well said Tim Fisher (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter ouch
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I'm speechless......:facepalm::facepalm:
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
What words have I put in your mouth?! None.
I don't hate politicians, I'm untrusting of all the political class, like the vast majority of the public at the minute.
Where have I said I trust what SISU say? I haven't, why? Because I don't.
It's a rent issue ATM, not a purchasing one so no, the RICOH wouldn't be handed to 'international capitalist', they be renting it for less, reasonable given the circumstances.
Your analogy is flawed. Why? If that happens, I have more people who will actually rent my house, do ACL? No, it's CCFC or no one, and probably bust for them, so no, they need CCFC whereas we, in theory, could build another stadium or relocate, which, no one wants but it could happen if it came to it, although what we've seen lately are scare tactics.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You make a claim that the people of Coventry have paid for the stadium - have not a clue what they have paid - if anything - and you aren't paying it anyway!
Also you claim no one buys food in the stadium or parks here!!
oakey
Well-Known Member
Grendel, if you read my post I did not claim that no one buys food in the stadium or parks there. When you make inaccurate assertions about my views a debate becomes pointless.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
:facepalm::facepalm:
oakey
Well-Known Member
"You think SISU deliberately set out to destroy CCFC"
I stand corrected those were not words you put into my mouth but thoughts you ascribed to me.
I do not think such a daft thing. Why would I? I have been very neutral about SISU since they took over and try to take a balanced view. However, some of their conduct I find unacceptable. If it turns out to be for the greater good of CCFC then I will, reluctantly, swallow the bad taste it leaves.
Your debating style does not allow reasoned debate so I will not be replying to your further posts on this thread.
I stand corrected those were not words you put into my mouth but thoughts you ascribed to me.
I do not think such a daft thing. Why would I? I have been very neutral about SISU since they took over and try to take a balanced view. However, some of their conduct I find unacceptable. If it turns out to be for the greater good of CCFC then I will, reluctantly, swallow the bad taste it leaves.
Your debating style does not allow reasoned debate so I will not be replying to your further posts on this thread.
oakey
Well-Known Member
You proved my point there, not yours, sorry.
As you're not prepared to read posts or admit you have misrepresented another poster's views I will not be replying to any further posts on this thread.
Last edited:
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
If you're going to quote me, do it properly "I'd guess you think SISU set out to deliberately destroy CCFC", I was 'guessing'.
I have been reasonable, you've put words in that haven't said, I out across a balanced view, just re read the posts, I haven't got nout to be ashamed of.
I guess David Cameron can just say to Ed Millibad 'I won't be replying to your questions because of your debating style'.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
More bull, 11,000 people don't get the opportunity to spend money on food etc, the queues limit access and anyway despite that only a small proportion of attendees actually buy anything.
Anyway, if TF thought that catering figure was realistic he'd snap up the existing deal which includes access to catering revenue as it pushes the sums into the black. What he is actually said is we can't find out what its worth, so heaven knows how you know better?
Your car parking figures are more made up stuff, they don't actually sell out the car park spaces, the coach thing is relatively trivial, the events are nothing to do with the football club so shouldn't be counted, you still have not deducted the cost of resurfacing the car park in 10 years time (or whatever) or renewing the car park markings or providing parking stewards/attendants or administering the parking season ticket system, just employing one manager and part time secretarial support is going to cost more than the £50K you claimed I forgot (if you account properly for tax, pensions, NI & office space and equipment)!
Basically you just doubled the numbers by picking something inappropriate out of the air & ignoring the reasonable issues I already raised.
As far as I can see you are saying ACL should just give up all its revenue streams as a gift to CCFC, what bull crap.
ACL has to be kept as a sustainable business, you are simply proposing killing a well run business to prop up a mismanaged one. It don't wash.
Anyway, if TF thought that catering figure was realistic he'd snap up the existing deal which includes access to catering revenue as it pushes the sums into the black. What he is actually said is we can't find out what its worth, so heaven knows how you know better?
Your car parking figures are more made up stuff, they don't actually sell out the car park spaces, the coach thing is relatively trivial, the events are nothing to do with the football club so shouldn't be counted, you still have not deducted the cost of resurfacing the car park in 10 years time (or whatever) or renewing the car park markings or providing parking stewards/attendants or administering the parking season ticket system, just employing one manager and part time secretarial support is going to cost more than the £50K you claimed I forgot (if you account properly for tax, pensions, NI & office space and equipment)!
Basically you just doubled the numbers by picking something inappropriate out of the air & ignoring the reasonable issues I already raised.
As far as I can see you are saying ACL should just give up all its revenue streams as a gift to CCFC, what bull crap.
ACL has to be kept as a sustainable business, you are simply proposing killing a well run business to prop up a mismanaged one. It don't wash.
Last edited by a moderator:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Ah well I guess there will be a rush on Monday morning between you and Waldorf as to who can make the tea for the ACL chairman first.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I know, but I can knock him back & undermine him with reason
Ho Ho. I attempted to educate you in modelling and forecasting. You have no basis whatsoever to justify any of your statistics. It is clear where your loyalties lie. It is not with the football club. You have no interest in Coventry City at all. I conclude you are an ACL plant on a mission to distabilise the club.
Tad
Member
There all as bad as each other. We're in this mess because some bright spark thought it was clever to move to the Ricoh and pay an absurd amount of rent for the pleasure without thinking of what it means giving up. SISU have gone about this completely wrong. The council, well, don't even get me started. They are the definition of useless. They have to be by far the worst, most unorganised bunch of over paid muppets I've ever seen.
Last edited:
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
If only that was true.
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
Hey, fame at last, they've put your name in the dictionary as part of the definition of "patronising"!
Otis
Well-Known Member
I really don't get all this polarisation. It is simply not all black and white.
I thought Tim Fisher talked a lot of sense yesterday.
By the same token though, he also talked some rubbish to boot.
We merely need to try and get the best solution for Coventry City, but also the best for the city of Coventry.
Just don't get all this 'if you are not with me you're against me' rubbish.
Some sense, some nonsense from Tim Fisher yesterday. It really was that simple if you analyse it honestly and truthfully.
Sent from my KIS using Tapatalk 2
I thought Tim Fisher talked a lot of sense yesterday.
By the same token though, he also talked some rubbish to boot.
We merely need to try and get the best solution for Coventry City, but also the best for the city of Coventry.
Just don't get all this 'if you are not with me you're against me' rubbish.
Some sense, some nonsense from Tim Fisher yesterday. It really was that simple if you analyse it honestly and truthfully.
Sent from my KIS using Tapatalk 2
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
I wonder how much tax payers money has gone into building the Ricoh. I personally would think its very little if any at all.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Who knows.
Do think most sensible City fans realise the rent is too high and that CCFC should get the revenue from food and beverages. It's common sense.
This city needs this football club. This football club cannot survive in its present state.
Common sense needs to prevail here. To talk of building another stadium is just nonsense to my mind. The Ricoh was built for CCFC. It's a great stadium. To move out and have to build a ground elsewhere must seem like bordering on stupidity to any outside party.
Just get the mediation in, come to a decision, get heads together, move forwards from that point on!
Do think most sensible City fans realise the rent is too high and that CCFC should get the revenue from food and beverages. It's common sense.
This city needs this football club. This football club cannot survive in its present state.
Common sense needs to prevail here. To talk of building another stadium is just nonsense to my mind. The Ricoh was built for CCFC. It's a great stadium. To move out and have to build a ground elsewhere must seem like bordering on stupidity to any outside party.
Just get the mediation in, come to a decision, get heads together, move forwards from that point on!
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
The only thing about mediation is that it is a very slow process
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Its to late for mediation its just Grendels son trying delaying tactics again.
Its just his words we won't see any action as normal !!!
Its just his words we won't see any action as normal !!!
