ACL - lets have some facts (4 Viewers)

[oldskyblue58]

Thought it might be an idea to have some facts about ACL instead of self interested spin ala Mr Fisher

-Owners of the long lease to operate the Ricoh Arena (approx 42 years left on lease)

-Owned by Coventry City Council and the Higgs Charity (50:50) with interlocking shareholders agreements ensuring each stakeholder has to approve the actions of the other. Each stakeholder has directors on the Board of ACL

- The council and Charity are bound by the rules and regulations of Local Government and Charity Commission respectively so their actions and the actions of their ACL directors are subject to far more scrutiny & liability than ordinary directors. Should imply a higher standard of what they can communicate but perhaps restrict how much they can say and how often

- sub lease the site to various tenants including CCFC, The Casino, De Vere Hotels

- The catering etc, and site management done through a joint venture between ACL & Compass known as IEC. ACL get a share of the net profits from the joint venture

- Over 80% of the income of the site is derived from conference, events and exhilbitions

- The match day income streams. All ticket income goes to CCFC. Match day packages and food (yorkshire bank suite etc) are sold to CCFC who then sell on at a profit. Car parking sold on to CCFC then resold by them at a profit. Kiosk income (and costs) belong to joint venture. Sponsorship income for ground/name belongs to ACL (it is their property after all CCFC sold those rights) Ricoh deal rolls on until 2025. Advertising split between CCFC and ACL.

- ACL paid a premium to acquire the long lease, and chose not to pay an annual rent by doing so. £21m

- Lease premium was financed by loan from Yorkshire Bank. 31/05/11 that loan stood at £16.2m (and has reduced since to an estimate of 15.6m). ACL pay interest at 1.265% abover LIBOR (0.5% approx) - pretty decent rate when you consider a lot of business mortgages currently.

Results - Turnover 2011 £6.6m 2010 £6.6m 2009 £6.8m
- Net Profit 2011 £470k 2010 £547k 2009 £3.223m (due to one off income from lease transfer)
- Fixed assets (long lease, improvements, equipment etc) at 31/05/11 £25m
- Debtors £1.7m and cash at bank £1.2m 31/05/11
- Total creditors 2011 26.3m 2010 £27.7m 2009 £32.7m
- Total creditors includes Bank loans 2011 £16.2m 2010 £16.8m 2009 £20.6m and income to be spread over a number of future years 2011 £ 7.5m 2010 £8.5m 2009 £7.7m
- net worth on balance sheet 2011 £1.5m 2010 £1.0m 2009 £ 0.49m

Auditors Reports - no mention of any concern regarding going concern, the reports were "clean"

Neither the Council nor Charity have taken a penny out of ACL and there is no intention to do so until the loans are cleared. All profits reinvested into the company

There is a mechanism to give the council an extra return on super profits above £3.75m (amount from memory ) on a sliding scale. It has never been taken as profits never high enough.

ACL, Council, Charity have all stated in the past they want to support a viable football club at the Ricoh.

All three are open to new stakeholders so long as they can prove the newstake holders are viable, able to invest in the development of the site, there is a long term future to the club.

The charity gave CCFC Ltd (not any other company or entity) the option to buy its shares. There is a formula etc but that is not public. That option is still valid and its termination depends on certain events in the agreement. There have been no discussions between charity and ccfc/sisu on the subject recently.

50% of the shares does not mean 50% of the turnover or profits. It entitles the owner to 50% of the dividends voted (no reserves to pay one so presently illegal and stakeholder policy is to pay off loans before any dividend paid). It would also entitle a shareholder to 50% of surplus assets on a winding up.

Currently CCFC owe ACL £1m in unpaid rent. The lease agreement terms stipulate that £500k has to be kept in an Escrow account as a deposit against default. CCFC are in default - this does not mean that the Escrow funds can be left depleted as rental payment but does mean ACL can draw on it to soften their cashflow blow caused by non payment. To be clear the lease requires rent to be paid £1.2m pa and the maintenance of £500k in the Escrow account.

Currently CCFC pay £10k approx per match. This is not rent or any contribution to rent. This is for the sell on of rights to car park income, the provision of food and staff for the corporate seats, power etc. These costs would be paid at any other club irrespective of whether rented or not.

ACL have repeatedly offered to have meaningful discussions with SISU over the rent.

