Mark Robins knew the score..... (1 Viewer)

[edgy]

"I absolutely wish them all the best, they work their socks off and as I've said before that club needs support from Coventry City Council.
I won’t go into specific detail. “There are well-documented things about what’s happening down at Coventry. It is a magnificent club. Potentially huge. “But it needs support to build revenue streams and help from the council.
"That led to a decision to want to speak with Huddersfield and that's how the decision has been arrived at.
"

 

---

[covcity4life]

everyone knows council have a alot of blame to shoulder...well those with brain cells do.

 

[Otis]

Fair comments.

I don't think anyone can deny the council have had a fair bit of input into this whole mess.

 

[diggerdaley]

What do you people want,the Council to give the Ricoh to a bloody hedge fund ?

 

[olderskyblue]

Robins only knew what Tim told him

 

[edgy]

Here we go the Council apologists....

 

[Jack Griffin]

I guess he was going on what he has been told by Fisher & never had access or knowledge of negotiations.

Timmy has been seen to be economical with the truth time after time.

Personally I want to see the truth exposed in court.. we'll only be expressing our opinions & feelings otherwise.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Bring on the JR.....I reckon it won't just be Fisher & Sisu who are found to have been somewhat economical with the truth....

 

[Godiva]

Here we go the Council apologists....

You asked for it ...

 

[Nick]

Robins probably knew a lot more than any member on here (apart from PWKH)

 

[duffer]

Let's be honest - Robins knew nothing other than what TF told him. I'd respect him a lot more if he told the truth, which was that he'd been offered a lot more elsewhere. Didn't even TF allude to that in one of the forums.

Regardless if you're going to use Robins statement as evidence that the council shafted the club, then you're grasping at straws, frankly.

 

[AJB1983]

So basically robins left cos Huddersfield get the money from the pies...

 

[duffer]

To be honest, I think most people have drawn their own conclusions as to who got us into this mess, and the vast majority seem to come out against SISU.

That's hardly surprising, there's a stack of pretty robust evidence against SISU in terms of published accounts, £60m debt, Fisher's contadictory statements, and their stated intentions for the club.

Against the council there's a bit of conjecture, some complaints that the rent was a bit high, and a JR relating to the fact the Council became ACL's lender (thus stopping SISU completing their plan to distresss the asset).

Personally, I'm not going to get pulled into this again - there's nothing new to be said.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Here we go the Council apologists....

From a SISU apologist....

They played a role in providing a venue for the football club they couldn't afford to complete themselves. Yes, the rent thereafter was too high; but in the entire term of SISU's tenure it amounted to £6m.

If the totality of our debt was only £6m; I don't think we'd be in the position we're in now

 

[Buster]

Quoting Robbins in this dispute is a complete red herring . A managers term ( unless you are Moyes or Fergie) is mostly short term .Hence the short term point of view I dont think anyone doubts the fact that if ACL and the council had capitulated to SISU we would be in a rosier position , this year . That doesnt make it right and doesnt make it sense long term .When we hit the buffers again in the future Robbins would have said "thanks im off

 

[jesus-wept]

everyone knows council have a alot of blame to shoulder...well those with brain cells do.[/QUOTEAs you obviously have brain cells who exactly are the council ?

 

[theferret]

From a SISU apologist....

They played a role in providing a venue for the football club they couldn't afford to complete themselves. Yes, the rent thereafter was too high; but in the entire term of SISU's tenure it amounted to £6m.

If the totality of our debt was only £6m; I don't think we'd be in the position we're in now

They played a role yes - and for that (and it was a very small financial commitment in the scheme of things) they assumed total ownership of the freehold of the stadium and a half stake in the management company. They got an awful lot for not very much (about £2 million), and having done so then proceeded to charge the football club £1.2 million a year for partial use of the facility around 25 times a year. But not only that, on those few occasions that the club used the facility, they had to give up a significant proportion of the revenues they generated from their own activities. It was an awful deal, and you have to point the finger at the likes of Robinson and McGinnity for signing up to it, and at SISU for not addressing the issue very early on in their tenure.

