A Deal Is Simple Really (10 Viewers)

[italiahorse]

Did they though or was it because the Administrator found the best return for Creditors? Let's just say PH4 had been accepted as Preferred Bidder do you think he could have given a return to SISU anywhere near as to what they were owed?

The club is only worth what its value is. You can't include losses in there.

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It strikes me MMM that you'll be one of these people who will never be happy unless you get perfection. It's not right to play at Northampton, it's not right to play in a SISU Built Arena, it's not right to buy a stake to ownership of the Ricoh Arena... Yet you continue to suggest every idea as a flaw, although you haven't given one suggestion to which SISU should be doing because you can't see past hatred for them..

Per-fucking-fection?

If not wanting to be in embargo annually, in administration, not being shamed in the House of Commons, playing a touch higher than the third-tier of English football, not seeing my fellow being assaulted by our own 'stewards', not being lied to - incessantly - by our owners, liking playing in my own damn city; well, if that's your notion of 'perfection', then you set the bar pretty low

 

[edgy]

Once SISU get their hands on the Ricoh and unite it with the club we then, finally, become a salable asset. I believe that has been the game plan all along, get their hands on the Ricoh cheaply and then sell stadium and club on for a profit. I would personally support the sale of the stadium to them because it would be the fastest and simplest route to new owners.

Correct. It's this or liquidation in my opinion.

 

[Houdi]

Let me ask you another question; why are SISU back at the negotiating table now? On the face of it, they have an agreement at Northampton - with heavy penalty clauses for a break - and plans on the table for a brand new stadium that will deliver them all the revenues they say they need.

So, why? Fans pressure? The need for the CVA to be signed? Pressure from the FA/FL? Ministerial questions and interest?

Yes that is probably the question that first needs asking. Having gone this far, after Fisher continually saying that 'we' have moved on, and going back to the Ricoh was now out of the question, why the sudden about turn. For Fisher having endured all the opprobrium, personal threats, gone through all the abuse at the forums, to suddenly agree to talks about a sudden return to the Ricoh seems perverse.
What has caused this volte-face ? The threat of a proper investigation into the clubs financial dealings ?,or maybe the realisation that the fans are actually serious in their promise to boycott Sixfields ? Whatever it is, I doubt it because of SISU caring about the fan's feelings, or because they don't wish to see the Ricoh left empty.

 

[Seyeclops666]

With any other owners, I would say yes we need to own our own ground. Six years on from the start of the SISU tenure, with no less than three seperate opportunities to buy the half share in the Ricoh, other than seeing debt piled into CCFC ltd. and(If SISU get their way) liquidate the club "Allegedly" I would say they can......"Fuck Off"

Nicely put - there should be a "double like" button!!

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Did they though or was it because the Administrator found the best return for Creditors? Let's just say PH4 had been accepted as Preferred Bidder do you think he could have given a return to SISU anywhere near as to what they were owed?

Do you HONESTLY - think the stated debt level was a 'true representation'?

If not, you can't comment as to what was best for the creditors; as the creditors' listing was frankly laughable

 

[Paxman II]

having a lease (and to .... one that is viewed as good as freehold) has never stopped a tenant from bidding to buy the freehold, nor would it stop a tenant taking an interest in the management company. But a lease agreeable to both sides would secure CCFC in Coventry quickly - the main problem at the moment isnt it?.

A long lease gives the owners something more tangible to sell and if it is at a low rent it (the club) is more marketable (the biggest problem is and always will be the amount owed to the owners)

What the low rent would be I have no idea - might still be offered at £400k for all I know

I'm having deja vu here to comments I was making months ago!

 

[Seyeclops666]

Once SISU get their hands on the Ricoh and unite it with the club we then, finally, become a salable asset. I believe that has been the game plan all along, get their hands on the Ricoh cheaply and then sell stadium and club on for a profit. I would personally support the sale of the stadium to them because it would be the fastest and simplest route to new owners.

