players for the development squad - these are investments for future sales), or, by miracle reaching the premiership and recouping.
This is one of the reasons the court case will not be dropped - SISU cannot afford to do that.
In the meantime SISU will be here to stay. As soon as they get their money they will go.
While ever the investment funds are shown as “live” and “performing” (creating a return via notional interest) then SISU don’t have a huge problem.
Their problem is if the debt is crystallised and they have to write it off and show a loss. Then the investors will have a loss and SISU’s real problems start. At the moment there is a chance (slim) that they may reclaim their losses via the legal system or (eventually) via selling some players for huge money (hence the emphasis on buying players for the development squad - these are investments for future sales), or, by miracle reaching the premiership and recouping.
This is one of the reasons the court case will not be dropped - SISU cannot afford to do that.
In the meantime SISU will be here to stay. As soon as they get their money they will go.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Not sure how paying their own and their opononents lawyers millions with nothing to show at the end is going to prove that.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You think it's that simple?
If it was that simple, why would anybody be bothered about SISU dropping the legal action...?
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
I’ve been involved in high court cases (bigger than this) and strategy is often more key than legal position.
The onion in such cases is looking at “who is driving” the litigation. Sometimes, the way individual driving the case (the client) may change & the desire to settle / fight may change.
Strange things may happen. Eg
Eg. The Tories may win the May council elections and, because they want to score points with the Coventry electorate decide to back CCFC knowing they can blame the previous Labour council. It costs nothing to the client (not their money).
Or
SISU appeal this all the way to the EU courts (if A50 gets extended for example) and it is deemed to have breached EU state aid rules.
Or
(As often happens) a disgruntled former participant in the debacle discloses some real humdinger of evidence.
Or
There is a breakdown in specific procedures and the defence case is defeated on a technicality.
The longer things go on, the more opportunity for the unexpected.
SISU won’t fold as long as there is a chance Of the above.
Just my opinion
The onion in such cases is looking at “who is driving” the litigation. Sometimes, the way individual driving the case (the client) may change & the desire to settle / fight may change.
Strange things may happen. Eg
Eg. The Tories may win the May council elections and, because they want to score points with the Coventry electorate decide to back CCFC knowing they can blame the previous Labour council. It costs nothing to the client (not their money).
Or
SISU appeal this all the way to the EU courts (if A50 gets extended for example) and it is deemed to have breached EU state aid rules.
Or
(As often happens) a disgruntled former participant in the debacle discloses some real humdinger of evidence.
Or
There is a breakdown in specific procedures and the defence case is defeated on a technicality.
The longer things go on, the more opportunity for the unexpected.
SISU won’t fold as long as there is a chance Of the above.
Just my opinion
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
K I genuinely thought you didn’t understand why people said that about you. Clearly you just want an argument.
Once more for the simple: someone said something negative about Sisu that didn’t require a response and wasn’t broadly inaccurate. Your response was to raise a technicality that might excuse them, because....?
Post what you want man, and leave the reverse victim shit out, I was just pointing out it’s posts like that that make people think this place is Pro-Sisu.
Fucks sake. You try and help some people.
Edit: I was even clear this wasn’t an attack by pointing out I suffer from the same. I’ve stopped responding to every insane conspiracy theory on here with facts because of it.
Nick
Administrator
It isn't excusing them, it is pointing something out to them as to why something that is shit for the club might not be shit for the investors which was the point he was making.
Maybe if people could read and process things they would see what was meant, rather than just defaulting to the "SISU Apologist" type shit. If people would be able to have a discussion without giving it that sort of shite they might understand things a bit more.
The same as NW is pointing something out to Tony, is he excusing the legal action or just explaining something?
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
I don’t post here often but often observe.
With regards SISU there seems to be an amount of bile directed at those seen as apologists.
It does (I assume) put people off posting a different view for fear of being attacked
With regards SISU there seems to be an amount of bile directed at those seen as apologists.
It does (I assume) put people off posting a different view for fear of being attacked
Nick
Administrator
If you step back and look at things objectively and try and figure out what their plans are you are seen as an apologist.
If you just use #sisuout without really engaging the brain then it seems to be the popular option.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I certainly don’t think it’s anymore complicated than that.
The litigation is a pain in the arse and has to be bankrolled by your opponent while fighting it. That’s great from SISU’s point of view if your opponent doesn’t have the financial capability to do that. However they’ve used that tactic on a local authority who can afford to bankroll defending the case and then get their money back at the end. If you’re going to use the courts to batter someone it’s probably best not to pick an opponent who can financially see it through.
The council obviously think they have a watertight case otherwise they would have capitulated by now. In much the same way as the government did last week with the Eurotunnel operators. No argument, accepted the judgment and coughed up millions.
If you ask me not have they only shown that they don’t batter people in court they’ve also demonstrated bad judgment in choosing their battle. You could argue doing the same things expecting different results is non too clever either.