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
mediation could be a double edge sword for both parties ............... i also suspect one or other of the parties (even both) will refuse to be bound by it ... just a question of who says it first. It is of course important to know what is being mediated. It would seem that the amount of the rent itself is pretty much agreed by both parties so would seem little point in including that itself...... the sums still outstanding or matchday income that is probably a different matter. LIke I say it all depends what is being mediated, and what will be binding
just some thoughts that might or might not apply
ACL - they could come out of such mediation as reasonable and with the deal pretty much as they have it or it could go against them and such things as the back rent etc could be significantly reduced. It would seem the rights to match day income have been put forward as going to CCFC for nothing but my guess is the need to see the books relates to seeing the cost of those sales (ie purchase, wages, utilities etc). Does that mean ACL have to open all their books for inspection no. Does that mean it has to be done at all no because you could agree a system of fixed or open costs for (purchases, wages, utilities) in which case what does the past matter...... the variable is the amount of sales and that is not actually controlled by ACL but reliant on size of crowds
CCFC - this process could entirely back the argument put forward. CCFC/SISU could win hands down, rent agreed , back rent written off and matchday income secured. However for a mediator to consider the position properly it isnt just ACl that will have to provide accurate, verifiable financial data. It could easily be argued that Deloittes or whoever will have to consider whether CCFC is viable with or without the matchday income, lower rent and debt w/o - be a problem if the mediator concluded that whatever happens CCFC is not a going concern wouldn't it. They may also conclude that a reasonable solution is that indeed CCFC have to pay something for those income rights. The mediator will also have to be wary that a court has judged the debt owed to ACL as valid and that it was uncontested. Doesnt mean because TF suggested it that it will go CCFC's way
Mediation rarely gives one outright winner ...... more it is a reasonable compromise that is benfecial to both businesses, it wont set out or try to result in disadvantaging either ...... and it doesnt have to be binding
Of course before we get to all that the two parties would have to agree the terms of the mediation, what information to be provided and what is to be considered. Past experience suggests that in itself would not be a simple process.
Mediation is a sensible idea ........ but as with everything else in this mess not simple and perhaps not necessarily what it seems to be at first glance
just some thoughts that might or might not apply
ACL - they could come out of such mediation as reasonable and with the deal pretty much as they have it or it could go against them and such things as the back rent etc could be significantly reduced. It would seem the rights to match day income have been put forward as going to CCFC for nothing but my guess is the need to see the books relates to seeing the cost of those sales (ie purchase, wages, utilities etc). Does that mean ACL have to open all their books for inspection no. Does that mean it has to be done at all no because you could agree a system of fixed or open costs for (purchases, wages, utilities) in which case what does the past matter...... the variable is the amount of sales and that is not actually controlled by ACL but reliant on size of crowds
CCFC - this process could entirely back the argument put forward. CCFC/SISU could win hands down, rent agreed , back rent written off and matchday income secured. However for a mediator to consider the position properly it isnt just ACl that will have to provide accurate, verifiable financial data. It could easily be argued that Deloittes or whoever will have to consider whether CCFC is viable with or without the matchday income, lower rent and debt w/o - be a problem if the mediator concluded that whatever happens CCFC is not a going concern wouldn't it. They may also conclude that a reasonable solution is that indeed CCFC have to pay something for those income rights. The mediator will also have to be wary that a court has judged the debt owed to ACL as valid and that it was uncontested. Doesnt mean because TF suggested it that it will go CCFC's way
Mediation rarely gives one outright winner ...... more it is a reasonable compromise that is benfecial to both businesses, it wont set out or try to result in disadvantaging either ...... and it doesnt have to be binding
Of course before we get to all that the two parties would have to agree the terms of the mediation, what information to be provided and what is to be considered. Past experience suggests that in itself would not be a simple process.
Mediation is a sensible idea ........ but as with everything else in this mess not simple and perhaps not necessarily what it seems to be at first glance
AFCCOVENTRY
Well-Known Member
Well didn't CCFC buy the land around the gasworks and then the EU grant was used to develop the area and stadium. Tesco payed a lump for their part. We cocked up and then sold out to Higgs and acl for our land ownership and revenue rights as well as stadium ownership. The money we received were to service out crippling debt from the premiership years. Instead of keeping part ownership of the stadium we did clever things like sign Lee Hughes for £5m! That would have given us a 25% stake in the Ricoh at the time.
