I can't quite believe what I hear on here from some of you. It is at times so self interesting. Why not look at it the way it is and climb out of the bubble some of you are in and recognise that this is not purely all SISU's fault?
There are culprits that are as much culpable as they are in this whole saga, which was evident the other day with ACL's made that daft statement in a frenzy over preserving football at the Ricoh.
At the end of the day these private companies that own football clubs with the greatest respect in the world for football supporters, will do what is right for them and hopefully by association the right thing for the football club. They can make mistakes, who hasn't trying run football clubs? The end game is still to make money not to lose it.
I have no idea if any other 'preferred' bidder will be any better. In fact I would be very sceptical of it.
Faced with the demise of the football club and poor decisions that helped get us here, SISU have been guilty of a lack of better decision making when it mattered most. Their brash style has not been received well by the council or ACL but the council and ACL have for the most part maintained a combative and unhelpful stance to the football club they should support within their community.
They are all guilty of letting this get to this position. Now it will have to play out. SISU have made plans that we should take seriously, what plan has ACL made exactly?
Suggesting that Tim Fisher does not tell his boss everything is frankly absurd. Of course he does and no doubt gets direction from the top too.
It's become a game of cat and mouse and a whole risk of legal brinkmanship pending if the next step is simply to destroy what's left of the football club and allow outsiders to try and start it all again when the company most likely to succeed are already in place?
The council burnt their bridges against a determined and strongly committed SISU than we all thought. There were ways to deal with each other and both sides should have found that avenue.
I want to see us at the Ricoh, absolutely. But I want the Ricoh to be signed over to the football club (at a premium) on a long established lease that gives the football club the opportunity to do it's business with all the various income streams the stadium can muster. The council should not be in business operating a stadium through a management company on behalf of tax payers who those same taxpayers want to see their football club remain in the community. The councils stance on refusing to adjust to this is the main reason we are where we are now.
Any owner would have had the same issue with the stadium and paying rent to a council (through it's management company) for the use of a stadium and no income from it at a high rent? Other owners may have been less despicably in their methods but the end result would be the same conclusion: sustainability or find another stadium.
imp:
