Million dollar question (17 Viewers)

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I believe he said that ACL had TAKEN £800k from the club .... there's a difference.

No. Clearly he stated rent. Listen again on CWR:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p014rksd

Starts at about 2:10.30....

Specifically the rent discussion begins at 2:16.40 - there or thereabouts:

The interviewer states: 'You're not paying rent'
Fisher: 'We do pay rent, we pay rent every month...'

Listen to the balance and make your own conclusions as to what he's saying

 

---

[torchomatic]

"Mitigation"?! Come on, both sides are as bad as each other.

I agree on that one. It was the net effect on rent and I agree it wasn't the best. That was the one I eluded to at the start.

The only thing I'd say in mitigation is that this statement was made directly after the reneged head of terms issue: and emotion and disappointment must have coloured emotion. It shouldn't have been said as it is misleading though, I agree

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The way torch and Mary are discussing this gives me hope of a resolution. There are too many wise people to see through the shit being served up by sisu and sometimes acl and the council for it to continue. If at first you get an answer that is unfeasible ask again cwr, telegraph, trust!! This is a great club that deserves better than this

For me, you have to sit at the negotiating table looking for an output better than that of your 'opponent'. If this moves to a stance whereby the desired output is to destroy your opponent, that's not a great starting point. And when claims and counter-claims - especially those which are clearly and manifestly untrue and border on slander - come into play; then there's no chanve of a successful outcome. Prides are dented, reputations there to be protected; reason goes out of the window.

Compared to our peers, does our rent look too high? Yes. Knowing what we do of FFS, will additional incomes provide a better chance of compating on the pitch? Yes.

These aren't hard issues to grapple with. But if you set-about achieving such with a belligerent and adversarial attitude, there's a chance it could succeed; but also a chance it could go terribly, terribly wrong

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

"Mitigation"?! Come on, both sides are as bad as each other.

You and I will never agree on that one Torchy

 

[torchomatic]

No, I guess not. <sigh>.

You and I will never agree on that one Torchy

 

[PWKH]

I'm still waiting for ACL to come out and say "we have not received a total of £800K from the football club since April 2012".

Has it?

No it has not received £800,000 from CCFC or Sisu or any combination since April 2012.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

For me, you have to sit at the negotiating table looking for an output better than that of your 'opponent'. If this moves to a stance whereby the desired output is to destroy your opponent, that's not a great starting point. And when claims and counter-claims - especially those which are clearly and manifestly untrue and border on slander - come into play; then there's no chanve of a successful outcome. Prides are dented, reputations there to be protected; reason goes out of the window.

Compared to our peers, does our rent look too high? Yes. Knowing what we do of FFS, will additional incomes provide a better chance of compating on the pitch? Yes.

These aren't hard issues to grapple with. But if you set-about achieving such with a belligerent and adversarial attitude, there's a chance it could succeed; but also a chance it could go terribly, terribly wrong

Completely agree so that's it then acl/CCC wind ccfc holdings up stop strangling us to death use a bullet for Petes sake!!!

 

[Godiva]

No it has not received £800,000 from CCFC or Sisu or any combination since April 2012.

Just to get the facts right, would it be correct to say that:
1) ACL have emptied the escrow for £500k
2) ccfc have spent about £300k in match day expenses

Could you reveal how much ACL have received from ccfc since april last year (if anything)?
And can you reveal if ccfc approached ACL asking for a rent re-negotiation prior to the stop paying?

 

[Jack Griffin]

If you must ask questions, then please answer the one I asked:

What do you think ACL will seek to charge any phoenix club that starts again as a non-league entity? And what could such a club reasonably afford?

What is the bigger lie anyway? Tim Fisher confusing rent payments with financial contributions (perhaps deliberately), or ACL saying the club owe them 1.3 million, when 500K of that was safely deposited in their bank account?

Has ACL gone bust? Firstly, why are you so anal about language, when the facts behind the rhetoric are not that difficult to see. Clearly, things became pretty desperate in terms of pressure from the bank that the council saw fit to settle the loan and offer ACL a lifeline. Gone bust in the sense you and I understand it, no. I haven't seen that statement anyway.

