Meeting with Joy Seppala & Dave Boddy - Thursday 27th February 2020 (17 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Colin Steins Smile

Colin Steins Smile

Well-Known Member
Well done! It's very reassuring that you've managed to hold such a meeting with Joy & Dave to establish a dialogue and they are suggesting they are comfortable with the finances for being at StA this season.
Over to Wasps now.....lets see how genuine they are in seeking a strong relationship with the club.
 
CovInEssex

CovInEssex

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
I'm still hugely sceptical about the new ground talk. To the point I don't really even entertain it. If I'm proven wrong and they build one I'll be delighted.
Until then I just want the focus to be on getting back to the Ricoh, (even though I can't abide the place).
Click to expand...

I think it's just for negotiation weight. It was be absolutely ludicrous to build another stadium in the city.
 
SkyBlueDom26

SkyBlueDom26

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Not much new news really. Did you ask for a likely timescale on the stadium? They’ve had six years is there anything to indicate the next six will be any different? I swear we were “down to three sites” years ago and now it’s up to six. Any ideas on how it’ll be funded or who will own it? What happened to it last time with the fans forum and everything?

Did you ask about why they won’t request the case is forgotten even if it’s pointless? Did you ask about future legal cases or appeals? Any more details on the indemnity?

Fair play for getting a meeting but seems a bit of a wasted opportunity to just turn up and say “yes yes everything’s lovely aren’t the team doing well” and not actually ask them any questions. Seems just like what many on here slate the Trust for doing with the other actors. Turn up, round of applause, no further forward.
Click to expand...


giphy.gif
 
Paxman II

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
Very enlightening. Just worried that the thought of an 18k seat stadium would be big enough. It won't by a long shot. In league 1 yes.
In the Championship we would command an 18k-20k average. Heck wev'e had 3ok for Crewe?
The premier league would be a sell out 30k plus with potential to hit 40k if we did well like say Leicester.
I don't beleive SISU will ever build a stadium, and are more likely to apply and get planning consent to aid their exit strategy.
A new owner would most likely buid a 35-40k seater but not before we were back in the premier league.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
shmmeee said:
Not much new news really. Did you ask for a likely timescale on the stadium? They’ve had six years is there anything to indicate the next six will be any different? I swear we were “down to three sites” years ago and now it’s up to six. Any ideas on how it’ll be funded or who will own it? What happened to it last time with the fans forum and everything?

Did you ask about why they won’t request the case is forgotten even if it’s pointless? Did you ask about future legal cases or appeals? Any more details on the indemnity?

Fair play for getting a meeting but seems a bit of a wasted opportunity to just turn up and say “yes yes everything’s lovely aren’t the team doing well” and not actually ask them any questions. Seems just like what many on here slate the Trust for doing with the other actors. Turn up, round of applause, no further forward.
Click to expand...

Difference being it's posted up what has been said and it says she hid behind the NDA line about it.

It has just been posted what was said for people to read. How many times did I have to ask CJ until he said about Eastwood?

She was asked if it can be withdrawn...

Joy also confirmed that it wasn’t possible to withdraw the complaint, as if the EU decide there is possible state aid, they would still have an obligation to pursue this.
Click to expand...
 
usskyblue

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
Absolutely fucking brilliant work.

Just goes to show that Ownership are willing to communicate when the discussion is with a balanced party.

This further highlights how the Trust have failed the fanbase and how the core of it need to go if they’re ever going to be taken seriously.

And, as is the fucking state of some of our forum members, I’m sure a few noses are put out by this.

Can we follow this up with a presence in the media? and/or Linnell’s phone-in on Friday?
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Difference being it's posted up what has been said and it says she hid behind the NDA line about it.

It has just been posted what was said for people to read. How many times did I have to ask CJ until he said about Eastwood?

She was asked if it can be withdrawn...
Click to expand...

Doesn’t answer my question. Couldn’t give a shiny shite what CJ did. I want to know when my club is coming home. Glad you’ve got more ammo for your next twitter spat though.

Now we’ve got two biased entrenched fans groups with half the info each and a refusal to ask questions lest they lose access. Yay.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
shmmeee said:
Doesn’t answer my question. Couldn’t give a shiny shite what CJ did. I want to know when my club is coming home. Glad you’ve got more ammo for your next twitter spat though.
Click to expand...

I can tell you are obviously upset by this.

You said it was no different to the trust, I pointed out how it was different.

