Your beloved SISU: Why? (3 Viewers)

[rob9872]

Well, go on then - find an investor who will happily give you £30m and accept a return back of £100k p/a. Assuming compound interest of 5% per year, you are looking at a payback period of 40 years - no financier in their right mind would accept this.

Past consideration bears no relevance. Market value today dictates the terms.
The IT age is a good analogy of this in many formsvover the years that have been updated and make old versions almost worthless and a small return still better than none.

 

---

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Depends on who you believe Andy. Some even in this post have stated that the rent is the main issue.

For me, if we are down to such close agreement, then SISU could sign up and get the admin order lifted. The fact that they haven't tells me that something else is going on, perhaps due to funding from their shareholders. Meanwhile, ACL, reasonably enough, reached the limit of their finite amount of patience. Whether SISU's inability to agree is part of a negotiation strategy or is a genuine problem with funding, ACL have the perception that they can't be messed around further, and it is hard to argue with that.

The problem with dealing with the likes of "balls of steel Seppala" is that they will always take as much as they can get - trying to be objective and unreasonable will always see them trying to get the maximum for themselves, so appeasing them is no good. Being tough and resolute is the only language they understand. ACL have stared them down and exposed TF's posturings as so much bluster

Fisher's public e-mail stated that he was satisfied with the £400k rent offer-he is purely disputing access to revenues, overtly to meet League 1 FFP requirements. With all the empty threats he has issued since this boycott first started, why he would jeapordise the club's future for the sake of an extra £100-200k per year (Mr D. Bell earning that I suspect) is beyond me. Why people back his stance even more so.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Like I have said previously, If an potential owner was to come into discussions with CCC/ACL, there is a chance for whatever reason that they deem that owner to purchase the Arena, SISU/CCFC need the Arena, but ACL/CCC are reluctant to discuss a potential sale not due business but due to there own "Personal" beliefs of SISU and ease tell me SBK, Any new owner coming in could be deemed unfit and improper to hold the responsibility to the Arena which CCFC needs to survive..

How many times do you need to be told mate?....SISU will never buy the Ricoh!
CCC/ACL have a "Duty of Care" to the people of Coventry. SISU will never be sold CCCshares of the Ricoh. The sooner you realise that the better!
CCC have already told SISU this!

 

[CJparker]

Past consideration bears no relevance. Market value today dictates the terms.
The IT age is a good analogy of this in many formsvover the years that have been updated and make old versions almost worthless and a small return still better than none.

That's a convenient attitude. That's like taking out a £10m loan, blowing it on women and speedboats, going bust and then saying "the value of my loan is what I can afford on my changed circumstances, so I will pay £30 now and £0 per month for a very long time".

In the real world, you can't adjust the terms to suit you as you go along.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

How many times do you need to be told mate?....SISU will never buy the Ricoh!
CCC/ACL have a "Duty of Care" to the people of Coventry. SISU will never be sold CCCshares of the Ricoh. The sooner you realise that the better!
CCC have already told SISU this!

Then CCFC are doomed to fail and there is no guarantee that they will sell it too anyone unless you have a written and signed factual document from ACL/CCC to prove otherwise?

 

[rob9872]

That's a convenient attitude. That's like taking out a £10m loan, blowing it on women and speedboats, going bust and then saying "the value of my loan is what I can afford on my changed circumstances, so I will pay £30 now and £0 per month for a very long time".

In the real world, you can't adjust the terms to suit you as you go along.

That's nothing like the argument as it needs to bear market value. I'm not suggesting a bargain jus fair value for money and the sum invested prior is gone. If you pay £1m for a house and the market crashes it is not worth £1m even if your mortgage is for £1m.

 

[CCFC_GT]

Then CCFC are doomed to fail and there is no guarantee that they will sell it too anyone unless you have a written and signed factual document from ACL/CCC to prove otherwise?

Even before SISU came along CCC made it clear its 50% share in the Ricoh was not for sale under any circumstances to any buyer full stop.

 

[CJparker]

That's nothing like the argument as it needs to bear market value. I'm not suggesting a bargain jus fair value for money and the sum invested prior is gone. If you pay £1m for a house and the market crashes it is not worth £1m even if your mortgage is for £1m.