This i hope will clarify some of the commentary regarding ACL from certain quarters. I would guess that as a good customer that ACL have been in contact with the bank on a regular basis. I would, from my own experience, expect the bank to have already looked some time ago at the value of CCFC's tenancy and concluded that CCFC is all but insolvent. If so then the bank has already factored in that information into its valuations and is still there. In the current and recent financial climate (say last 5 years) there is no real value to giving a tenancy to any football club - let alone the basketcase that is CCFC.

 

---

[skyblueman]

Thanks for that OSB - on a slightly different topic you might have a view on what would you guess the likely returns to SISU if the liquidated now or called in receivers?

 

[Block19]

If we lease/rent the stadium how come some of the kiosks are closed and the toilets shut. If I rented something I would want everything open

 

[oldskyblue58]

Thanks for that OSB - on a slightly different topic you might have a view on what would you guess the likely returns to SISU if the liquidated now or called in receivers?

no point calling in receivers ....... straight to liquidation in my view. ARVO have secured all assets so nothing for anyone else to get .... therefore no point paying 10's of 1000's to administrators etc. Basically ARVO get everything at whatever they they can sell it on for

 

[oldskyblue58]

If we lease/rent the stadium how come some of the kiosks are closed and the toilets shut. If I rented something I would want everything open

Because a) we havent paid for anything since april, b) why should acl incur more costs than necessary when they are not getting paid, c) you adapt to the number of customers its good business sense

 

[BrisbaneBronco]

thought it might be an idea to have some facts about acl instead of self interested spin ala mr fisher

-owners of the long lease to operate the ricoh arena (approx 42 years left on lease)

-owned by coventry city council and the higgs charity (50:50) with interlocking shareholders agreements ensuring each stakeholder has to approve the actions of the other. Each stakeholder has directors on the board of acl

- the council and charity are bound by the rules and regulations of local government and charity commission respectively so their actions and the actions of their acl directors are subject to far more scrutiny & liability than ordinary directors. Should imply a higher standard of what they can communicate but perhaps restrict how much they can say and how often

- sub lease the site to various tenants including ccfc, the casino, de vere hotels

- the catering etc, and site management done through a joint venture between acl & compass known as iec. Acl get a share of the net profits from the joint venture

- over 80% of the income of the site is derived from conference, events and exhilbitions

- the match day income streams. All ticket income goes to ccfc. Match day packages and food (yorkshire bank suite etc) are sold to ccfc who then sell on at a profit. Car parking sold on to ccfc then resold by them at a profit. Kiosk income (and costs) belong to joint venture. Sponsorship income for ground/name belongs to acl (it is their property after all ccfc sold those rights) ricoh deal rolls on until 2025. Advertising split between ccfc and acl.

- acl paid a premium to acquire the long lease, and chose not to pay an annual rent by doing so. £21m

- lease premium was financed by loan from yorkshire bank. 31/05/11 that loan stood at £16.2m (and has reduced at around since to an estimate of 15.6m). Acl pay interest at 1.265% abover libor (0.5% approx) - pretty decent rate when you consider a lot of business mortgages currently.

Results - turnover 2011 £6.6m 2010 £6.6m 2009 £6.8m
- net profit 2011 £470k 2010 £547k 2009 £3.223m (due to one off income from lease transfer)
- fixed assets (long lease, improvements, equipment etc) at 31/05/11 £25m
- debtors £1.7m and cash at bank £1.2m 31/05/11
- total creditors 2011 26.3m 2010 £27.7m 2009 £32.7m
- total creditors includes bank loans 2011 £16.2m 2010 £16.8m 2009 £20.6m and income to be spread over a number of future years 2011 £ 7.5m 2010 £8.5m 2009 £7.7m
- net worth on balance sheet 2011 £1.5m 2010 £1.0m 2009 £ 0.49m

auditors reports - no mention of any concern regarding going concern, the reports were "clean"

neither the council nor charity have taken a penny out of acl and there is no intention to do so until the loans are cleared. All profits reinvested into the company

there is a mechanism to give the council an extra return on super profits above £3.75m (amount from memory ) on a sliding scale. It has never been taken as profits never high enough.

Acl, council, charity have all stated in the past they want to support a viable football club at the ricoh.

All three are open to new stakeholders so long as they can prove the newstake holders are viable, able to invest in the development of the site, there is a long term future to the club.

The charity gave ccfc ltd (not any other company or entity) the option to buy its shares. There is a formula etc but that is not public. That option is still valid and its termination depends on certain events in the agreement. There have been no discussions between charity and ccfc/sisu on the subject recently.

