Chrisbaker85PUSB
New Member
ACL said the rent would be 400k but CCFC would have access to matchday costs which would drag the amount down to 150k that's how I understood it.
SISU were offered 150 k a year rent deal (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter dongonzalos
- Start date
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
skybluescotland said it! He is right most of the time and I think he has good contacts
Delboycov
Active Member
That's a feckin brilliant deal! SISU should snap their hands off...although of course they won't as they have no intention of paying anything. Del Boy and Trotters Independent were more trustworthy businessmen.
cofastreecity
New Member
it is very simple, the rent offer was £400k per annum compared to £1.25million, but in addition ACL offered all F&B Match-day revenues which equate to a minimum of £100k per annum profit, reducing the like for like rent to circa £300k per annum depending on attendances, then they talked about business rates which if you go on the valuation office web site you will see an appeal, which one can only assume will benefit CCFC and impact ACL. In simple terms an annual charge of £1.25m when the club last paid its legal rent in 2011/12, now works our at circa £150k, and the F&B profits could be much more if the gates rise. Almost a 10 fold decrease is a pretty good position in any language, if I was CCFC I would snatch ACLs hands off and get the players wage bill under control. For example, how can the club justify paying Bell £7000 per week until 2015, from my calculations thats £364,000 per annum, and who signed that deal off, not ACL, am i thick but seems that Belly's wages would more than cover the rent, and would our beloved team miss Bell??? Its all about honesty, perhaps we need to get Mr John Clarke OBE to recall whether he shook hands on a deal or not, as TF seems to have amnesia. PUSB
cofastreecity
New Member
Clearly numbers are not your strong point, it is pretty simple, and factual. SISU just do not want to pay, the net costs to CCFC are £150k. History will prove this when the club sadly evaporate.
kingharvest
New Member
It definitely wasn't 150k. Whoever said that is wrong.
Also, the F&B deal is far more complex and skewed towards the council.
This council has so much to answer for, not just ccfc but the city in general. They're local authority with too many egos playing politics.
Why more people haven't questioned the original tesco land deal surprises me, the club were naive and the council knew what it was doing. The state aid argument is littered with unanswered questions.
I genuinely wouldn't trust our council in anything they say or do.
Also, the F&B deal is far more complex and skewed towards the council.
This council has so much to answer for, not just ccfc but the city in general. They're local authority with too many egos playing politics.
Why more people haven't questioned the original tesco land deal surprises me, the club were naive and the council knew what it was doing. The state aid argument is littered with unanswered questions.
I genuinely wouldn't trust our council in anything they say or do.
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
Bennets Afro
Well-Known Member
Wasn't it rejected because they wanted the arrears wiping clear?
Never read anywhere it was rejected because of the rent figure
Never read anywhere it was rejected because of the rent figure
skybluesteve76
New Member
No way was it 150k!
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
This is what the Coventry Telegraph website says
Last edited by a moderator:
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It was a doctor and the chief executive of Coventry city council
Who was in the meeting.
My guess is he was right.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
I just want to see the minutes from the meeting, that will confirm who said what. But noone seems to want to disclose them.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
What's that got to do with anything?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Unless it was a honorary Doctorate I would suggest it means he has a brain and unlikely to have got confused.
As the chief executive of the council if he public ally lies and is proven to have done so. His career is up in smoke.
TF? .......
As the chief executive of the council if he public ally lies and is proven to have done so. His career is up in smoke.
TF? .......
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I am sure Doctor Shipman had a brain.
I'm pretty certain fisher has a top degree st Oxford or Cambridge.
So what?
Sky Blues
Active Member
I think PWKH said on the radio yesterday that he wanted to release his notes from the meeting, but lawyers stopped them - something about a flurry of legal letters warning that they would face a legal fight that would cost £100,000 even if they were ultimately proved right in the end!
In my opinion some of the civil laws in this country can have an incredibly chilling effect on free speech, even when someone wants to tell what they believe to be the truth.
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
Wonder why we will never know the truth until the minutes are released, the war of words will continue. The only losers are the fans, nothing new there then.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Yes all the ACL staff have got together and decided to make up that TF and the two directors agreed to the deal and the reneged,
It's part of ACL's evil plan to discredit SISU and as TF puts it bully them into a deal.