True, but how has the value of the Ricoh diminished, as in your example?

 

[CJparker]

Then CCFC are doomed to fail and there is no guarantee that they will sell it too anyone unless you have a written and signed factual document from ACL/CCC to prove otherwise?

CCC will never sell to SISU... but they may saction the sale of the Higgs share to CCFC, if it was owned by someone other than SISU.

 

[CCFC_GT]

Fisher's public e-mail stated that he was satisfied with the £400k rent offer-he is purely disputing access to revenues, overtly to meet League 1 FFP requirements. With all the empty threats he has issued since this boycott first started, why he would jeapordise the club's future for the sake of an extra £100-200k per year (Mr D. Bell earning that I suspect) is beyond me. Why people back his stance even more so.

I have no sympathy for SISU but for the record the dispute on revenues is not just about an extra £100-200k per year.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I have no sympathy for SISU but for the record the dispute on revenues is not just about an extra £100-200k per year.

What is it about then?

 

[rob9872]

True, but how has the value of the Ricoh diminished, as in your example?

It hasn't but supply and demand has changed. Unnecesary size anf cost fir what is required and what our competitors pay

 

[dadgad]

How many times do you need to be told mate?....SISU will never buy the Ricoh!
CCC/ACL have a "Duty of Care" to the people of Coventry. SISU will never be sold CCCshares of the Ricoh. The sooner you realise that the better!
CCC have already told SISU this!

You 're spot on SBK, but its falling on deaf ears.
Whether they cannot see it or just won't see it is hardly our problem.
Let it go, total waste of energy.

 

[psgm1]

It really astonishes me the depths the pro-sisu side go to to defend the indefensible. They seem oblivious to the blatant brinkmanship of these SiSU people, yet blather on how tyrannical the council are!

As for the lack of a credible alternative nonsense - well SiSU went out of its way to turn down one offer on the table - with absolutely no logical reason as to why! With debts well over £40 million at the time, how on earth can anyone claim the club is undervalued? SiSU went out of its way to ensure anything of value was sold at the earliest of opportunities, whilst at the same time going out of its way to make the event of going to watch football games as unpallatable as possible.

Who for example in their right minds can dare to call themselves a fan, yet support a regime that attacks the very fans that are their lifeblood? How many times have SiSU said they have listened to the fans and are listeneing, yet have changed absolutely nothing?

How can any moral person actually support an organisation, that in effect steals shares from fans who have held those shares for years, offering no payment, and expect to be thanked for doing so?

It is utterly repugnant that these so-called fans (clearly they aren't) claim to have the best interest of the club at heart, yet expect - no demand, that the arena be handed over in effect for free! ACL have bent over backwards throughout this (too much imho) yet SiSU seem to reject out of hand ANY offer, they just want it for free AND the food and drink money!

To those who support SiSU I say leave Coventry city football club, you are not fans and most definitely you are not welcome. Its YOUR KIND that has ruined this club. SiSU are swines, but they don't pretend to be anything else, but those scum who support SiSU are the ones who buy season tickets that allow SiSU to stay and drag the club ever further into the mire. SiSU have no compuntion in blackmailing the true fans of the club on an almost weekly basis. How can you possibly argue there is no alternative to owners who are happy to blackmail the club - a club they clearly haven't invested in. You obviously are either utterly deluded, or worse deliberaately want to harm the club! City doesn't need so-called fans like you, and never will!

Its notable that when finally after 3 years the CET asked SiSU how much of this mythical £40 million SiSu have put into the club (as opposed to mere expenditure which is covered by player sales, ticket sales etc) they are silent - yet only a few weeks ago these same people who demand financial confidentiality, were quite happy to go public saying how poor a state ACL's finances are! Hypocricy - thy name is SiSU.

DO one - and take your deluded apologists with you - city will be far better off without them!

 

[Bennets Afro]

Well said psgm except the season ticket bit. I bought mine not to line sisu pockets but to try and at least have some money coming into the club so they don't have to sell every man and his dog

 

[CCFC_GT]

What is it about then?

The £100-200k figure that keeps getting mentioned is the PROFIT on other match day related revenue that ACL has offered SISU.