50% of the shares does not mean 50% of the turnover or profits. It entitles the owner to 50% of the dividends voted (no reserves to pay one so presently illegal and stakeholder policy is to pay off loans before any dividend paid). It would also entitle a shareholder to 50% of surplus assets on a winding up.

Currently ccfc owe acl £1m in unpaid rent. The lease agreement terms stipulate that £500k has to be kept in an escrow account as a deposit against default. Ccfc are in default - this does not mean that the escrow funds can be left depleted as rental payment but does mean acl can draw on it to soften their cashflow blow caused by non payment. To be clear the lease requires rent to be paid £1.2m pa and the maintenance of £500k in the escrow account.

Currently ccfc pay £10k approx per match. this is not rent or any contribution to rent. This is for the sell on of rights to car park income, the provision of food and staff for the corporate seats, power etc. These costs would be paid at any other club irrespective of whether rented or not.

Acl have repeatedly offered to have meaningful discussions with sisu over the rent.

This i hope will clarify some of the commentary regarding acl from certain quarters. I would guess that as a good customer that acl have been in contact with the bank on a regular basis. I would, from my own experience, expect the bank to have already looked some time ago at the value of ccfc's tenancy and concluded that ccfc is all but insolvent. If so then the bank has already factored in that information into its valuations and is still there. In the current and recent financial climate (say last 5 years) there is no real value to giving a tenancy to any football club - let alone the basketcase that is ccfc.

a big thank you osb for keeping us in the loop and making things easier to understand. Keep posting

 

[cloughie]

Would agree with OSB

Fisher imp:as usual spinning half truths to try and convince all that none of this shambles of a club is poor sisu's fault

 

[skyblueman]

no point calling in receivers ....... straight to liquidation in my view. ARVO have secured all assets so nothing for anyone else to get .... therefore no point paying 10's of 1000's to administrators etc. Basically ARVO get everything at whatever they they can sell it on for

Feared as much - any guesses on the return for AVRO then?

 

[oldskyblue58]

aside from the equipment the only items of worth are

- Land at Ryton........ that could be sold as housing would be of greater value - but current use £1m ?
- The league registration ...... cancelled if liquidated but if sold before may have worth
- the trademarks and badges ...... £10k ?
- other stuff ...... £30k in total ?

 

[oldskyblue58]

you know what really bugs me is that the radio stations and local rags have access to the same information as me but still accept everything that TF says as gospel truth.

This morning he stated that ACL owed Yorkshire Bank £20m .......... last accounts show substantially less than that 16.2m
He stated that the bank were ripping ACL and therefore the good folk of coventry off because of the amount ACL had to pay ...... its not even 2% ! interest. I bet there are plenty of businesses and home owners who would like that.
He stated that the lowering of rent would reduce the value of the stadium..... technically true but any bank would already have looked at the nature of the major tenant CCFC and concluded there was a massive risk there and therefore adjusted their view of value.
Says Council cant bail out ......... of course they cant far needier causes in coventry than ACl or CCFC
Says ACL will take CCFC down when the reality is that CCFC are trying to take ACL down ...... but it makes people think ACL are the bad guys and it will be their fault if CCFC go
He says he is doing it the people of Coventry ...... frankly i am insulted by that, we are just not that thick to believe it

But do you hear any of this challenged ?

 

[Godiva]

Great work again OSB!

You say there's a formular to calculate a purchase price should ccfc want to acquire the Higgs 50% shares position.
Earlier we thought the price was about £6 or £10mil (can't remember) and that the option would run out shortly. So that part is new to me.

You also say the net worth on the balance sheet end 2011 is £1.5m - a 50% share equals to £0.75m.

It would be interesting to have your professional guesstimate on a fair price for the Higgs shares based on the 2011 net value.
And second - do you think the formular based price is higher or lower?

 

[Steve.B50]

Yes Great work OSB.

We need a plan !!!!

 

[wingy]

Sorry to go off topic OSB but have you popped into companies house site yet to verify that fans forum statement re;conversion of debt to equity,I beiieve you posted the 28 as asignificant date.

 

[oldskyblue58]

value kind of depends on what the future holds Godiva..... it isnt the balance sheet total. The charity cant accept less than they paid for it and the reputation of the Ricoh has grown (even internationally) so I would not put the value below £6m for starters .... after that its anyones guess.