I blame SISU for the mess we are in, but you do wonder how different things would be had we all rallied behind the club when the rent dispute first started.

 

[Sisued]

OK....your boss gives you a contract at x amount. your company is taken over and the new boss says i cant pay x you have to take a 60% reduction. You reluctantly agree then your boss refuses to pay the new wage what do you do?

 

[Sisued]

oh i should add that while your boss is saying he cant pay he's already talking to other people about your job that will cost him more than if he pays you.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Here we go the Council apologists....

That being the term for people who don't see things your way?

Odd, so much criticism elsewhere of people being called SISU apologists......

 

[theferret]

oh i should add that while your boss is saying he cant pay he's already talking to other people about your job that will cost him more than if he pays you.

I'm trying my best to understand where you are going with this analogy, but I'm struggling to be honest.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

They played a role yes - and for that (and it was a very small financial commitment in the scheme of things) they assumed total ownership of the freehold of the stadium and a half stake in the management company. They got an awful lot for not very much (about £2 million), and having done so then proceeded to charge the football club £1.2 million a year for partial use of the facility around 25 times a year. But not only that, on those few occasions that the club used the facility, they had to give up a significant proportion of the revenues they generated from their own activities. It was an awful deal, and you have to point the finger at the likes of Robinson and McGinnity for signing up to it, and at SISU for not addressing the issue very early on in their tenure.

I blame SISU for the mess we are in, but you do wonder how different things would be had we all rallied behind the club when the rent dispute first started.

Let's be clear, CCC don't charge 'the club' £1.2m per annum. It's ACL. Related, but different.

I certainly and absolutely agree with your latter sentence. If SISU's ultimate ambition wasn't to distress ACL into submission; but to pay a fair rent, or pay a fair value for the arena and unify all income streams; I'd be right behind them. That ambition, clearly stated and articulated the fans would have everyone marching on the council buildings.

But it's not. It's clearly just not

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

They played a role yes - and for that (and it was a very small financial commitment in the scheme of things) they assumed total ownership of the freehold of the stadium and a half stake in the management company. They got an awful lot for not very much (about £2 million), and having done so then proceeded to charge the football club £1.2 million a year for partial use of the facility around 25 times a year. But not only that, on those few occasions that the club used the facility, they had to give up a significant proportion of the revenues they generated from their own activities. It was an awful deal, and you have to point the finger at the likes of Robinson and McGinnity for signing up to it, and at SISU for not addressing the issue very early on in their tenure.

I blame SISU for the mess we are in, but you do wonder how different things would be had we all rallied behind the club when the rent dispute first started.

I can only speak for myself, but the reason that I didn't "rally behind the club when the rent dispute first started" was because of the appalling way SISU handled the "negotiations".

At the time, when others were praising SISU's tough negotiating stance, I predicted that it would all end very badly.

I am very unhappy to have been proven correct on this.

 

[theferret]

Let's be clear, CCC don't charge 'the club' £1.2m per annum. It's ACL. Related, but different.

I certainly and absolutely agree with your latter sentence. If SISU's ultimate ambition wasn't to distress ACL into submission; but to pay a fair rent, or pay a fair value for the arena and unify all income streams; I'd be right behind them. That ambition, clearly stated and articulated the fans would have everyone marching on the council buildings.

But it's not. It's clearly just not

I appreciate the distinction, and it is an important one I agree.

The problem now of course is even if SISU were to backtrack and articulate such an ambition, it would be too late anyway. I think we are past the point of no return. Could all have been very different like you say.

 

[theferret]

I can only speak for myself, but the reason that I didn't "rally behind the club when the rent dispute first started" was because of the appalling way SISU handled the "negotiations".

I think that's perfectly fair. I'm not denying that for one minute, and that is the frustrating thing. They had a very good case, and had they gone about things in a reasonable and non-confrontational manner, they might have kept everyone onside.

Their instinct though is to bully and threaten, and they are clearly the architects of their own downfall in this case.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

I think that's perfectly fair. I'm not denying that for one minute, and that is the frustrating thing. They had a very good case, and had they gone about things in a reasonable and non-confrontational manner, they might have kept everyone onside.