The revenue figure itself will be much higher, but for arguments sake unless someone has the actual figure lets assume it is £1M (it was apparently over £1M in the final season at HR). If that £1M revenue was income on SISU books (I am not saying it should be) and not ACL books the implication under FFP rules is that CCFC would this season be able to spend 65% of £1M, i.e. an extra £650k per annum on players wages.

Of course SISU should not just be given access to revenue, they should have to buy the right to it, and I share the concerns of many on here that they are not owners we would choose to have, but they were the only interested party when we were on the verge of going under last time. I don't see what has happened since to make us attractive to new investors, and I hope I am wrong but I do not believe that CCC/ACL will change their position significantly to make the football club an attractive proposition to new investors.

 

[Bluegloucester]

It really astonishes me the depths the pro-sisu side go to to defend the indefensible. They seem oblivious to the blatant brinkmanship of these SiSU people, yet blather on how tyrannical the council are!

As for the lack of a credible alternative nonsense - well SiSU went out of its way to turn down one offer on the table - with absolutely no logical reason as to why! With debts well over £40 million at the time, how on earth can anyone claim the club is undervalued? SiSU went out of its way to ensure anything of value was sold at the earliest of opportunities, whilst at the same time going out of its way to make the event of going to watch football games as unpallatable as possible.

Who for example in their right minds can dare to call themselves a fan, yet support a regime that attacks the very fans that are their lifeblood? How many times have SiSU said they have listened to the fans and are listeneing, yet have changed absolutely nothing?

How can any moral person actually support an organisation, that in effect steals shares from fans who have held those shares for years, offering no payment, and expect to be thanked for doing so?

It is utterly repugnant that these so-called fans (clearly they aren't) claim to have the best interest of the club at heart, yet expect - no demand, that the arena be handed over in effect for free! ACL have bent over backwards throughout this (too much imho) yet SiSU seem to reject out of hand ANY offer, they just want it for free AND the food and drink money!

To those who support SiSU I say leave Coventry city football club, you are not fans and most definitely you are not welcome. Its YOUR KIND that has ruined this club. SiSU are swines, but they don't pretend to be anything else, but those scum who support SiSU are the ones who buy season tickets that allow SiSU to stay and drag the club ever further into the mire. SiSU have no compuntion in blackmailing the true fans of the club on an almost weekly basis. How can you possibly argue there is no alternative to owners who are happy to blackmail the club - a club they clearly haven't invested in. You obviously are either utterly deluded, or worse deliberaately want to harm the club! City doesn't need so-called fans like you, and never will!

Its notable that when finally after 3 years the CET asked SiSU how much of this mythical £40 million SiSu have put into the club (as opposed to mere expenditure which is covered by player sales, ticket sales etc) they are silent - yet only a few weeks ago these same people who demand financial confidentiality, were quite happy to go public saying how poor a state ACL's finances are! Hypocricy - thy name is SiSU.

DO one - and take your deluded apologists with you - city will be far better off without them!

PSGM, I agree with most of what you have said, but you let yourself down by accusing season ticket holders of being Sisu supporting scum.

 

[dadgad]

PSGM1 (above)

Good post. I like passion when it's backed up by a bit of moral fortitude. It smacks of backbone a characteristic with which worms will be unfamiliar.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Someone (Jan I think) posted that it was around 850K and ACL were prepared to cross invoice CCFC so they could count towards FFP turnover, allowing an additional 60% of the 850K figure to be used for salaries (~£500K).

As far as attractiveness is concerned, well ACL have built up a tidy exibition & hotel buisness, buying the club with a half share gets the owners into that. The real buisness issue is that footie clubs are not really profitable, they have to diversify & that probaby means developing other income streams on the adjoining land (wish I could find a map of that).

 

[CCFC_GT]

Someone (Jan I think) posted that it was around 850K and ACL were prepared to cross invoice CCFC so they could count towards FFP turnover, allowing an additional 60% of the 850K figure to be used for salaries (~£500K).

As far as attractiveness is concerned, well ACL have built up a tidy exibition & hotel buisness, buying the club with a half share gets the owners into that. The real buisness issue is that footie clubs are not really profitable, they have to diversify & that probaby means developing other income streams on the 5 acre adjoining land (wish I could find a map of that).