Is the formula valid ..... i would guess both sides could agree to not use it. other than that i have no details

 

[oldskyblue58]

Sorry to go off topic OSB but have you popped into companies house site yet to verify that fans forum statement re;conversion of debt to equity,I beiieve you posted the 28 as asignificant date.

nice reminder wingy thanks ............. just checked - no increase in share capital on SBS&L so i dont see how SISU put money in as equity ........ i am sure TF has an explanation tho :thinking about:

 

[wingy]

So that £30+M.Sisu debt still applies.

 

[Godiva]

Great work again OSB!

You say there's a formular to calculate a purchase price should ccfc want to acquire the Higgs 50% shares position.
Earlier we thought the price was about £6 or £10mil (can't remember) and that the option would run out shortly. So that part is new to me.

You also say the net worth on the balance sheet end 2011 is £1.5m - a 50% share equals to £0.75m.

It would be interesting to have your professional guesstimate on a fair price for the Higgs shares based on the 2011 net value.
And second - do you think the formular based price is higher or lower?

value kind of depends on what the future holds Godiva..... it isnt the balance sheet total. The charity cant accept less than they paid for it and the reputation of the Ricoh has grown (even internationally) so I would not put the value below £6m for starters .... after that its anyones guess.

Is the formula valid ..... i would guess both sides could agree to not use it. other than that i have no details

So you would say a company with a net worth (balance sheet) of £750t and a last reported profit £235t is worth £6mil?
That's a P/E of 25.

Add to that the prospect of losing a yearly income of £600t - that may or may not be partly exhanged by income from new activities.

So I ask you again - with all due respect - would you say £6mil is a fair price?

 

[katzenjammer]

OSB, are you an current/ex employee of the club or ACL?

 

[oldskyblue58]

OSB, are you an current/ex employee of the club or ACL?

no katzenjammer not now or ever...... are you a band member or just a lover of their music ?

The information is all out there ...... you dont need to be an insider or ex employee to find it...... all i have done is put it all in one place

 

[oldskyblue58]

Not saying a fair price but the charity for reasons of charity commission cant accept less. Plus all depends on the future projections etc.

Balance sheet doesnt seek to value reputation for example ......

value is certainly more than TF alluded to ...........as worthless

 

[katzenjammer]

no katzenjammer not now or ever...... are you a band member or just a lover of their music ?

The information is all out there ...... you dont need to be an insider or ex employee to find it...... all i have done is put it all in one place

I was just intrigued, that's all, wondered if you had an agenda on way or the other I guess. Trying to put your collated stats into context in my head and that was the bit of info I lacked.

Incidently, I am neither a member or a fan of their music, I am so named because of a Kyuss song, of whom I am a fan.

 

[oldskyblue58]

no agenda ....... i just like to get the facts out there and offer my own explanation and opinion. I have business qualifications that help me see things a little clearer than many so i try to explain what i can so as many as possible understand whats going on. So much coming out of CCFC is smoke and mirrors

 

[Godiva]

So you would say a company with a net worth (balance sheet) of £750t and a last reported profit £235t is worth £6mil?
That's a P/E of 25.

Add to that the prospect of losing a yearly income of £600t - that may or may not be partly exhanged by income from new activities.

So I ask you again - with all due respect - would you say £6mil is a fair price?

Not saying a fair price but the charity for reasons of charity commission cant accept less. Plus all depends on the future projections etc.

Balance sheet doesnt seek to value reputation for example ......

value is certainly more than TF alluded to ...........as worthless

But still - a P/E of 25??? ACL is not Facebook or Microsoft and with the added future prospect of losing a £600t per year I would never even consider a trade.

A price tag of £6mil is a show stopper.
I guess the council is not allowed to take over ACL 100% as it would probably have to pay the same price (and there are probably laws to prevent it).
And obviously the club won't either and that is likely why negotiations are abandoned (or at a halt).

The club won't (can't) pay more than £100t-150t p y for the rent. If forced to, sisu will most likely pull the plug.
With a rent income of only £100t-150t ACL will not make a profit and be able to satisfy it's loan creditors.

So it looks to me as it really is a doomsday scenario - for both club and ACL.
Both risk going out of business.

The only scenario where at least one survives, seem to be the 'Fischer Plan'. If the club gets ACL for (next to) nothing, the club is saved.
If not - the club will cease to exist and it's downfall will drag ACL down as well.

Sisu are saying: 'Give us ACL for a pittance, then you at least have a pittance and the city will have a football club with a future. Or good luck trying to save ACL without a football club contributing to the local community and providing income for ACL and it's shop and restaurant operators.'

It's going to be a very cold winter.