I don't necessarily agree that this would happen like that but I do believe that this is the best and only decent argument for allowing SISU to have anything to do with the stadium. I would still prefer them to Feck off before they did get their hands on it because I don't trust them with CCFC or the stadium.

 

[Paxman II]

With any other owners, I would say yes we need to own our own ground. Six years on from the start of the SISU tenure, with no less than three seperate opportunities to buy the half share in the Ricoh, other than seeing debt piled into CCFC ltd. and(If SISU get their way) liquidate the club "Allegedly" I would say they can......"Fuck Off"

Typically dangerous comments that are misleading at best....so much of it on here or are you actually unaware your self of the true nature of facts?

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Well there our owners James so unless you want the club to continue failing at which point you'll blame SISU anyway you need to put your anamosity aside.

It's just a vicious circle, the club can't be successful without owning the stadium. Yet the fans don't want the current owners to own the stadium and then blame them for lack of success.

I can understand there view but I think the potential long term benefits to the club owning the stadium is more important than our feelings towards the owners.
Any deal would have to be done in a way that protects the club from SISU pulling a fast one or any shenanigans with the stadium and I don't see how any fan could be against that.

It seems to me that some people are against anything that would benefit SISU even it benefited the club also.

 

[Paxman II]

Why don't the Council care about the club? I need to get my head round this. SISU will be gone in the future at some point, the Council will always be here, just like the fans.

Are you actually beginning to make sense for once?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Once SISU get their hands on the Ricoh and unite it with the club we then, finally, become a salable asset. I believe that has been the game plan all along, get their hands on the Ricoh cheaply and then sell stadium and club on for a profit. I would personally support the sale of the stadium to them because it would be the fastest and simplest route to new owners.

Completely agree.

 

[shy_tall_knight]

Wat the council and Higgs have put into the arena soes not equal its market value. The council put very little into the stadium, Tesco funded the majority. However that does not give the club the divine right to get a large chnk of the equity in the property for free. Why should SISU benefit from something they have not contributed to, the increased debts are mostly due to ineffective management we should not expect the council / ACL to subsidise their incompetency through giving them the stadium or part of for free or on the cheap.

IMO ACL won't sign the AVC
There will be a points deduction
The FA will step in and force CCFC to play at the Ricoh
There will be a mass player exodus by 31/08/13

 

[Paxman II]

It's just a vicious circle, the club can't be successful without owning the stadium. Yet the fans don't want the current owners to own the stadium and then blame them for lack of success.

I can understand there view but I think the potential long term benefits to the club owning the stadium is more important than our feelings towards the owners.
Any deal would have to be done in a way that protects the club from SISU pulling a fast one or any shenanigans with the stadium and I don't see how any fan could be against that.

It seems to me that some people are against anything that would benefit SISU even it benefited the club also.

More deja vu. Christ everyone's been reading my post from months ago!

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Per-fucking-fection?

If not wanting to be in embargo annually, in administration, not being shamed in the House of Commons, playing a touch higher than the third-tier of English football, not seeing my fellow being assaulted by our own 'stewards', not being lied to - incessantly - by our owners, liking playing in my own damn city; well, if that's your notion of 'perfection', then you set the bar pretty low

Forget the Admin rubbish because I didn't mention that in my post and answer this question where do you want CCFC to be playing next year?

 

[James Smith]

Let me ask you another question; why are SISU back at the negotiating table now? On the face of it, they have an agreement at Northampton - with heavy penalty clauses for a break - and plans on the table for a brand new stadium that will deliver them all the revenues they say they need.

So, why? Fans pressure? The need for the CVA to be signed? Pressure from the FA/FL? Ministerial questions and interest?

I'm interested in the fact that the CVA has suddenly become the focus of the attention of Tim and Sisu and appears to have brought a return to the negotiating table. Having been told almost literally by Tim that it's Sixfields or bust why the sudden about face? Did they think that by offering the full amount to ACL they would get the CVA agreed to quickly and avoid any digging into the finances? Why would they be uncomfortable about a detailed look into the club's finances, I mean everything would be above board and normal business practices?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

The club is only worth what its value is. You can't include losses in there.