I would be interested to know if Jan can confirm the first paragraph, or if someone can find that post as I missed it.

Point taken on purchasing the THT half share of the Ricoh, as long as there are other investors ready to come in this time, and as long as CCC don't block the sale of this half share to any potential new owners who will again no doubt be seeking to make a profit. As you point out, that profit isn't going to come from the footie club.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The £100-200k figure that keeps getting mentioned is the PROFIT on other match day related revenue that ACL has offered SISU.

The revenue figure itself will be much higher, but for arguments sake unless someone has the actual figure lets assume it is £1M (it was apparently over £1M in the final season at HR). If that £1M revenue was income on SISU books (I am not saying it should be) and not ACL books the implication under FFP rules is that CCFC would this season be able to spend 65% of £1M, i.e. an extra £650k per annum on players wages.

Of course SISU should not just be given access to revenue, they should have to buy the right to it, and I share the concerns of many on here that they are not owners we would choose to have, but they were the only interested party when we were on the verge of going under last time. I don't see what has happened since to make us attractive to new investors, and I hope I am wrong but I do not believe that CCC/ACL will change their position significantly to make the football club an attractive proposition to new investors.

Except is it not the profits which are all ACL can actually give away? If we sold an extra 4,000 STs at an average £250 each there's your extra £1m straight off the bat. If we were successful on the pitch we would not be clamouring so hard for bits and pieces-indeed if we were still in the league above then our total turnover wouldn't be an issue for FFP. The club is an even less attractive proposition, has vastly reduced income, and is a League 1 club, as a direct result of their dire mismanagement.

 

[ashbyjan]

I can confirm it: F & B turnover in 2011/12 was £1,010,992, with Nett Profit of £119,903 but due to drop in attendances this year has lead to a drop in revenue which is expected to be around £650-700k with profit of around £95k ACL have indeed said that they were willing to give their share of the profits (80%) to CCFC as part of the new licence agreement and also to cross invoice the revenue amounts to assist CCFC with their revenue figures for FFP.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I can confirm it: F & B turnover in 2011/12 was £1,010,992, with Nett Profit of £119,903 but due to drop in attendances this year has lead to a drop in revenue which is expected to be around £650-700k with profit of around £95k ACL have indeed said that they were willing to give their share of the profits (80%) to CCFC as part of the new licence agreement and also to cross invoice the revenue amounts to assist CCFC with their revenue figures for FFP.

Excellent Jan, thanks-what more is the club asking for?

 

[ashbyjan]

The club has massively moved goal posts - on top of wanting 100% of all match day revenues for nothing - it almost seems that as ACL get close to giving them everything they ask for they shift tack. Their current demands revolve around simply claiming the unlawfulness of the original agreement and the size of historic internal charges levied by ACL on CCFC for utilities etc. They are then claiming this means that they can offset the unpaid rent against the money owed under the unlawful original licence and overcharged utilities. I think it is this, plus having agreed to the deal in ACL's eyes going back on it completely, the real threat to liquidate CCFC to break the licence and move club out of Cov for 3 years and then to a new ground etc have lead ACL to pursue the administration route. I believe it is now beyond ever agreeing a deal - the trust between the parties is totally destroyed and I can really never see them working together in any way in the future and this is vital if both ACL and CCFC are to prosper. This is a real case of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

It was telling that whilst we were signing people up for the Trust before the game yesterday the number of fans who seemed actually glad we were heading for admin if it meant getting rid of SISU and getting in new owners who would work in partnership with ACL. We must have the only fans who actually want their club to go into admin !!! We have good evidence that there are several interested parties out there, some of whom have made multiple visits to the Ricoh already.