 

[wingy]

How wonderful.

 

[oldskyblue58]

why does everyone stop at the only use of the ground is by CCFC ?

Why does everyone think that ACL are sitting still waiting for this ?

Why does everyone think that ACL are not trying to do something aboout their cashflow need so it doesnt rely on CCFC?

Why does everyone think that the site isnt going to be developed further to create other income streams?

Why are people so hung up on there being no alternatives ? think outside the box

would ACL actually miss the match day income ? its part of the joint venture total and most of that total income is from other sources. The non rent income from CCFC doesnt contribute much profit to ACL

Would they miss the rent ? yes but only if they did nothing at all to replace it.

Do they really want to sell to SISU ? Selling to CCFC is a different question.

Is TF's solution the only one - i do not think so but he wants, in fact needs, us all to believe it

 

[cloughie]

Quote OSB; Is TF's solution the only one - i do not think so but he wants, in fact needs, us all to believe it

exactly right, ACL doesn't rely on CCFC as much as fisher would have everyone believe. Fisher desperately needs everyone to believe it because if ACL are ahead of him ie new alternatives lined up then ACL won't miss CCFC and Tim Fisher will be out of a job.

 

[dick turpin]

Stuff em.
The Higgs trust need all of their money back for NEW projects of worth to the City.
SISU are of NO worth to the City.
If they had loaned out a pound they would want more than 5p back,pisstake

Post like this need to be made more open to the general public
or maybe the CeT will pick this story up in a few days time and have the balls to print

Tim F or a Revolution

 

[jsbcov]

If there was no football club then surely Ricoh would stop their sponsorship? There's another potential loss of 850k per year I would presume. The indoor arena already has a sponsorship deal with Jaguar so not sure what Ricoh would get out of continuing sponsorship?

 

[Godiva]

Quote OSB; Is TF's solution the only one - i do not think so but he wants, in fact needs, us all to believe it

exactly right, ACL doesn't rely on CCFC as much as fisher would have everyone believe. Fisher desperately needs everyone to believe it because if ACL are ahead of him ie new alternatives lined up then ACL won't miss CCFC and Tim Fisher will be out of a job.

No?

ACL:
Results - Turnover 2011 £6.6m 2010 £6.6m 2009 £6.8m
- Net Profit 2011 £470k 2010 £547k 2009 £3.223m (due to one off income from lease transfer)
- Fixed assets (long lease, improvements, equipment etc) at 31/05/11 £25m
- Debtors £1.7m and cash at bank £1.2m 31/05/11
- Total creditors 2011 26.3m 2010 £27.7m 2009 £32.7m
- Total creditors includes Bank loans 2011 £16.2m 2010 £16.8m 2009 £20.6m and income to be spread over a number of future years 2011 £ 7.5m 2010 £8.5m 2009 £7.7m
- net worth on balance sheet 2011 £1.5m 2010 £1.0m 2009 £ 0.49m

Take away £1.2m per year and for 2011 alone you'll need profit from replacement activities at £730t just to break even. That' is a lot of new activities they'll need to bring in.
And without a weekly football venue bringing 6.000-11.000 spectators, how will the shops, kiosks and restaurant owners suffer? Will they keep contributing to the ACL income the same they do today? What about the advertising income? Will it stay the same without the football club?

Looking at the numbers I would say it seems more likely that ACL may go under without the club.

OR - let's say the ACL really can attract new activities/businesses that can contribute a profit of £730t per year. Why haven't they done it in the past? In fact, profit declined from 2010 to 2011 indicating just how difficult it is to get new activities in.

 

[jsbcov]

No?

ACL:
Results - Turnover 2011 £6.6m 2010 £6.6m 2009 £6.8m
- Net Profit 2011 £470k 2010 £547k 2009 £3.223m (due to one off income from lease transfer)
- Fixed assets (long lease, improvements, equipment etc) at 31/05/11 £25m
- Debtors £1.7m and cash at bank £1.2m 31/05/11
- Total creditors 2011 26.3m 2010 £27.7m 2009 £32.7m
- Total creditors includes Bank loans 2011 £16.2m 2010 £16.8m 2009 £20.6m and income to be spread over a number of future years 2011 £ 7.5m 2010 £8.5m 2009 £7.7m
- net worth on balance sheet 2011 £1.5m 2010 £1.0m 2009 £ 0.49m

Take away £1.2m per year and for 2011 alone you'll need profit from replacement activities at £730t just to break even. That' is a lot of new activities they'll need to bring in.
And without a weekly football venue bringing 6.000-11.000 spectators, how will the shops, kiosks and restaurant owners suffer? Will they keep contributing to the ACL income the same they do today? What about the advertising income? Will it stay the same without the football club?

Looking at the numbers I would say it seems more likely that ACL may go under without the club.

OR - let's say the ACL really can attract new activities/businesses that can contribute a profit of £730t per year. Why haven't they done it in the past? In fact, profit declined from 2010 to 2011 indicating just how difficult it is to get new activities in.

Best post of the day,

 

[Godiva]

Best post of the day,

Not true - the OP is.

 

[skyblueman]

If there was no football club then surely Ricoh would stop their sponsorship? There's another potential loss of 850k per year I would presume. The indoor arena already has a sponsorship deal with Jaguar so not sure what Ricoh would get out of continuing sponsorship?

Yep I just bet Ricoh are really enjoying basing in the reflected glory CCFC are bringing them

 

[psgm1]

You CANNOT go immediately into liquidation. By LAW, the company / club / entity has to attempt administration. What ACL CAN do is petition for ARVO to be declared bankrupt due to non payment of rent (known as a winding up order). Basically it is a mechanism to force errant companies who are hard-balling (as is the case with SiSU). It gives them a final ultimatum which is legally enforceable.

In other words, either SiSU pay the back rent. or ACL can pull the plug on them perfectly legally. I strongly suspect SiSU are not expecting ACL to do this, as ACL have up until now done everything they can to ensure the club keeps going.

SiSU have a bad reputation within the financial community for trying to ensure they are primary creditors in whatever enterprise they go into (There was an articlr in a national newspaper about SiSUs antics, but memory fails - a google search should find it!)

What DOES concern me is there a vocal minority of posters who actually came out and PRAISED SiSU for doing this! Coventry City fans like to think of the club as part of the community (as I would like myself). Sadly there are a tiny few who are only concerned in watching football - no matter how it comes about. That is NOT being part of a community.

Coventry City does NOT need these kind of fans. Ultimately football is a game, and what SiSU are trying to pull could affect people's livelihoods. This in a city that has a proud history of standing up for workers' rights.

Look at the protests for the loss of jobs at London Cabs. SiSU will in my eyes have blood on their hands if they are allowed to get away with this. And quite frankly any fan who supports SiSU in this act shares in that guilt.

As a COMMUNITY CLUB, true fans should stand up for ACL. After all they only got in this mess, to ensure cov had a home! There is one way to suppport ACL,and that is to boycott ALL home games. SiSU cannot be allowed to get away with this. Who is to say they wont try the same to get the entire ground! After all if they win once, what is to say they wont win again?

SiSU must be consigned to the dustbin of history, supporting them by going to games is morally bankrupt whislt they are trying to destroy a charity!

 

[fernandopartridge]

you know what really bugs me is that the radio stations and local rags have access to the same information as me but still accept everything that TF says as gospel truth.

This morning he stated that ACL owed Yorkshire Bank £20m .......... last accounts show substantially less than that 16.2m
He stated that the bank were ripping ACL and therefore the good folk of coventry off because of the amount ACL had to pay ...... its not even 2% ! interest. I bet there are plenty of businesses and home owners who would like that.
He stated that the lowering of rent would reduce the value of the stadium..... technically true but any bank would already have looked at the nature of the major tenant CCFC and concluded there was a massive risk there and therefore adjusted their view of value.
Says Council cant bail out ......... of course they cant far needier causes in coventry than ACl or CCFC
Says ACL will take CCFC down when the reality is that CCFC are trying to take ACL down ...... but it makes people think ACL are the bad guys and it will be their fault if CCFC go
He says he is doing it the people of Coventry ...... frankly i am insulted by that, we are just not that thick to believe it

But do you hear any of this challenged ?

The local paper is only local in respect of its name. It's printed in Birmingham and primarily written by remote journalists using 2nd hand information. The CT is just about as much as a basket case as the football club.

The BBC on the other hand has to tread carefully, they risk upsetting the club and being denied access to the matches.

 

[ccfc92]

The local paper is only local in respect of its name. It's printed in Birmingham and primarily written by remote journalists using 2nd hand information. The CT is just about as much as a basket case as the football club.

The BBC on the other hand has to tread carefully, they risk upsetting the club and being denied access to the matches.

And BBC wouldn't want to lose that right

Do news companies have to pay us to attend games and take photos and videos etc?