Sisu - it's always somebody elses fault (5 Viewers)

elephanttears

New Member
Why would the council want it without CCFC to play in it? Genuine question BTW


They want it and with CCFC to play in it, its a long term revenue stream. I dont think they want Sisu to even get half of it. Because they know they will then be looking for the other half.
 

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Fisher said that since April ACL has received £800K from the club. Some have said this is not true and laughable. I said I look forward to hearing ACL stating they haven't received that amount.

He was clear in stating they had paid that value in rent. Clearly rent. The court order suggests his recollection may be troubled in that regard
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
They want it and with CCFC to play in it, its a long term revenue stream. I dont think they want Sisu to even get half of it. Because they know they will then be looking for the other half.
So why would that be worse than where we are at now?
 

elephanttears

New Member
Does anyone think its morally right that Coventry Council are set to cut 800 jobs over the next 2 years but on the other hand bail out ACL to the tune of 14 Million pounds.
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
Does anyone think its morally right that Coventry Council are set to cut 800 jobs over the next 2 years but on the other hand bail out ACL to the tune of 14 Million pounds.
You haven't answered my question. You have changed the subject .. Like a politician!
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
Elephant,
Why would the council getting control of the Ricoh with CCFC in it (cannot see why the council would want this scenario, but anyway...) be worse than SISU?
 

elephanttears

New Member
Elephant,
Why would the council getting control of the Ricoh with CCFC in it (cannot see why the council would want this scenario, but anyway...) be worse than SISU?

Sorry im behind you here!

Because them controlling the Ricoh with us in it gives them an indefinite revenue stream. The Ricoh without CCFC in it does not, the stadium would go to ruin.
 

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Bollocks, in reality its all the same pot. If they cant afford to keep employees they they cant afford the Ricoh either.

One is operating budget. The other comes from a fund they can borrow from at low rates, then charge ACL a greater value thereby making money.

It's not all one great pot. Pensions for example would be different yet again
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
Elephant,
If the council want the Ricoh with CCFC in it, why would that be worse than what we have now with SISU?
That was my question.
 

elephanttears

New Member
One is operating budget. The other comes from a fund they can borrow from at low rates, then charge ACL a greater value thereby making money.

It's not all one great pot. Pensions for example would be different yet again

Where has it been disclosed that this is where the money has come from?
 

elephanttears

New Member
Elephant,
If the council want the Ricoh with CCFC in it, why would that be worse than what we have now with SISU?
That was my question.

Because CCFC is currently SISU like it or not. At least some of the revenue would be put back in to CCFc by sisu as the more successful the football team is the more money they make. I dont care if sisu take money from the club as long as it makes us more successful. Do you not think the Glaziers take from united?
 

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Where has it been disclosed that this is where the money has come from?

At the time of the deal. A central fund from which they can borrow at very low rates. They have back to back lent to ACL at a higher rate than they pay, therefore making money for the council. ACL got better rates than they were getting from their bankers: so in theory it's a win:win. Unless your name is Fisher
 

elephanttears

New Member
At the time of the deal. A central fund from which they can borrow at very low rates. They have back to back lent to ACL at a higher rate than they pay, therefore making money for the council. ACL got better rates than they were getting from their bankers: so in theory it's a win:win. Unless your name is Fisher

So who owns this central fund, government?
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
Sorry elephant, you still haven't explained why SISU would be better than your alleged cunning plan of a council owned club?
Unlikely, but you need to explain why this would be worse.
 

davebart

Active Member
Because CCFC is currently SISU like it or not. At least some of the revenue would be put back in to CCFc by sisu as the more successful the football team is the more money they make. I dont care if sisu take money from the club as long as it makes us more successful. Do you not think the Glaziers take from united?

Unfortunately neither side really want to run a football club. Yes SISU control CCFC but they wish they didn't have to. They wish they could access their money and run.

Unfortunately that doesn't bode well in negotiations when they want a share of the stadium. ACL must be concerned that they could put CCFC into admin at any time.

I cannot see any way out of this. Even if SISU get a very favourable deal it will not make the club profitable (or even stable). Long term the club will eventually hit the buffers.
 

davebart

Active Member
Sorry elephant, you still haven't explained why SISU would be better than your alleged cunning plan of a council owned club?
Unlikely, but you need to explain why this would be worse.

I'm lost now. what is the point? Would the council run the club better than SISU?