If I remember corrrectly the building works over ran and then the council stumped up £2m only?
So all this council non sense about protecting a public asset is a tad over hyped.
Council shouldn't bring running a stadium. It's not like a council sports field. Acl should be making larger profits from non football related income and they don't. Council bailed them out with that loan which belongs to the Coventry tax payer. Sisu have ever right to be aggrieved as there doesn't seem to be much help from the council when it comes to generating income for the sky blues.
What's more important to the people of Coventry. A stadium that runs the odd dog and cat show with a concert every other month or a successful football club which is the lunch pin of the community?
Acl aka council seem to forgot the idea of having this stadium was CCFCs idea. Granted the funding went to pot as Richardson, McGinity and co cocked up in spectacular style. However, we need some help now.
Damn I remember those premiership years and there was a buzz around the city. I loved the walk to Highfield rd with my mates and the buzz and excitement then. The pubs were busy, food outlets doing well. We just don't get that anymore and there doesn't seem to be any pride of affiliation with the Ricoh like we had with Highfield rd. I believe once we get revenue steams and hopefully one day part ownership f the stadium we will get some affiliation with the ricoh.
Lets hope all parties grow up and conclude a sensible outcome which benefits all.
Last edited:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
The outstanding amount is in loans, (ie the £14M the council borrowed to rescue ACL). These are being paid back by ACL from revenue streams they have, originally the loan was £20M. At least it is reducing & a large part of that reduction is due to past rent payments by CCFC.
There is little doubt the council missed a trick as they could have become the guarantor a few years earlier, thus lowered the interest payments and saved ACL even more money so allowing them to move on negotiations with SISU at an earlier stage.
I think they should talk about mediation terms (and it will be no simple matter to agree the ground rules in the first place), but there is no way ACL should suspend legal actions or allow negotiations to move to actual arbtiration until after May when ACL have access to CCFC bank accounts.
Last edited by a moderator:
hutch1972
Well-Known Member
Its a good job that ccc are not like that then:facepalm:
MichaelCCFC
New Member
The critical thing with mediation is that it only works if all parties are willing to be open, work together and are willing to compromise. Events of the last week seem to suggest the opposite of these requirements. If these requirements aren't met then mediation is just a delaying tactic and waste of time. And remember, we're not trying to negitate peace in the Middle East - all that's needed is compromise on pounds, shilings and pence. Yesterday at Bury, I was proud to be a ccfc fan. I didn't know what to expect from supporters or players given Robins and everything else that's happened. But from start to finish the team and fans were brilliant, crayons and all. For the first time in years we've got a decent team, and the play offs are still not impossible. The only thing stopping our progress is acl-sisu-council. There is no practical reason why ACL-sisu could not on Monday morning publish detailed reports in the cov telegraph stating what is on offer, what is wanted and what are the stumbling points. Given all the info that's been put into the public domain any claim of commercial confidentiality is nonsense. Our future depends not on whether acl or sisu are in the 'right', but on the 2 sides co-operating. Arguing about the past is pointless & does not move things forward. When fans are mentioned there's always the right noises made but actions speak a lot louder than words and all this spin is starting to become disrespectful of fans and the team. It's time for acl-sisu-council to stop disrespecting supporters, stop the PR war of words and let's see some positive action. It's the very future of CCFC they're jeopardising. PUSB
magic82ball
New Member
I couldn't give a tom tit if the rent agreement was £20mil pa. SISU signed up to this when they took over the club, they should honour it. If that means the end of CCFC then that is unfortunate but you dont go back on contracts because it no longer suits you. If SISU had the courage of their convictions and stuck with the Ranson blue print, we would have had every chance of being a prem side by now and getting at least 22,000 - and being to renegotiate a rent reduction in a proper way rather than acting like petulant children because ACL and the Council wont play ball. Make no mistake, it is SISU who put us in this position, not ACL!