Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Or the tax authorities
Ricoh Lease... (10 Viewers)
- Thread starter Voice_of_Reason
- Start date
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
In a general reply I think people should read Justice Higinbottoms Judgement 30/06/2014 and read paticuler paragraphs 37 on ward (sorry don't know how to bring this up) .I agree with Sky Blue Dreamer when it comes to money on table Sisu run away.As for never being offered a lower rent deal somewhere in his report I think I saw a head of terms of £400,000 mentioned.
Last edited:
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Even after it’s pointed out that Northampton and Birmingham and every player and manager and the tax authorities have never had an issue you still say that Sisu don’t pay money when asked. Ok
I’ve had civil conversations with them all. Clearly there is a lot of ill will however if anything this season has shown our council backed the wrong horse and when one of those horses is a football club with history over 120 years and the other was a nomadic rugby club looking for a ground it’s downright offensive
Last edited:
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
You state Northhampton and Birmingham and the tax if we didn't pay any of those we would not have been playing.Selling they may have backed the wrong horse but if 1 is not in the race ie"We are going to build our own Stadium"you cannot back it. Civil conversation you could have 1 with anyone it doesn't put money on the table .
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Course it doesn’t put money on the table but of course they could have backed the club
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
Was that about the deal for 5.5m then 2m where the judge said he didn't think higgs and CCC were looking to work with Yorkshire Bank? Evidence has since come out that says ACL were stringing along, hasn't it?
Which rent offer was 400k?
Nick
Administrator
So it was only that particular instance that turns out CCC and ACL weren't going to do a deal anyway? Everybody else has been paid?
How do they know it was only one in the race if they did everything in secret rather than put it on the market to see how many horses wanted it?
Funny that.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Nick post 216 paragraph74 post 217 .When we went into administration a few local companies didn't get paid I think they perhaps should have handled the sale better read my post WE said were not in the race therefore we cannot win.
Nick
Administrator
What does it say?
Would they have been paid with ACL putting us into admin? You are really stretching to find examples.
What about the bid that was put in?
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Unless i've missread it The said paragraph in Justice Higginbottoms judgement and it also states for us to get some of the f and b hand were shook on it.On 4th february our trusted leader poo pooed saying she wanted to have a deal where we had a share in ACL.If you read the next paragraph you see we were not in the race.As for "stretching" try telling that to those who lost £100's .Last comment where have I mentioned bid?
End of the day , even if they had to take less money off the football club or negotiate longer etc. Council should never have sold the stadium of our home football club with such a rich history, to a rugby club from London!! Absolute disgrace.... millions put into so many other things every year locally, so nothing to do with money
It’s absolutly tragic and shocking In equal measure.
How anyone that lives in coventry and is a Coventry fan can think what the council did is somehow acceptable is beyond me
It’s absolutly tragic and shocking In equal measure.
How anyone that lives in coventry and is a Coventry fan can think what the council did is somehow acceptable is beyond me
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Nick sorry I said in post 212 old git here don't know how to do this.Takes me all my time to hit the right keys .
luwalla.WE said we did not want the Stadium taking Susi's analogie they would had to have took us to court if we sold it for less.(State aid) By the way like many City fans I don't live in the city
luwalla.WE said we did not want the Stadium taking Susi's analogie they would had to have took us to court if we sold it for less.(State aid) By the way like many City fans I don't live in the city
Senior Vick from Alicante
Well-Known Member
The council don't give a flying fuck about the club. The fact that councilor's are left to decide multi million pound deals is a joke, running a fucking corner shop does not give you the business acumen needed to make informed decisions when your dealing with companies that do it for a living. Lucas started the poisoning of the relationship with the them against us and then the tribal nature of politics took hold. As someone stated earlier we need a ground outside the city limits and let the Ricoh and the Wasps implode.
sorry didn’t mean anything detrimental to any fans that live outside the city... plenty do & living in Coventry doesn’t give anyone more validity as a fan... only really put that in as I know People that argue about the residents of Coventry that don’t follow the club/ football , and that the wasps deal was maybe what the council had to consider when thinking of all those that live in Coventry, not just Coventry city fans. But I just don’t believe the wasps purchase did anything more for those people either
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Some people made their mind up about sisu and have ignored the evidence that has come to light in the last few years.
Nick
Administrator
It seems like it. The pr job worked a treat.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
I agree we need a ground in side or outside the City show me where the first brick has been put in 7 vears since they said we don't want the Ricoh.As for relationships we shook hand on a deal that included some f and b in it for £400000 and walked away by the way if the Ricoh did Implode you would foot the bill.Councils all over the country do multi million pound deal every day of the week but they have advisers If I remember any dealing done by the council were unanimous not just Lucas
Nick
Administrator
Which rent deal was that?