 

[Tonylinc]

The club has massively moved goal posts - on top of wanting 100% of all match day revenues for nothing - it almost seems that as ACL get close to giving them everything they ask for they shift tack. Their current demands revolve around simply claiming the unlawfulness of the original agreement and the size of historic internal charges levied by ACL on CCFC for utilities etc. They are then claiming this means that they can offset the unpaid rent against the money owed under the unlawful original licence and overcharged utilities. I think it is this, plus having agreed to the deal in ACL's eyes going back on it completely, the real threat to liquidate CCFC to break the licence and move club out of Cov for 3 years and then to a new ground etc have lead ACL to pursue the administration route. I believe it is now beyond ever agreeing a deal - the trust between the parties is totally destroyed and I can really never see them working together in any way in the future and this is vital if both ACL and CCFC are to prosper. This is a real case of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

It was telling that whilst we were signing people up for the Trust before the game yesterday the number of fans who seemed actually glad we were heading for admin if it meant getting rid of SISU and getting in new owners who would work in partnership with ACL. We must have the only fans who actually want their club to go into admin !!! We have good evidence that there are several interested parties out there, some of whom have made multiple visits to the Ricoh already.

You may say that this is mad but I too would welcome admin. if only to get rid of these leeches. They are without doubt the worst owners any football club could have. They have no affiliation at all with Coventry or its football club and whilst it is unlikely that we could get Coventry fans as owners; surely nobody could do a worse job????

 

[Spencer]

The club has massively moved goal posts - on top of wanting 100% of all match day revenues for nothing - it almost seems that as ACL get close to giving them everything they ask for they shift tack. Their current demands revolve around simply claiming the unlawfulness of the original agreement and the size of historic internal charges levied by ACL on CCFC for utilities etc. They are then claiming this means that they can offset the unpaid rent against the money owed under the unlawful original licence and overcharged utilities. I think it is this, plus having agreed to the deal in ACL's eyes going back on it completely, the real threat to liquidate CCFC to break the licence and move club out of Cov for 3 years and then to a new ground etc have lead ACL to pursue the administration route. I believe it is now beyond ever agreeing a deal - the trust between the parties is totally destroyed and I can really never see them working together in any way in the future and this is vital if both ACL and CCFC are to prosper. This is a real case of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

It was telling that whilst we were signing people up for the Trust before the game yesterday the number of fans who seemed actually glad we were heading for admin if it meant getting rid of SISU and getting in new owners who would work in partnership with ACL. We must have the only fans who actually want their club to go into admin !!! We have good evidence that there are several interested parties out there, some of whom have made multiple visits to the Ricoh already.

We're not the only club with fans who desire admin. There are lots of fans that think it is a way to shed the debt and build again. Indeed, it can be - but it can be a disaster.

I remember Forest fans saying Dougherty should be forced out. All I, as an outsider, could see was Dougherty had ploughed cash into forest. But, as they hadn't been promoted, in the fans minds it wasn't enough.

Having said that I think there could be a buyer. For as much as I don't like the Ricoh, it is far more impressive than many other grounds (in my opinion).

 

[georgehudson]

a series of excellent posts, & thanks psgm1 for saying what thousands have been thinking for a long time,
& while we're at it let's try & get sisu to explain this, so far never explained £40m,
the c/telegraph. c & w, & several others have tried,
time now for some PROPER investigative journalism,
PUSB

 

[Moff]

PSGM1 (above)

Good post. I like passion when it's backed up by a bit of moral fortitude. It smacks of backbone a characteristic with which worms will be unfamiliar.

Wow 17 pages of horse shit on the same subject being discussed in nearly all the other threads.

Its so tedious now, I forget sometimes we play football, as i just thought we supported SISU or ACL, and actually we no longer have a team.

Perhaps we should all turn up at the court hearing to cheer on our favourite team of lawyers, prosescution or defence.

Oh and the reason I quoted your post Dadgad, is that in all 17 pages in my humble opinion, it is the most ridiculous, calling people who disagree with you worms. :facepalm:

 

[CCFC_GT]

Except is it not the profits which are all ACL can actually give away? If we sold an extra 4,000 STs at an average £250 each there's your extra £1m straight off the bat. If we were successful on the pitch we would not be clamouring so hard for bits and pieces-indeed if we were still in the league above then our total turnover wouldn't be an issue for FFP. The club is an even less attractive proposition, has vastly reduced income, and is a League 1 club, as a direct result of their dire mismanagement.

Please read again - I was not suggesting ACL should give anything away, just clarifying the difference between revenue and profit on revenue.