Their instinct though is to bully and threaten, and they are clearly the architects of their own downfall in this case.

I agree with you all the way.

I said at the time that they had a weak legal case, but a strong moral one.

Just handled it so very very badly.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

Robins probably knew a lot more than any member on here (apart from PWKH)

Why? He was the manager he wasnt a director or one of the board of the club or Sisu why would he know any more than me or you?

 

[fernandopartridge]

I guess he was going on what he has been told by Fisher & never had access or knowledge of negotiations.

Timmy has been seen to be economical with the truth time after time.

Personally I want to see the truth exposed in court.. we'll only be expressing our opinions & feelings otherwise.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the council have the club's best interests at heart

 

[WiganSkyBlue]

everyone knows council have a alot of blame to shoulder...well those with brain cells do.

Everyone knows that without the council the RICOH would never have been built ... well those with brain cells do. Why should a valuable asset belonging to the council tax payers of Coventry be handed over to a hedge fund with, as they have amply demonstrated, absolutely no affinity with the city or the surrounding area of Warwickshire.

 

[Seyeclops666]

There is no evidence whatsoever that the council have the club's best interests at heart

Most of them are City fans and several were season ticket holders - can you tell me if Joy and Fisher were regulars at the City for the last 30+ years?? They have desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club with the interests of the the Tax payers - may I remind you that even at our best we werent getting more than 20K attending - the council are trying to take account of the other 300K+ residents too.

 

[theferret]

Most of them are City fans and several were season ticket holders - can you tell me if Joy and Fisher were regulars at the City for the last 30+ years?? They have desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club with the interests of the the Tax payers - may I remind you that even at our best we werent getting more than 20K attending - the council are trying to take account of the other 300K+ residents too.

But seeing as little or no taxpayers money ever went in to the stadium, why should that be of concern? Of course they need to keep it viable because they need to be sure that ACL can continue to meet their obligations in terms of repayments, but otherwise what responsibility do they have to council tax payers? The stadium was built for CCFC, and they were the driving force behind it right up until the last minute, having done much of the legwork and helped put in place much of the funding. It was just unfortuante that there was a funding shortfall at the end and the council secured a loan to bridge it - and for that the club lost complete control of a project they had taken from nothing to very nearly the point where the first spade entered the ground. It was a travesty really.

I can't really see much evidence of the council having 'desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club'. That some key figures on the council support the club is undeniable, that SISU acted appallingly during negotiations is undeniable. That said, when all this is done and dusted, I very much hope there is some sort of internal investigation at CCC that asks if things could have been done differently because as far as I am concerned they have a lot of questions to answer.

Oh, and a minor point, we averaged over 20K in our first 2 seasons, suggesting we were regularly getting over 20K.

 

[Seyeclops666]

But seeing as little or no taxpayers money ever went in to the stadium, why should that be of concern? Of course they need to keep it viable because they need to be sure that ACL can continue to meet their obligations in terms of repayments, but otherwise what responsibility do they have to council tax payers? The stadium was built for CCFC, and they were the driving force behind it right up until the last minute, having done much of the legwork and helped put in place much of the funding. It was just unfortuante that there was a funding shortfall at the end and the council secured a loan to bridge it - and for that the club lost complete control of a project they had taken from nothing to very nearly the point where the first spade entered the ground. It was a travesty really.

I can't really see much evidence of the council having 'desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club'. That some key figures on the council support the club is undeniable, that SISU acted appallingly during negotiations is undeniable. That said, when all this is done and dusted, I very much hope there is some sort of internal investigation at CCC that asks if things could have been done differently because as far as I am concerned they have a lot of questions to answer.

Oh, and a minor point, we averaged over 20K in our first 2 seasons, suggesting we were regularly getting over 20K.

Thanks for pointing that out - my mistake.