But would that figure been enough to reach an agreement? Probably not.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Once SISU get their hands on the Ricoh and unite it with the club we then, finally, become a salable asset. I believe that has been the game plan all along, get their hands on the Ricoh cheaply and then sell stadium and club on for a profit. I would personally support the sale of the stadium to them because it would be the fastest and simplest route to new owners.

If what you assert is true; and I for one have for some time preached this gospel; then it would mean that to achieve their ultimate goal - ownership of the Ricoh to sell and exit - SISU have, and still are prepared to risk the very existence of our club. Even now, they are gambling on ACL not opposing the CVA - as such would lead to liquidation.

That is why I, like many, hate SISU. So, next time anyone, please don't use my hatred of SISU as a stick to beat me with; pretending it clouds clarity of stance.

All I need to know if that they were prepared to gamble with the very existence of our football club to achieve their financial goals. In fact, I'm not embarrassed by my loathing of them at all; I'm damn proud

 

[Paxman II]

Wat the council and Higgs have put into the arena soes not equal its market value. The council put very little into the stadium, Tesco funded the majority. However that does not give the club the divine right to get a large chnk of the equity in the property for free. Why should SISU benefit from something they have not contributed to, the increased debts are mostly due to ineffective management we should not expect the council / ACL to subsidise their incompetency through giving them the stadium or part of for free or on the cheap.

IMO ACL won't sign the AVC
There will be a points deduction
The FA will step in and force CCFC to play at the Ricoh
There will be a mass player exodus by 31/08/13

Not quite what's being suggested.

A deal can be sought which benefits the football club for ever. SISU can benefit partially but would pay an upfront price or a premium on a lease. They don't get equity for free. How they build upon that equity after that is up to them. Getting a saleable asset is vital to any owner, one which even Haskell or an other would have required.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Do you HONESTLY - think the stated debt level was a 'true representation'?

If not, you can't comment as to what was best for the creditors; as the creditors' listing was frankly laughable

Oh so it was a made up sum was it? When this make it lying and bring Mr Appleton's position into question after all Paul Appleton listed the monies owed, so he must have fact not sat in front of a drawing board with crayons.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Forget the Admin rubbish because I didn't mention that in my post and answer this question where do you want CCFC to be playing next year?

I don't need to answer that. It's like asking if I want to eat for the next week.

You say I'm looking for 'perfection'. Well, if anything better than what must be one of the worst three owners in English League football is a touch too lofty for you; the problem's yours, not mine

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Oh so it was a made up sum was it? When this make it lying and bring Mr Appleton's position into question after all Paul Appleton listed the monies owed, so he must have fact not sat in front of a drawing board with crayons.

Wait there. I want to savour this. You honestly believe £70m is a true reflection of our level of indebtedness?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

I don't need to answer that. It's like asking if I want to eat for the next week.

You say I'm looking for 'perfection'. Well, if anything better than what must be one of the worst three owners in English League football is a touch too lofty for you; the problem's yours, not mine

Because you know it's not possible without SISU benefitting and that crawls under your skin quite sad really.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Wait there. I want to savour this. You honestly believe £70m is a true reflection of our level of indebtedness?

I don't need to answer that. It's like asking if I want to eat for the next week.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Because you know it's not possible without SISU benefitting and that crawls under your skin quite sad really.

It's sadder that you support a entity that's gambled - no, present tense; still gambles - with the very existence of the football club you purport to support for financial gain, and you're over the moon with it

 

[jaytskyblue]

Once SISU get their hands on the Ricoh and unite it with the club we then, finally, become a salable asset. I believe that has been the game plan all along, get their hands on the Ricoh cheaply and then sell stadium and club on for a profit. I would personally support the sale of the stadium to them because it would be the fastest and simplest route to new owners.