 

[dadgad]

a series of excellent posts, & thanks psgm1 for saying what thousands have been thinking for a long time,
& while we're at it let's try & get sisu to explain this, so far never explained £40m,
the c/telegraph. c & w, & several others have tried,
time now for some PROPER investigative journalism,
PUSB

Your point re "investigative journalism" is a good one.
Time and time again I feel let down by the CET in this regard.
There have been times when the correct questions were not asked and
certain scenarios were allowed to be played out to the detriment of the club.
Are they frightened? Gutless hacks scared of pissing off their chums??

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The club has massively moved goal posts - on top of wanting 100% of all match day revenues for nothing - it almost seems that as ACL get close to giving them everything they ask for they shift tack. Their current demands revolve around simply claiming the unlawfulness of the original agreement and the size of historic internal charges levied by ACL on CCFC for utilities etc. They are then claiming this means that they can offset the unpaid rent against the money owed under the unlawful original licence and overcharged utilities. I think it is this, plus having agreed to the deal in ACL's eyes going back on it completely, the real threat to liquidate CCFC to break the licence and move club out of Cov for 3 years and then to a new ground etc have lead ACL to pursue the administration route. I believe it is now beyond ever agreeing a deal - the trust between the parties is totally destroyed and I can really never see them working together in any way in the future and this is vital if both ACL and CCFC are to prosper. This is a real case of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

It was telling that whilst we were signing people up for the Trust before the game yesterday the number of fans who seemed actually glad we were heading for admin if it meant getting rid of SISU and getting in new owners who would work in partnership with ACL. We must have the only fans who actually want their club to go into admin !!! We have good evidence that there are several interested parties out there, some of whom have made multiple visits to the Ricoh already.

That's new to my ears-and a little surprising all things considered. Personally I'm stunned it has reached this stage-though then again perhaps not, seeing as we have probably had more media attention this season in L1 than we have since moving to the Ricoh.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Please read again - I was not suggesting ACL should give anything away, just clarifying the difference between revenue and profit on revenue.

Suspect our wires are crossed GT.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Your point re "investigative journalism" is a good one.
Time and time again I feel let down by the CET in this regard.
There have been times when the correct questions were not asked and
certain scenarios were allowed to be played out to the detriment of the club.
Are they frightened? Gutless hacks scared of pissing off their chums??

It took whistleblowing from this forum to get them to probe the ARVO debenture for a start.

 

[CCFC_GT]

The club has massively moved goal posts - on top of wanting 100% of all match day revenues for nothing - it almost seems that as ACL get close to giving them everything they ask for they shift tack. Their current demands revolve around simply claiming the unlawfulness of the original agreement and the size of historic internal charges levied by ACL on CCFC for utilities etc. They are then claiming this means that they can offset the unpaid rent against the money owed under the unlawful original licence and overcharged utilities. I think it is this, plus having agreed to the deal in ACL's eyes going back on it completely, the real threat to liquidate CCFC to break the licence and move club out of Cov for 3 years and then to a new ground etc have lead ACL to pursue the administration route. I believe it is now beyond ever agreeing a deal - the trust between the parties is totally destroyed and I can really never see them working together in any way in the future and this is vital if both ACL and CCFC are to prosper. This is a real case of the whole being bigger than the sum of its parts.

It was telling that whilst we were signing people up for the Trust before the game yesterday the number of fans who seemed actually glad we were heading for admin if it meant getting rid of SISU and getting in new owners who would work in partnership with ACL. We must have the only fans who actually want their club to go into admin !!! We have good evidence that there are several interested parties out there, some of whom have made multiple visits to the Ricoh already.

Thanks Jan for your clarification in this and your previous post. Clearly there is no way back for SISU. Lets hope it all ends well.

 

[rob9872]

Your point re "investigative journalism" is a good one.
Time and time again I feel let down by the CET in this regard.
There have been times when the correct questions were not asked and
certain scenarios were allowed to be played out to the detriment of the club.
Are they frightened? Gutless hacks scared of pissing off their chums??

Some common ground and unity here. Our local paper is disgraceful imo. It should be to serve its community at that level but is like a tabloid devoid of scoops.