The first point is a) hypothetical & b) how could they on what basis?

The second point a) Fisher isn't confused, he lied b) the club owe £1.3M as has been proved in a court of law. How the 300K matchday fees fit into that I'm not sure, either it comes off that sum or it doesn't, I reckon it probably does.

The final point a) No, they showed a profit every year of operation b) the debts have been rescheduled to be to one of the owners (very much like CCFC paid interest for loans recieved from Geoffery Robinson for many years) c) I can assure you the statment that ACL had gone bust was made on the radio last week, last week the Coventry Telegraph quoted him in similar vein http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ailing-council-owned-business-92746-32878039/

 

[torchomatic]

I'm glad you're around. COuld you answer the following:

1. Who negotiated the rent of the Arena back in 2005 from both sides, ACL and CCFC
2. Who came up with the figure of £1.2M a year and how was it calculated
3. Did CCFC agree straight away or were they reluctant to sign
4. Robinson states in December 2005 that the rent is too high and they are trying to re-negotiate. What happened to the negotiations?

No it has not received £800,000 from CCFC or Sisu or any combination since April 2012.

 

[Jack Griffin]

I'm glad you're around. COuld you answer the following:

1. Who negotiated the rent of the Arena back in 2005 from both sides, ACL and CCFC
2. Who came up with the figure of £1.2 a year and how was it calculated
3. Did CCFC agree straight away or were they reluctant to sign
4. Robinson states in December 2005 that the rent is too high and they are trying to re-negotiate. What happened to the negotiations?

Wasn't Paul Fletcher was chief executive of ACL at that time?

 

[Godiva]

The final point a) No, they showed a profit every year of operation b) the debts have been rescheduled to be to one of the owners (very much like CCFC paid interest for loans recieved from Geoffery Robinson for many years) c) I can assure you the statment that ACL had gone bust was made on the radio last week, last week the Coventry Telegraph quoted him in similar vein http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ailing-council-owned-business-92746-32878039/

He said salaries were due by the end of this month. But he added defiantly: “We’re not here to subsidise a failing council-owned business.”

How is 'had gone bust' equal to 'failing'?

 

[RegTheDonk]

Could you blame her? Why should she and others continue to throw their money at a loss making enterprise, especially when they meet opposition at every turn....

Well she should just sell up then and get the hell out of dodge

 

[SkyBlueBlood]

This not a debate over whether SISU or ACL are good or bad, it is about 2 companies who are playing infantile games that will destroy our club.

 

[torchomatic]

Right on. And then the Tooth Fairy could take over. Or the Easter Bunny maybe.

Well she should just sell up then and get the hell out of dodge

 

[rupert_bear]

Ferret, torchmatic, Grendel any fucker can you let us know where you think over £80 million has been spent on this club since 2007 ?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Well well.

First he suddenly decides to withhold rent when relegation to L1 is a near certainty. Then he rejects repeated offers for lower and lower levels of rent, with outstanding (and accumulating) arrears proposed to be offset by matchday fees and a lengthy repayment. Not happy with this, he spouts the nonsensical idea of the club finding somewhere else to play, and actually contacts the likes of Hinckley to make it appear a concrete idea. Still he didn't stop there-he then went on to suggest that groundsharing was not the only alternative, but the money existed to physically build a new stadium. Now, with each idea having been shown as an empty threat, he decides to dangle the very fate of the club itself as one last attempt to force ACL to give in-though to what, is unclear, with a rent reduction of nearly £1m, a reduced escrow obligation, a decreased arrears figure to repay, amongst other things.

Tim Fisher has been gambling with the club's future ever since he initiated this boycott, and he has made increasingly absurd comments to try and force a conclusion. How anybody here can a) back such a stance and b) insinuate that some of us will be delighted to see his threat come to fruition I have no idea (CJ excluded). He has explicitly lied about the rent payments as he knows that the situation is complex enough for him to get away with it with some supporters-ACL then rose to the bait and lied about the rental offer. This is not defensible either but then again, extremely generous offers have been made, and one still exists, which Timmy refuses to entertain for spurious reasons.