So your logic is you risk selling The major Coventry asset to a proven incompetent and unethical business in the hope they will smoothly and trouble free sell it on. Is that it?
It really is a shockingly immature view.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

It's sadder that you support a entity that's gambled - no, present tense; still gambles - with the very existence of the football club you purport to support for financial gain, and you're over the moon with it

Yet people support a company who have ripped off the club we support for financial gain since the Ricoh was built and they receive demigod status from some of our fans for it

 

[Paxman II]

It's sadder that you support a entity that's gambled - no, present tense; still gambles - with the very existence of the football club you purport to support for financial gain, and you're over the moon with it

I think the difference here is not so much supporting the entity know as SISU but supporting the entity know as the Sky Blues and finding a way that will achieve that. Owners will come and go. In the immediate term it is clear the football club is dependent on SISU. We need to get them back at the Ricoh. The stadium is council owned....that should change.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

It's sadder that you support a entity that's gambled - no, present tense; still gambles - with the very existence of the football club you purport to support for financial gain, and you're over the moon with it

Gambles? How is looking to invest in a stadium that maximises there revenue to improve CCFC a club sad?

Sorry to say MMM, but trying to show me as a SISU supporter is beyond sad it's frankly pathetic and it's because you don't have a sensible arguement so resorting to mindless insults. I love my Football Club a lot maybe you should learn to show that as well as this hatred you have.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Yet people support a company who have ripped off the club we support for financial gain since the Ricoh was built and they receive demigod status from some of our fans for it

Demigod? Point me toward one person who considers them totally blameless

 

[jaytskyblue]

Sisu have shown the City and fans of Coventry nothing but disdain, especially around the Northampton debacle. They have entirely failed on and off the pitch. They have been unethical and untrustworthy, with a faceless owner. Virtually everyone accepts they are not really interested in the football club.

So why do some still treat Sisu as if they are the life and blood of 'our club'?
Why do some people want to trust them with the Ricoh?

Bizarre, I bet even they cant believe it.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Demigod? Point me toward one person who considers them totally blameless

PWKH, if you really need anymore examples look in the mirror Dear Chap

 

[fernandopartridge]

Sisu have shown the City and fans of Coventry nothing but disdain, especially around the Northampton debacle. They have entirely failed on and off the pitch. They have been unethical and untrustworthy, with a faceless owner. Virtually everyone accepts they are not really interested in the football club.

So why do some still treat Sisu as if they are the life and blood of 'our club'?
Why do some people want to trust them with the Ricoh?

Bizarre, I bet even they cant believe it.

What if nothing comes of the Northampton debacle, i.e. they're playing at the Ricoh next season on improved terms from the previous tenure?

Surely it's the sort of 'hard nosed' business practice we were all looking forward to when a hedge fund took over in 2007?

For me, it's a shame they didn't enact some of this ruthlessness much earlier, not just in the context of the rental agreement but with players' and managers' contracts.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Gambles? How is looking to invest in a stadium that maximises there revenue to improve CCFC a club sad?

Sorry to say MMM, but trying to show me as a SISU supporter is beyond sad it's frankly pathetic and it's because you don't have a sensible arguement so resorting to mindless insults. I love my Football Club a lot maybe you should learn to show that as well as this hatred you have.

You know that bit in Toy Story when Woody shouts at the delusional Buzz: 'You Are A Toy!'.....

They have no interest in investing in the stadium to the benefit of the club. They want it cheap to benefit them.

I'm not repeating it again. Just no

 

[fernandopartridge]

You know that bit in Toy Story when Woody shouts at the delusional Buzz: 'You Are A Toy!'.....

The have no interest in investing in the stadium to the benefit of the club. They want it cheap to benefit them.

I'm not repeating it again. Just no

Although a bit abstract, what benefits SISU benefits CCFC, or may make CCFC a more attractive proposition to any potential buyer. Who knows. It's likely to be better than the existing situation.