It would be unfair to simply say SISU have been all bad. There are things like cost control that they have improved, the club is more stable, recovering not just from previous owners instability but also the instability SISU had a large part in creating under their tenure
Day to day running of the club has improved recently as has the communication and you would have credit SISU with input in to that but the idea that the club is living within its means is a fallacy. It isn't, over the financial three years 2016 to 2018 they had to put a net £1.17m into the club to keep it afloat. The alternative to not meeting the day to day running costs was insolvency. SISU have been bank of last resort, otherwise CCFC could not have paid its bills. The club is not profitable in each of the financial years to date under their stewardship. Indeed even if you exclude the interest payment it still isn't profitable in 2018 despite £973K in player sales.
Since the administration in 2013 when the deficit on the balance sheet was zero they have put the club (Otium) in to a deeper financial hole of over 19m. Since 2008 SBS&L Group shows total losses of £55m with SISU in control. Hardly prudent management of a club with few assets and restricted income streams and off the back of a clean slate regarding previous owners.
If self sufficiency (which we have not achieved) is such a good idea (and it is) then why didn't they do it from the start. Gambling with the club is not prudent or clever, just the same as it isn't for any other club or owners. They could at the start have come in and said "we saved the club but now we need to safeguard its future" they didn't they gambled until they ran out of money. Running out of money is probably what drove this so far failed drive to self sufficiency, it was not the plan because the plan was to have been long gone by now.
There is no evidence of admin fees being paid to SISU btw.
On the pitch things have improved recently and i think this clouds peoples memory. Things are looking good now but lets see where we are next May. But under SISU we have been relegated twice, achieved our lowest position in 50 years (and it could have been worse), had more bad seasons than good against which we had one cup win and one promotion.
Off the pitch, SISU have made numerous decisions that have focused on their investors needs not the strategy needed for a successful sustainable club. CCFC became a tool in a high stakes game and is still at risk. A business cannot operate in a bubble "of my way or the highway" it must develop positive relationships and it hasn't with key stake holders in Coventry. Yes there has to be forceful dialogue the owners must fight the clubs corner but SISU fight for their investors first and foremost aggressively and in an antagonistic way. No i am not ignoring the part played in this by other parties most notably the CCC they all have a case to answer but the question was about our owners.
SISU gambled when they bought in and made glaring errors (lack of due diligence and not breaking the lease when they could have demanded it), they gambled when they took us to the administration they set up (it very nearly worked was a clever plan to break the lease but had unforeseen repercussions) gambled when they took us to Sixfields and made glaring miscalculations, in my opinion gambled with the EC case and move to Birmingham (i accept not just their doing).................... have they learnt anything since other than better PR ? History does seem to keep repeating itself
For years they have gone on about the need for better income and our own stadium. Not once have they detailed a plan, a strategy, the costs or given a straight answer on the subject. Just trotted the same lines out to the fans expecting them to simply believe it. There is still no believable explanation as to how CCFC returns to Coventry. Disrespected their main customers on many occasions on this and other matters. Alienated many by being less than honest or transparent, which puts future generations interest at risk
They are owners is really the best i can say for them.......... they have some good points, one of the gambles could have worked and very nearly did............ but against that they have many actions, decisions, disputes etc that simply have left the club at risk, deeper in debt and short of the stability a permanent home brings. Despite this the team has now begun to achieve consistently better - how much is down to SISU though? (some but not really that much, its more to do with the club staff & players making the best of what they have got).
Bad owners - Yes not unlike many others though