Save yourself some dignity Tim and take the bloody offer.

 

[Godiva]

Well well.

First he suddenly decides to withhold rent when relegation to L1 is a near certainty. Then he rejects repeated offers for lower and lower levels of rent, with outstanding (and accumulating) arrears proposed to be offset by matchday fees and a lengthy repayment. Not happy with this, he spouts the nonsensical idea of the club finding somewhere else to play, and actually contacts the likes of Hinckley to make it appear a concrete idea. Still he didn't stop there-he then went on to suggest that groundsharing was not the only alternative, but the money existed to physically build a new stadium. Now, with each idea having been shown as an empty threat, he decides to dangle the very fate of the club itself as one last attempt to force ACL to give in-though to what, is unclear, with a rent reduction of nearly £1m, a reduced escrow obligation, a decreased arrears figure to repay, amongst other things.

Tim Fisher has been gambling with the club's future ever since he initiated this boycott, and he has made increasingly absurd comments to try and force a conclusion. How anybody here can a) back such a stance and b) insinuate that some of us will be delighted to see his threat come to fruition I have no idea (CJ excluded). He has explicitly lied about the rent payments as he knows that the situation is complex enough for him to get away with it with some supporters-ACL then rose to the bait and lied about the rental offer. This is not defensible either but then again, extremely generous offers have been made, and one still exists, which Timmy refuses to entertain for spurious reasons.

Save yourself some dignity Tim and take the bloody offer.

If you read the opening posts of the 'well, well' thread it is clear that rent reduction is not a new discussion, but has been tried since we moved to Ricoh.
All previous attempts have failed.

The rent strike is a different and much more radical/extreme action, but it has proved to be the only way to get ACL/Council to actually agree to a reduction.

 

[torchomatic]

Read my opening post. Also the Q&A with GR later on. The previous regime thought the rent excessive also and were trying to renegotiate.

Well well.

First he suddenly decides to withhold rent when relegation to L1 is a near certainty. Then he rejects repeated offers for lower and lower levels of rent, with outstanding (and accumulating) arrears proposed to be offset by matchday fees and a lengthy repayment. Not happy with this, he spouts the nonsensical idea of the club finding somewhere else to play, and actually contacts the likes of Hinckley to make it appear a concrete idea. Still he didn't stop there-he then went on to suggest that groundsharing was not the only alternative, but the money existed to physically build a new stadium. Now, with each idea having been shown as an empty threat, he decides to dangle the very fate of the club itself as one last attempt to force ACL to give in-though to what, is unclear, with a rent reduction of nearly £1m, a reduced escrow obligation, a decreased arrears figure to repay, amongst other things.

Tim Fisher has been gambling with the club's future ever since he initiated this boycott, and he has made increasingly absurd comments to try and force a conclusion. How anybody here can a) back such a stance and b) insinuate that some of us will be delighted to see his threat come to fruition I have no idea (CJ excluded). He has explicitly lied about the rent payments as he knows that the situation is complex enough for him to get away with it with some supporters-ACL then rose to the bait and lied about the rental offer. This is not defensible either but then again, extremely generous offers have been made, and one still exists, which Timmy refuses to entertain for spurious reasons.

Save yourself some dignity Tim and take the bloody offer.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

If you read the opening posts of the 'well, well' thread it is clear that rent reduction is not a new discussion, but has been tried since we moved to Ricoh.
All previous attempts have failed.

The rent strike is a different and much more radical/extreme action, but it has proved to be the only way to get ACL/Council to actually agree to a reduction.

Unless Torch can find evidence that discussions have been taking place continuously since 2005, or once since SISU took over in 2007, then this is a blunt argument. They had no problem with it until self inflicted relegation was sealed.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Read my opening post. Also the Q&A with GR later on. The previous regime thought the rent excessive also and were trying to renegotiate.

That doesn't settle as an answer. I'm feeling generous though, so get yourself something nice for lunch.