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Liquid Gold and Nick if you mean me I have taken my infomation from a legal paper as for what deal ?1 to rent the Area as i already said and I will say again paragraph 74 Justice Hickinbottoms judgment Sky Blue Sport and Leisure V Coventry Council 30/06/ 2014
luwalla no offence taken
luwalla no offence taken
Last edited:
Skybluemichael
Well-Known Member
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Going off to cry to my twitter friends because I can't formulate an argument over 240 characters and when I do I get destroyed.
Proper playground shit.
So you are referring to this... where Joy sepalla said the club weren’t prepared to move forward on a deal unless the club owned A STAKE in ACL... so the council then sold ALL of ACL to a rugby club from London ?
Is this the part of the judgement that’s meant to make us think the council were justified in what they did ?
“After the Council had purchased the Bank debt, thereby resolving that immediate sticking point, negotiations over rent continued between CCFC and ACL. On 29 January 2013, Heads of Terms were agreed, involving rent at £400,000 from 1 January 2013 with an agreement on arrears taking into account a reduced escrow account sum (which left arrears of about £0.5m to be paid) and an in-principle agreement for CCFC to benefit from match-day food and beverage revenues and ACL paying a larger share of the rates on the Arena. The Directors of CCFC and ACL representatives shook hands on that; but the deal was rejected on 4 February 2013 by Ms Seppala (who, as described by Mr Thompson, “sat at the top of the tree in terms of [SISU] decision making”) on the basis that she was not prepared to accept any deal that excluded SISU from holding a stake in ACL.
if they were prepared to sell ACL in its entirety to wasps, then why was asking for simply a part of ACL unreasonable for the Football club... who incidentally already Invested heavily in the site/ project ?
Last edited:
Senior Vick from Alicante
Well-Known Member
How would I foot the bill exactly? Everything reverts back to the council if Wasps go tits they purchased a lease for an extended period. The council have helped Wasps at every juncture in this city to be successful at the expense of the club you support but you side with the council.
Nick
Administrator
I would reply but blocked because he didn't like his made up stuff correcting.
Good to see he's got a few frothers all worked up because of basic facts.
Last edited:
Peter Billing Eyes
Well-Known Member
Related to this topic, I think the last thing we need is a stadium outside the city boundaries. I would say the Ricoh is borderline acceptable as realistically, how many fans do we have beyond Bedworth and Nuneaton as a percentage of our fanbase? The South and West of the city is the only direction you can go in without encountering another team within a 30 minute drive. Any suggestion that we should move out of Coventry could be folly and rightly or wrongly, (and given the likelihood of finding a legitimate plot of land within it, and not a pie in the sky suggestion of somewhere like Ikea, Pool Meadow, Hearsall Common or what would be a woefully inadequate Butts); sadly, the only real option is the Ricoh. A final word, I’m not for seeing people’s jobs put at risk, but the sooner Wasps bugger off and the old guard at CCC retire, the better.
Skybluemichael
Well-Known Member
What annoys me is they talk like sisu took over a well run club to start with, but it was a basket case long before they got hear
mark82
Super Moderator
Presumably because they were already deep in discussions with Wasps.
mark82
Super Moderator
When the Ricoh isn't an option what do we do? I still believe a stadium on the outskirts would be fine as long as transport links are good. If you moved the Ricoh a couple of hundred yards up the road and it was in Bedworth it wouldn't make it any more difficult to get to than it is, it wouldn't really make any difference at all other than some people would flounce about some imaginary boundary that changes over time anyway.
This is overlooked far more than it should be...
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Sisu were awful owners and the six fields move and comment by Mr Fisher were deluded about the expected numbers. Handled so much better this time at St Andrews by pretty much everyone, maybe not cwr. I agree with Mark we need to see concrete progress on a new stadium and if it’s slightly outside of the 6 miles from the guildhall rule then we need to support it
oh and I should say I was at 0% chance of anything happening about a new stadium until meeting them and it’s only really gone up slightly. But what choice is there?
oh and I should say I was at 0% chance of anything happening about a new stadium until meeting them and it’s only really gone up slightly. But what choice is there?
On your reasoning WASPS have not paid anything either
They raised £35m of other people's money on the back of an beneficial deal with CCC
The first 3 interest payments were specifically earmarked as coming out of the £35m - so the Bond Holders paid them selves
£10m was to pay back a loan from their owners
Until the £35m is repaid the cost to WASPS is ?????
How was the Coventry City £1.3m Ricoh Arena rent bill decided
So it was based on the estimated rate of return ( interest ) CCC could expect from the Stadium
The big error was it assumed more income other than CCFC - which never happened
There was also an assumption CCFC would be in the Premier with no contingency should that not happen
The final paragrapn in that article is also informative
The Ricoh Arena dream that one council official thought was a joke
Rather like Reeves and Co telling Steve Waggott that WASPS were not involved in any deal with the Ricoh before CCFC returned?
Same person also saying WASPS would not be in Coventry and CRFC would also be the sole premier rugby club in the City ( the latter of course being true in status if not league position )