I pointed out how things were asked but she used the NDA line. I pointed out how she said herself it can't be withdrawn (so she was asked about withdrawing it).

Yet you repeat the same line as Linnell (who I'd put money on being the person who told Pete that the club don't want the indemnity to be discussed) about "asking for it to be forgotten"?

The other positive is that somebody will be at the fan meetings with the club taking our points with them and reporting back.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
I can tell you are obviously upset by this.

You said it was no different to the trust, I pointed out how it was different.

I pointed out how things were asked but she used the NDA line.
Click to expand...

She was asked if it could be withdrawn. Not why she doesn’t make the request anyway if it can’t.

I’m tired mate. This is being held up as a victory and I’m sorry but I can see the Emporers cock as it’s even more shrivelled than it was. My worry with all of this is we just become the anti Trust being equally biased and toothless but on the other side of the argument. Les Reid to the Trusts Simon Gilbert. It’s just a recipe for more infighting and bollocks and no actual answers.

If there’s a plan to actually ask questions then fair enough. If it’s just to turn up and Polish Joys knob about what a great season we’re having then frankly leave it to Juggy.
 
covmark

covmark

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Now we’ve got two biased entrenched fans groups with half the info each and a refusal to ask questions lest they lose access. Yay.
Click to expand...

Did you even read any of the opening two posts?
Clear as day in there that Pete had been in contact with the Wasps hierarchy and is likely to be in contact with them again in the future. Doesn't come across as biased at all.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
mark82

mark82

Super Moderator
shmmeee said:
Not much new news really. Did you ask for a likely timescale on the stadium? They’ve had six years is there anything to indicate the next six will be any different? I swear we were “down to three sites” years ago and now it’s up to six. Any ideas on how it’ll be funded or who will own it? What happened to it last time with the fans forum and everything?

Did you ask about why they won’t request the case is forgotten even if it’s pointless? Did you ask about future legal cases or appeals? Any more details on the indemnity?

Fair play for getting a meeting but seems a bit of a wasted opportunity to just turn up and say “yes yes everything’s lovely aren’t the team doing well” and not actually ask them any questions. Seems just like what many on here slate the Trust for doing with the other actors. Turn up, round of applause, no further forward.
Click to expand...

Regarding the stadium, the length of deal they are wanting at the Ricoh answers that question. Will things be any different, who knows - I can't see into the future any more than you!

By the fans forum, I guess you mean what started as the SCG. This turned into the supporters forum, which is still held regularly and has representatives from all fan groups (including the trust) and now someone from here.

Did you ask about why they won’t request the case is forgotten even if it’s pointless? - Yes, it's because they feel there is a case to be answered (and even if they did the EU would still investigate anyway).
Did you ask about future legal cases or appeals? - Do you mean specifically around the lease of the stadium to Wasps? Not specifically, other than they clearly feel there is a case to be answered.
Any more details on the indemnity? - Obviously asked, but covered by NDA. Unfortunately they aren't going to put themselves in the position to breach the NDA.

Without sounding funny, no-one is in this for a round of applause. We asked 3 hours worth of questions to them, and yes, most of what we'd really like to know regarding Ricoh negotiations is in the NDA requested by Wasps. It's a shame, but that's a reality.
 
Liquid Gold

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Doesn’t answer my question. Couldn’t give a shiny shite what CJ did. I want to know when my club is coming home. Glad you’ve got more ammo for your next twitter spat though.

Now we’ve got two biased entrenched fans groups with half the info each and a refusal to ask questions lest they lose access. Yay.
Click to expand...
You just last week said we should sit back and let them do whatever as we have no influence so it's a bit rich that you're throwing toys out of the pram now your demands aren't being met now others are actually taking action.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
She was asked if it could be withdrawn. Not why she doesn’t make the request anyway if it can’t.

I’m tired mate. This is being held up as a victory and I’m sorry but I can see the Emporers cock as it’s even more shrivelled than it was. My worry with all of this is we just become the anti Trust being equally biased and toothless but on the other side of the argument. Les Reid to the Trusts Simon Gilbert. It’s just a recipe for more infighting and bollocks and no actual answers.

If there’s a plan to actually ask questions then fair enough. If it’s just to turn up and Polish Joys knob about what a great season we’re having then frankly leave it to Juggy.
Click to expand...

You can take the boy out of the council but can never take the council out the boy

You accuse me of insults. Already it’s “fuck off” “mate” “emperors cock” have a lie down or you will make an utter fool of yourself
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
shmmeee said:
She was asked if it could be withdrawn. Not why she doesn’t make the request anyway if it can’t.