The council can't run the club. They have no mandate to do so.
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
Elephant, If the council owned the Ricoh and CCFC you think they would milk it and let it rot. Am I right?
Cannot see it, myself. If such an unlikely event came to pass the council would want to sell it, surely?
Maybe interested parties would then step forward, including part owned by supporters group a possibility, don't you think?
The 'bore off' comment was unnecessary, as I am not trying a windup, mine are genuine questions.
 

mattylad

Member
When I quoted a half share to be £10m. I was shouted down about not having proof, and was told it was more like £6m.
Yet! guess who "Liked" your £15m quote.....1 third of Curly, Larry, and Mo.:facepalm:
I have no proof but years ago someone connected to the club said if you follow the matrix laid out it would cost 15m for half
 

elephanttears

New Member
Elephant, If the council owned the Ricoh and CCFC you think they would milk it and let it rot. Am I right?
Cannot see it, myself. If such an unlikely event came to pass the council would want to sell it, surely?
Maybe interested parties would then step forward, including part owned by supporters group a possibility, don't you think?
The 'bore off' comment was unnecessary, as I am not trying a windup, mine are genuine questions.

Sorry for the comment.

Ive never said the council want to own CCFC, they cant and never will and wouldn't want to. The Council will not let hold of this revenue stream that is the Ricoh Arena thats what im saying. At least if Sisu/CCFC had half ownership some of the revenue would go to the club and with the fair play rules coming in we need that revenue. if we had half ownership you have all the commercial revenues, concerts etc and we would be able do make decisions about the arena itself.
 

oakey

Well-Known Member
You see this is what doesn't ring true for me. The revenue streams from the Ricoh are tiny compared to a council's budget and it seems more likely that CCC want rid of the whole thing but only to a company they trust to keep that part of Coventry improving. The last thing CCC need is aggressive Hedge fund types getting their grubby hands on a large part of the city's image and livelihood. CCC may be wrong but I do not believe their motives are mercenary.
 

davebart

Active Member
Can anyone say whether ACL need the club at all? Do the other revenue streams pay the loan off? In which case they could just close the football pitch down and use the stadium for big events.
 

elephanttears

New Member
You see this is what doesn't ring true for me. The revenue streams from the Ricoh are tiny compared to a council's budget and it seems more likely that CCC want rid of the whole thing but only to a company they trust to keep that part of Coventry improving. The last thing CCC need is aggressive Hedge fund types getting their grubby hands on a large part of the city's image and livelihood. CCC may be wrong but I do not believe their motives are mercenary.

The problem is neither the council or sisu are clear and transparent. No ones really knows whats going on and everyone has their own theory and reasons. I know what your saying but i dont think the Council should have the right to force out the owners of the football club because it doesnt think they are fit to run it, how do they know it wouldn't be successful if it had the proper revenue from the Ricoh?
 

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Can anyone say whether ACL need the club at all? Do the other revenue streams pay the loan off? In which case they could just close the football pitch down and use the stadium for big events.

ACL say they can survive without the club. What might be of more interest is that they have had their accounts signed-off this week, which means their third-party and independent auditors must believe it's a viable concern moving forward; even allowing for the pretty real prospect of the club not being around for much longer.

You may not find this palatable, but it would have been considered by the auditors, and they were still happy to sign off the accounts. Deduce from that what you will
 

elephanttears

New Member
ACL say they can survive without the club. What might be of more interest is that they have had their accounts signed-off this week, which means their third-party and independent auditors must believe it's a viable concern moving forward; even allowing for the pretty real prospect of the club not being around for much longer.

You may not find this palatable, but it would have been considered by the auditors, and they were still happy to sign off the accounts. Deduce from that what you will

Short term ACL will survive, long term all interest would be lost from an Arena that has no team. CCFC would have a stadium of its own which local business would want to be associated with. The Ricoh would be demolished within 10 years due to lack of interest.
 

TheRoyalScam

Well-Known Member
Short term ACL will survive, long term all interest would be lost from an Arena that has no team. CCFC would have a stadium of its own which local business would want to be associated with. The Ricoh would be demolished within 10 years due to lack of interest.

Where would this fictional stadium be, and who would grant the planning permission? You're living in a cloud cuckoo land and going on my 'ignore' list with Grendel and the rest after I've read your answer.
 

elephanttears

New Member
Where would this fictional stadium be, and who would grant the planning permission? You're living in a cloud cuckoo land and going on my 'ignore' list with Grendel and the rest after I've read your answer.

Well if we didn't play at the Ricoh we would play somewhere else?

I couldn't give a flying fuck what list im on, keep your seedy little lists to yourself.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top