'Contracts are there to be broken.'^5

 

[Godiva]

Unless Torch can find evidence that discussions have been taking place continuously since 2005, or once since SISU took over in 2007, then this is a blunt argument. They had no problem with it until self inflicted relegation was sealed.

Just to get the facts right, would it be correct to say that:
1) ACL have emptied the escrow for £500k
2) ccfc have spent about £300k in match day expenses

Could you reveal how much ACL have received from ccfc since april last year (if anything)?
And can you reveal if ccfc approached ACL asking for a rent re-negotiation prior to the stop paying?

Well at least I try to obtain some facts, and as you can tell from my question to PWKH I am trying to find the evidence you ask for.

But so far there's no reply.

 

[torchomatic]

I never said continuously. I said the previous regime had wanted to renegotiate too after being in the Ricoh for four months.

Unless Torch can find evidence that discussions have been taking place continuously since 2005, or once since SISU took over in 2007, then this is a blunt argument. They had no problem with it until self inflicted relegation was sealed.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Well at least I try to obtain some facts, and as you can tell from my question to PWKH I am trying to find the evidence you ask for.

But so far there's no reply.

Thing is Godiva that every club pays matchday expenses so it's unreasonable to say that the club should be commended for this. The escrow money was not placed there by the club (and indeed was done to stop it going down a black hole as Jan says), and they are legally obliged to top it back up. If there have been attempts by SISU to negotiate a rental reduction I will gladly eat one of MMM's humble pies, but I somehow doubt it.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I never said continuously. I said the previous regime had wanted to renegotiate too after being in the Ricoh for four months.

Except it's not the previous regime of interest here.

 

[torchomatic]

True. However, my point is that more than one regime has believed the rent to be unsustainable. Also, many have stated that the rent was OK before SISU came so why are they complaining now, etc.

Except it's not the previous regime of interest here.

 

[Grendel]

Ferret, torchmatic, Grendel any fecker can you let us know where you think over £80 million has been spent on this club since 2007 ?

I have answered this 3 times?

£15 million on existing creditors and the business was also losing £6 million a year. Forest under their current owners would have lost £60 million over the sane period.

 

[Grendel]

Thing is Godiva that every club pays matchday expenses so it's unreasonable to say that the club should be commended for this. The escrow money was not placed there by the club (and indeed was done to stop it going down a black hole as Jan says), and they are legally obliged to top it back up. If there have been attempts by SISU to negotiate a rental reduction I will gladly eat one of MMM's humble pies, but I somehow doubt it.

Hull font pay match day expenses

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

True. However, my point is that more than one regime has believed the rent to be unsustainable. Also, many have stated that the rent was OK before SISU came so why are they complaining now, etc.

Fair point, but my counterargument is that SISU have not pushed for a re-negotiation until relegation to L1 became inevitable, over a 5 year period. If there's proof to the contrary I'll retract my point, but do you not think that it would have made sense to address this immediately after taking over?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Hull font pay match day expenses

So who pays for policing?

 

[torchomatic]

I do agree with you. I think SISU royally messed up here. They should have negotiated the rent before taking over the Club when they were in a strong position. I can only presume that relegation and FFP has focussed their minds at long last.

Fair point, but my counterargument is that SISU have not pushed for a re-negotiation until relegation to L1 became inevitable, over a 5 year period. If there's proof to the contrary I'll retract my point, but do you not think that it would have made sense to address this immediately after taking over?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I do agree with you. I think SISU royally messed up here. They should have negotiated the rent before taking over the Club when they were in a strong position. I can only presume that relegation and FFP has focussed their minds at long last.

And when it did, their negotiating methods. Have they helped or hindered progress?

 

[RegTheDonk]

Right on. And then the Tooth Fairy could take over. Or the Easter Bunny maybe.

Don't be daft. Everyone knows they are Villa fans.

 

[skybluehugh]

"Mitigation"?! Come on, both sides are as bad as each other.

So why the feck do you constantly side with our owners. you are never willing to see anyone elses view if it is against them.

 

[skybluehugh]

Right on. And then the Tooth Fairy could take over. Or the Easter Bunny maybe.

they would do a better job of running the club than the current twats.