I’m tired mate. This is being held up as a victory and I’m sorry but I can see the Emporers cock as it’s even more shrivelled than it was. My worry with all of this is we just become the anti Trust being equally biased and toothless but on the other side of the argument. Les Reid to the Trusts Simon Gilbert. It’s just a recipe for more infighting and bollocks and no actual answers.

If there’s a plan to actually ask questions then fair enough. If it’s just to turn up and Polish Joys knob about what a great season we’re having then frankly leave it to Juggy.
Click to expand...

There is no bias in what has been reported back and there's no knob polishing in there. Where is it being held up as a victory?

You have an issue with people mentioning the Trust, we get it. You didn't want a statement to be made, you get angry when the trust are mentioned.If you are tired then have a rest because you will end up losing your head like the other times.

Since Linnell said on the radio about "asking for it to be dropped" (funny as he said it didnt exist the week before) then you and CJ have tried to bang that drum. We all know it can't be dropped, what is asking for it to be dropped going to do?

Pete and Mark went in with no agenda, no links to anybody else and asked some questions and reported back. None of them have businesses that are funded by Joy, none of them are mates with Joy, none of them are old chums from the olden days with Joy.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
covmark said:
Did you even read any of the opening two posts?
Clear as day in there that Pete had been in contact with the Wasps hierarchy and is likely to be in contact with them again in the future. Doesn't come across as biased at all.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It’s biased because you only speak to one side. Same as the Trust because they burned their bridges. We will see what Wasps give up if and when that meeting happens and how it’s different from what the Trust have been saying. Right now it’s just a repeat of Boddys program notes to compare to the repeat of Wasps PR the Trust give us. It’s fucking pointless and we are being taken for a ride and no one can ask any difficult questions of either side for fear of not being allowed at the big boys table. For all the “why don’t you ask X” posts on here about the Trust and the media we’ve just done the exact same. Not a single question asked and every answer taken as gospel. Because that’s what happens when you are being used for PR. Just like the Trust are.

Whatever. This is going to become ten people shouting at me again. We’ll see where this goes.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
shmmeee said:
It’s biased because you only speak to one side. Same as the Trust because they burned their bridges. We will see what Wasps give up if and when that meeting happens and how it’s different from what the Trust have been saying. Right now it’s just a repeat of Boddys program notes to compare to the repeat of Wasps PR the Trust give us. It’s fucking pointless and we are being taken for a ride and no one can ask any difficult questions of either side for fear of not being allowed at the big boys table. For all the “why don’t you ask X” posts on here about the Trust and the media we’ve just done the exact same. Not a single question asked and every answer taken as gospel. Because that’s what happens when you are being used for PR. Just like the Trust are.

Whatever. This is going to become ten people shouting at me again. We’ll see where this goes.
Click to expand...

Did you actually read it? I have often disagreed with Pete over the years, I have bickered with them about stuff but to say he is going to be biased is nonsense. I remember asking him what protesting at the Ricoh would achieve when he did it.

Pete has actually hammered SISU, local councillors and Wasps from what I can see, it isn't just solely SISU.

Isn't it obvious why people reply to you, maybe it's intentional to get away from the point?
 
usskyblue

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
She was asked if it could be withdrawn. Not why she doesn’t make the request anyway if it can’t.

I’m tired mate. This is being held up as a victory and I’m sorry but I can see the Emporers cock as it’s even more shrivelled than it was. My worry with all of this is we just become the anti Trust being equally biased and toothless but on the other side of the argument. Les Reid to the Trusts Simon Gilbert. It’s just a recipe for more infighting and bollocks and no actual answers.

If there’s a plan to actually ask questions then fair enough. If it’s just to turn up and Polish Joys knob about what a great season we’re having then frankly leave it to Juggy.
Click to expand...

Get a fucking grip.

You get nowhere by burning bridges. Dialogue is important, but it has to be balanced, it can’t be from one side or the other. That’s where the core of the Trust are killing themselves.

We have to remain objective and hold all parties responsible. It’s the only way to coax them in to the same room.

You can’t simply shine knobs, or hit them with a fucking hammer. Dialogue has to be balanced if you want another chance to ask questions.
 
Last edited:
mark82

mark82

Super Moderator
shmmeee said:
Doesn’t answer my question. Couldn’t give a shiny shite what CJ did. I want to know when my club is coming home. Glad you’ve got more ammo for your next twitter spat though.