I understand what you are saying but I had dealings with some of these people (to be clear I don't work for CCC - I live and work in London and have since 2000) and they seemed to be agonising about what to do. They were prepared to sanction the Higgs Trust half to be sold at cost to CCFC but they started to be very concerned about SISU and every dealing with them reconfirmed their fears (as well as lack of faith in discussing reduced rent, failure to submit accounts, transfer embargoes etc etc) - to the point that they didnt feel SISU had the best interests of CCFC at heart and were actually a dangerous and dodgy bunch of sharks only interested in the stadium. I see that as responsible and trying to balance the needs of CCFC and the wider population. I have it on authority that should someone more worthy get CCFC then a deal is there to be done to put the club on a sustainable footing - it just wont be with SISU (and I for one agree with them on that)!!

 

[theferret]

Thanks for pointing that out - my mistake.

I understand what you are saying but I had dealings with some of these people (to be clear I don't work for CCC - I live and work in London and have since 2000) and they seemed to be agonising about what to do. They were prepared to sanction the Higgs Trust half to be sold at cost to CCFC but they started to be very concerned about SISU and every dealing with them reconfirmed their fears (as well as lack of faith in discussing reduced rent, failure to submit accounts, transfer embargoes etc etc) - to the point that they didnt feel SISU had the best interests of CCFC at heart and were actually a dangerous and dodgy bunch of sharks only interested in the stadium. I see that as responsible and trying to balance the needs of CCFC and the wider population. I have it on authority that should someone more worthy get CCFC then a deal is there to be done to put the club on a sustainable footing - it just wont be with SISU (and I for one agree with them on that)!!

I am sure that on an individual level, what you say is true. The council's biggest errors date back to when SISU took control. The club was on its knees at that point, but I don't ever recall the council - or more specifically ACL - offering to help the club by revisiting the terms of the agreement (at a time when the arena was probably at its most profitable). What they did instead (and this was more the council) was throw their weight behind SISU, and they effectively insisted that the club only deal with them, this at a time when GR had concerns and was trying to open negotiations with other interested parties. Their actions at that time were more about preserving their income from the club than they were about saving the club (imo), perhaps that and just a little bit of poor judgement thrown in as well. To a certain extent though, I blame GR for allowing himself to be bullied by the council.

All water under the bridge though I guess. We are where we are, and I've no doubt that now the council (probably more so than ACL) just want to see the club survive. None of those individuals want to be able to say in years to come that the city lost its football club under their watch. I think any talk now of ACL/council self-interest is misplaced.

 

[duffer]

Thanks for pointing that out - my mistake.

I understand what you are saying but I had dealings with some of these people (to be clear I don't work for CCC - I live and work in London and have since 2000) and they seemed to be agonising about what to do. They were prepared to sanction the Higgs Trust half to be sold at cost to CCFC but they started to be very concerned about SISU and every dealing with them reconfirmed their fears (as well as lack of faith in discussing reduced rent, failure to submit accounts, transfer embargoes etc etc) - to the point that they didnt feel SISU had the best interests of CCFC at heart and were actually a dangerous and dodgy bunch of sharks only interested in the stadium. I see that as responsible and trying to balance the needs of CCFC and the wider population. I have it on authority that should someone more worthy get CCFC then a deal is there to be done to put the club on a sustainable footing - it just wont be with SISU (and I for one agree with them on that)!!

All fair enough, but please don't buy this myth that there's no taxpayers' money in the stadium. Cov CC put £10m in as a grant, and now hold £14m as a mortgage. Higgs trust paid £6.5m for CCFC's 50% share, part cash, part debt write-off.

 

[WillieStanley]

What the frig?? I haven't been on here since Saturday where I was witness to the biggest display of unity from Sky Blues Fans for as long as I can remember. Proud to be apart of that unity through adversity. A few days on and we've regressed a year. He said, she did, labelling. What matters is saving our club, not mud slinging, not who predicted what and not who is to blame. Let's be proactive not reactive and build on what Saturday achieved.

To be honest, I've gone beyond caring as to whether it's Sisu's fault, ACL's fault, Richardsons fault or whoever. I just want this sorted. The time for bringing those to account is for after we've pulled this club away from the raging storm of the abyss.