I can just see it now.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I think anyone with half a brain can make a very good judgement call on what the truth is.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
He isn't telling lies
The rent is £400,000. If no income was made then we pay £400,000. I assume as the £1.2 million is quoted to reduce from the £10,00o per game running costs also exist so assume 2 cup games a season that is £250,000.
Back to £400,000. This suggests the revenue from match day earnings will be £250,000 going to the club. As I don't really get the relationship with compass - I guess this is part of what compass pay. ACL projection therefore is that this is worth £250,000. Fisher alluded to this in an interview saying ACL refused to allow the club access to the figures which prevented them from reaching an agreement.
Then there is the debt. It's now I believe £1.5 million so u assume this now is £1.2 million. Big issue. Rightly in my view the club won't pay it.
That is my interpretation of the statement.
Nothing in the statement is a lie the devil is in the detail.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
If they want anything in these negotiations then it is an independant taker of minutes as the versions both sides come out with are not compatible, so one or other or both sides are lying.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I never said that - my point it both sides are politicking, telling us what they want us to hear.
We don't know the ins and outs of the deal.
I am on neither side, I just want what is best for the football club.
Regarding the was it or wasn't it debate , the actual rent requested was and is 400k.. Not 150, its all there in black and white
but ACL are using match day revenue to highlight that annual rent could effectively be reduced to 150k net... And therein lies the problem , other clubs already keep match day revenues , and they pay around 150k before they make that money from food and beverage.. so giving us a rent of 400k and then telling us we can have the food costs to reduce this rent down to 150k is just the same as any other club being charged 400k rent ! Far too much
ACL are trying to make it appear like a great deal by butting the lines and offsetting other income ... We need a rent of 150k And the ability to benefit from match day revenue, the same as other clubs
but ACL are using match day revenue to highlight that annual rent could effectively be reduced to 150k net... And therein lies the problem , other clubs already keep match day revenues , and they pay around 150k before they make that money from food and beverage.. so giving us a rent of 400k and then telling us we can have the food costs to reduce this rent down to 150k is just the same as any other club being charged 400k rent ! Far too much
ACL are trying to make it appear like a great deal by butting the lines and offsetting other income ... We need a rent of 150k And the ability to benefit from match day revenue, the same as other clubs
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
They were allowed full access to the figures confirmed by Peter.
It is good to have a debate which brings out both sides iof the argument
Keep it up Grendel.
Unfortunately your points always seems to trace back to source ...... TF's lies
It is good to have a debate which brings out both sides iof the argument
Keep it up Grendel.
Unfortunately your points always seems to trace back to source ...... TF's lies
Last edited:
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I agree Stu I want the best for the football club.
However I also want to know the truth.
Yes politicians have lied in the past.
However to throw that in as a reason why ACL are lying on this occasion does not cut it with me.
Look at everything you have heard so far and make a judgement call.
Do not dismiss DR Martin Reeves comments on the basis that other politicians have lied in the past.
He should not be tarred in that way unless he has.
We have all the people from ACL including PWKH
Telling us what happened in that meeting.
PWKH has always been straight with us on here and acted very professionally
I am happy TF agreed then back tracked and is now lying.
Last edited:
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
You don't know for a fact that things ACL haven't twisted things or lied about things in the past.. In truth I don't trust them, the council or SISU
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Are you happy that TF shook hands with all three directors.
Said we have a deal then walked away got his mind changed replied with an email threatening to build a new football stadium?
Because whatever the exact figure was in that meeting TF was very happy with it and agreed to it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately you have read an ACL statement and concluded the rent is £150,000. The statement was deliberately worded to create the impression.
The rent is £400,000.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
He has already said he agreed the figure and that figure was £400,000 you're arguing with yourself now.
Sky Blues
Active Member
I don't have the inclination to listen again right now, but it's there on the breakfast show listen again bit on the CWR website about 2hr45mins (or slightly earlier).
As PWKH said he wants to release his notes, we might draw our own conclusions about who does not want those notes released.
As you say, the lack of information simply hurts the fans.
Lord_Nampil
Well-Known Member
And that's the problem with the whole situation, Trust in the deal! the 3rd party is the only wy forward and should have been done ages ago, I think the council have lt thus drag on to long! Leaving it to ACL seems to me being the wrong decision!