Now we’ve got two biased entrenched fans groups with half the info each and a refusal to ask questions lest they lose access. Yay.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself, but I'm not biased. I couldn't give a damn about politics between the different parties. All I really care about is watching football, and in Coventry - although that can't be at the expense of the clubs future.

Can't please everyone though, hey.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
mark82 said:
Speak for yourself, but I'm not biased. I couldn't give a damn about politics between the different parties. All I really care about is watching football, and in Coventry - although that can't be at the expense of the clubs future.

Can't please everyone though, hey.
Click to expand...

This is the difference, you and Pete don't have any other motives than CCFC.

You don't want anything out of it, you don't want a seat at the board, you don't have to try and please any other parties and you don't have to give a shit what you do and don't say.

I wouldn't worry about it, you can tell it is pushing the right buttons from that reaction.
 
Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon

Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
Stadium Plans – Short & Long Term

As previously communicated, the search for stadium sites is ongoing and has been narrowed down to a shortlist of 6 sites. A further site has also recently been identified. Although all sites are suitable for a stadium, the new site is considered the ideal location. As the exact location of the sites is commercially sensitive, they couldn’t tell us where the sites were, however, it was confirmed that all sites on the shortlist have been approved by the EFL for their proximity to St Mary’s Guildhall in Coventry, which is a marker point for the EFL.
Click to expand...

It's IKEA, city centre football here we come!
 
covmark

covmark

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
It’s biased because you only speak to one side. Same as the Trust because they burned their bridges. We will see what Wasps give up if and when that meeting happens and how it’s different from what the Trust have been saying. Right now it’s just a repeat of Boddys program notes to compare to the repeat of Wasps PR the Trust give us. It’s fucking pointless and we are being taken for a ride and no one can ask any difficult questions of either side for fear of not being allowed at the big boys table. For all the “why don’t you ask X” posts on here about the Trust and the media we’ve just done the exact same. Not a single question asked and every answer taken as gospel. Because that’s what happens when you are being used for PR. Just like the Trust are.

Whatever. This is going to become ten people shouting at me again. We’ll see where this goes.
Click to expand...
Honestly mate, I fail to see where there's any bias. As it said in the opening posts from Mark. Pete has met with Wasps, and future meetings are expected.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
mark82 said:
Regarding the stadium, the length of deal they are wanting at the Ricoh answers that question. Will things be any different, who knows - I can't see into the future any more than you!

By the fans forum, I guess you mean what started as the SCG. This turned into the supporters forum, which is still held regularly and has representatives from all fan groups (including the trust) and now someone from here.

Did you ask about why they won’t request the case is forgotten even if it’s pointless? - Yes, it's because they feel there is a case to be answered (and even if they did the EU would still investigate anyway).
Did you ask about future legal cases or appeals? - Do you mean specifically around the lease of the stadium to Wasps? Not specifically, other than they clearly feel there is a case to be answered.
Any more details on the indemnity? - Obviously asked, but covered by NDA. Unfortunately they aren't going to put themselves in the position to breach the NDA.

Without sounding funny, no-one is in this for a round of applause. We asked 3 hours worth of questions to them, and yes, most of what we'd really like to know regarding Ricoh negotiations is in the NDA requested by Wasps. It's a shame, but that's a reality.
Click to expand...

As I say fair play for going and the fact you’ve come away exactly how the Trust have with Wasps kinda proves my point about it not being evil conspiracies but rather the realities of trying to get answers and maintain relationships.

But there are clear questions you haven’t asked.

The big one being Wasps are clearly asking for a Sisu to contact the ECJ and ask for the case to be forgotten. You accepted the non answer about whether this would work but didn’t ask why they don’t try and call Wasps bluff if that’s the case.

The forum was a stadium forum Sandra Garlick set up ages ago with far more detail about the new ground than we have now. Where did it go? Why was it stopped? Likely it was just PR bullshit and if so what’s different this time? You can’t just accept “oh yes we want a stadium” on face value.

In terms of timescales again you didn’t ask, you assumed based on a five year deal but what are the deadlines? If we haven’t found land in the next three years what then? Isn’t this just more kicking it into the long grass while we wait for the state aid case? Essentially we are being told the same thing we have for six years with even less evidence it’s actually happening and are expected to just take this as gospel?

Like I say I get it. You don’t want to annoy them now you’ve got access. That’s to be expected and that’s what’s happened on the other wise with the Trust. The whole situation was so foreseeable and frustrating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 18 (members: 0, guests: 18)
Top