Yorkshire SB
Well-Known Member
Due to becoming generally disenchanted with all things Coventry City, I have avoided this forum for a good few months.
However, I have just read the entire thread created by the user I shall name, 'Coffee', and thought I could review it's contents for my own understanding and possibly other's.
Sidenote - it was disappointing to see Coffee ridiculed in an often petty, childish manner for hosting an opinion that differed to the majority.
First of all, SISU inherited (saved us from Admin at the final hour) a mess. The club was hemorrhaging money (rent, players wages). I remember hearing that for us to break-even we would have to have an average attendance of around 23k a week, or something like that. Clearly they have supported the losses throughout the years, but this has affected how much money they are able to invest into the side, both regarding transfers and wages. This lack of investment has been reflected in our flailing ambition, league performance and eventual relegation.
Evidently the rent situation, prior to the fall out, was generous towards ACL. Consequently their lack of cooperation when negotiating a lower rent agreement is unsurprising. I read a lot of comments which questioned why SISU were not agreeing a lower rent agreement or continuing to seek to purchase half of the stadium. This is for me where the issue lies. SISU are a company built upon investment, who will have to justify major business decisions to their investors. I believe SISU genuinely began the rent talks with the intention of negotiating a deal to purchase the stadium. They have been at this club long enough to know what they need to make this club sustainable and ultimately profitable. After numerous negotiations it is clear that ACL are not willing to sell the stadium at an acceptable price, or one that is a rationale economic decision for SISU, and SISU do not want to continue renting the stadium as this will not generate the capital they need.
Obviously there isn't a single fan that wants to see the club playing outside of the city. However, the business relationship between ACL and SISU is beyond reconciliation. SISU cannot continue to wait around paying rent on a stadium that will never be theirs, their investors will not allow it. Nor will ACL allow SISU to continue playing at the ricoh whilst they build a new stadium for the club.
Therefore the alternative is to play at another ground whilst a ground is built that SISU will own. By this method there will be a plan in place for SISU to recover their lost capital, which will remain unachievable by staying at the ricoh.
The issues are whether SISU are acting on behalf of their best interests or the club's, and will they own the new stadium or will the Club. Whilst SISU own us I think we have to accept that this is as close as we will get to owning our own stadium, and that their best interests are somewhat inherently linked to our own.
I may be completely off the money here and appear a bit ignorant to the bigger picture, as I haven't followed this forum much over the previous weeks, but the way I see it whilst SISU own us, we will not play at the ricoh. If we could change owners then great, we'd be back at the ricoh, paying over the odds for ACL's share in the ground and on our way back to the Championship in a sustainable situation, but we're not. SISU want a return on their investment and therefore will move the club outside of Coventry until the new stadium is built. I believe this will happen regardless of where 7 thousands fans turn up at Sixfields or 1 thousand.
However, I have just read the entire thread created by the user I shall name, 'Coffee', and thought I could review it's contents for my own understanding and possibly other's.
Sidenote - it was disappointing to see Coffee ridiculed in an often petty, childish manner for hosting an opinion that differed to the majority.
First of all, SISU inherited (saved us from Admin at the final hour) a mess. The club was hemorrhaging money (rent, players wages). I remember hearing that for us to break-even we would have to have an average attendance of around 23k a week, or something like that. Clearly they have supported the losses throughout the years, but this has affected how much money they are able to invest into the side, both regarding transfers and wages. This lack of investment has been reflected in our flailing ambition, league performance and eventual relegation.
Evidently the rent situation, prior to the fall out, was generous towards ACL. Consequently their lack of cooperation when negotiating a lower rent agreement is unsurprising. I read a lot of comments which questioned why SISU were not agreeing a lower rent agreement or continuing to seek to purchase half of the stadium. This is for me where the issue lies. SISU are a company built upon investment, who will have to justify major business decisions to their investors. I believe SISU genuinely began the rent talks with the intention of negotiating a deal to purchase the stadium. They have been at this club long enough to know what they need to make this club sustainable and ultimately profitable. After numerous negotiations it is clear that ACL are not willing to sell the stadium at an acceptable price, or one that is a rationale economic decision for SISU, and SISU do not want to continue renting the stadium as this will not generate the capital they need.
Obviously there isn't a single fan that wants to see the club playing outside of the city. However, the business relationship between ACL and SISU is beyond reconciliation. SISU cannot continue to wait around paying rent on a stadium that will never be theirs, their investors will not allow it. Nor will ACL allow SISU to continue playing at the ricoh whilst they build a new stadium for the club.
Therefore the alternative is to play at another ground whilst a ground is built that SISU will own. By this method there will be a plan in place for SISU to recover their lost capital, which will remain unachievable by staying at the ricoh.
The issues are whether SISU are acting on behalf of their best interests or the club's, and will they own the new stadium or will the Club. Whilst SISU own us I think we have to accept that this is as close as we will get to owning our own stadium, and that their best interests are somewhat inherently linked to our own.
I may be completely off the money here and appear a bit ignorant to the bigger picture, as I haven't followed this forum much over the previous weeks, but the way I see it whilst SISU own us, we will not play at the ricoh. If we could change owners then great, we'd be back at the ricoh, paying over the odds for ACL's share in the ground and on our way back to the Championship in a sustainable situation, but we're not. SISU want a return on their investment and therefore will move the club outside of Coventry until the new stadium is built. I believe this will happen regardless of where 7 thousands fans turn up at Sixfields or 1 thousand.