ryb1983ccfc
New Member
I have thought for long periods about this our club is Coventry city not walsall sky blues so will everybody at sisu get the message? Probably but they won't care!
ok whatever
Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
So whats a real fan then?Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
<br />Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
So whats a real fan then?
You tell me, backing a joint venture company over your club isn't a good start (not directly aimed at you, just a general comment).
Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
No it won't...what a pathetic thing to say! I like many others support Coventry City purely because of the Coventry bit in the name. If we're moved out of the city permanantly or even long term then we'll cease to be Coventry City anymore. You can sit back smugly, safe in the knowledge that you backed the owners in their mission to destroy our club all the way. You're right though I guess, it will separate the real fans from the rest.
I guess if you were from Wimbledon you'd be supporting MK Dons now...
Get yourself some sort of badge.
Do people not understand the meaning of 'temporary'? Clearly it isn't a permanent move and actually, if you look at the reaction of a possible ground share, it isn't 'I can't go because I can't get there' which would be fair enough, I probably won't get a ST because I wouldn't be able to go as often as I like, but I'd go whenever I can, but the majority of the feeling is not going purely in protest of SISU, if SISU are planning on building a new stadium whilst temporarily ground sharing with a team for 2-3 seasons, if anything, it would indicate they have a long-term plan for the club and our permitted, why would you waste that kind of money if that wasn't the case?
Supporting owners that destroyed the club? Have they been as destructive as the McGinity, Richardson regimes? I don't think so. Oh, what about the regime led by Elliott who couldn't pay transfer fees 'contractually obliged to pay' as well as being the man who brought SISU here? Yet many want him back? :thinking about:
SISU are on a mission to destroy the club? That made me chuckle, it isn't true and yet another wild conspiracy, but sadly, we have gullible supporters who'd hope on that bandwagon. Clearly they're not because if they wanted to that, they'd justice and go and not support the club financially, it's a lot quicker and cheaper to that than to bring 20 players in last season, whilst paying their wages as well as the other costs of running the club... :laughing:
Irrelevant, we're not franchising the club elsewhere, it's a temporary move, it'd be like Brighton, if anything.
Scaremongering can be effective when speaking to a gullible audience.
Would this type of spat be the pre -curser to a two team city ,now thats a question worth asking.
Do people not understand the meaning of 'temporary'? Clearly it isn't a permanent move and actually, if you look at the reaction of a possible ground share, it isn't 'I can't go because I can't get there' which would be fair enough, I probably won't get a ST because I wouldn't be able to go as often as I like, but I'd go whenever I can, but the majority of the feeling is not going purely in protest of SISU, if SISU are planning on building a new stadium whilst temporarily ground sharing with a team for 2-3 seasons, if anything, it would indicate they have a long-term plan for the club and our permitted, why would you waste that kind of money if that wasn't the case?
Supporting owners that destroyed the club? Have they been as destructive as the McGinity, Richardson regimes? I don't think so. Oh, what about the regime led by Elliott who couldn't pay transfer fees 'contractually obliged to pay' as well as being the man who brought SISU here? Yet many want him back? :thinking about:
SISU are on a mission to destroy the club? That made me chuckle, it isn't true and yet another wild conspiracy, but sadly, we have gullible supporters who'd hope on that bandwagon. Clearly they're not because if they wanted to that, they'd justice and go and not support the club financially, it's a lot quicker and cheaper to that than to bring 20 players in last season, whilst paying their wages as well as the other costs of running the club... :laughing:
Ok, when Sisu return their football club to our City then I shall resume supporting them.
If sisu built a new stadium for 20 million quid, they won't, but say they do. They would end up with a league 1 side if we're fortunate enough to avoid relegation, with up to 100 million pounds worth of debt. A reduced amount of medal wearing 'real' fans and so not this great cash cow you allude to. It's not a great long term plan is it really?
Well it's more sustainable than paying 1.28m p/a whilst getting no revenue from it, in essence, we've been paying around 1.3-1.8m p/a because we get no revenue (I've put a 500k approx difference because attendance were high to start with, now are low, so it's worth less than when we first moved in) from the RICOH, in the long-term anyway, which people criticise SISU most for, for not having a LT plan.
We'll see about that, it's like the boycotters, they say it's out of principle, they just can't be bothered, if you were THAT bothered, then you would still go games to support the club and you'd vent your discontent into singing SISU out songs etc.
If people are willing to go to an away game the other side of the country, then to not go to Brum for a 'home game' is a bit OTT, you can catch a bus to Brum, about £2, or a train ticket for £5, less expensive than say getting a taxi from town to the RICOH or a nearby pub.
Well it's more sustainable than paying 1.28m p/a whilst getting no revenue from it, in essence, we've been paying around 1.3-1.8m p/a because we get no revenue (I've put a 500k approx difference because attendance were high to start with, now are low, so it's worth less than when we first moved in) from the RICOH, in the long-term anyway, which people criticise SISU most for, for not having a LT plan.
There are hardly any supporters left as it is. Sisu are on a mission to make money. Nothing more, nothing less. They are a hedge fund,it's whats it's all about. They don't care where CCFC are playing as long as they can make money.Long term if they can recoup money there is no doubt about it they will. It doesnt matter about any of us supporters it's all about money.
To say you are paying more because you are not receiving an income is a good way of massaging the figures. We all know that we must part own /own the ricoh going forward. it's the way that Sisu went about trying to achieve that, which lost me.Well it's more sustainable than paying 1.28m p/a whilst getting no revenue from it, in essence, we've been paying around 1.3-1.8m p/a because we get no revenue (I've put a 500k approx difference because attendance were high to start with, now are low, so it's worth less than when we first moved in) from the RICOH, in the long-term anyway, which people criticise SISU most for, for not having a LT plan.
No its not.
10k people paying £15 a ticket x23 games gives an income of £3.45m minus £1.3m rent is £2.15m
5k people (if were lucky) paying £15 a ticket x 23 games (rent free) gives an income of £1.72m
Well it's more sustainable than paying 1.28m p/a whilst getting no revenue from it, in essence, we've been paying around 1.3-1.8m p/a because we get no revenue (I've put a 500k approx difference because attendance were high to start with, now are low, so it's worth less than when we first moved in) from the RICOH, in the long-term anyway, which people criticise SISU most for, for not having a LT plan.
I would travel Lands End to John O'Groats to watch my team at an away game, but I will state now I will not watch a home game outside of this City under any circumstances.
If you don't understand the principle of why then its pointless me even trying to explain it to you.
You really believe that SISU have any intention of building a new stadium and with it a long term plan!!! You aren't serious are you? If there was even a chance of it happening, which I think even those that haven't been as vocal in their criticism of them have conceded is extremely unlikely, who do you think will invest in them to build it with their record in football up to now? I must admit it's been a bad day for CCFC (That's COVENTRY City Football Club btw a fact that seems to have been lost on you tonight) but you have cheered me up with your juvenile naivety tonight. Absolutely priceless!
You think PH4 wouldn't want to make profit from the club? Are you that naive? Texan (USA, land of slaves to money) property developer (do I need to explain this?) - obviously in it for the money, why do you think people invest? To make a loss? Please. Why do you think he wants to secure a 50% share in ACL before a takeover is agreed!?
I'm not hating on PH4, I hope he's legit, but don't go on about the 'Mayfair hedge fund' only wanting profit because that's exactly what PH4 is about, he'd want the land surrounding the RICOH to develop it (property developer?) to make a profit (shocker) - for the exact reasons as SISU.
English football doesn't care about the fans, why do you think they milk our money!? Bayern Munich have the cheaper adults ST (£104, that £91 cheaper than my concession ST for L1 football, and considering our form, I feel ripped off) than anyone in the football league (and a lot of non-league I bet).
</p>Good for you, I guess this will separate the real CCFC fans from the rest.
To say you are paying more because you are not receiving an income is a good way of massaging the figures. We all know that we must part own /own the ricoh going forward. it's the way that Sisu went about trying to achieve that, which lost me.