sw88
Chief Commentator!
I wonder how many more will stick to this stance. I for one would return, even with SISU in charge, to watch my team at the Ricoh.
(And I wouldn't criticise anyone who chose to stick to their views)
I wonder how many more will stick to this stance. I for one would return, even with SISU in charge, to watch my team at the Ricoh.
(And I wouldn't criticise anyone who chose to stick to their views)
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
Sorry i was referring to the term of 10 years. at the present time a 1 year deal would be fine to leave room for further negotiating and actually getting the team back in the Ricoh. Sisu have just managed to get rid of a long lease they are hardy going to be in a position to want to sign up for another.
But again just my opinion
They showed when they agreed to take over the Mortgage from ACL they were willing to sign up to a long term lease of 125 years.....
ACL support? there is no such thing as ACL support from other fans. Its only some City fans who are supporting them.
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
I get why you support it, but the odd distinction between hard-working protesters and the apparent easy-life Cobbler SISU apologists or whatever is completely made up from thin air.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
fuking council still not giving up ricoh
greedy pieces of shit
greedy pieces of shit
sw88
Chief Commentator!
Would you really trust SISU to own and run it though? I wouldnt
WillieStanley
New Member
Holy crap!! I'd better subscribe to this guys point of view otherwise people may think I don't work hard!!! #NOPM
TheRoyalScam
Well-Known Member
Isn't it past your bedtime?
Or do you get an extra half an hour in the school holidays?
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
id rather ahvea sisu owned ricoh than a council owned one not used.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
deanocity3
New Member
Joy Seppala
From 1992 She worked for a number of years in the mergers and acquisitions departments of Kidder Peabody & Co.
this is what happened to them during this period
Kidder, Peabody was later involved in a trading scandal related to false profits booked over the course of 1990–1994. Joseph Jett, a trader on the government bond desk, was found to have systematically exploited a flaw in Kidder's computer systems, generating large false profits. When the fraud was discovered, it was determined that Jett had lost 75 million dollars over the four years instead of the apparent profit of 275 million dollars over the same period. The SEC later concluded Jett had committed securities fraud and banned him from the industry.
In the rush of bad press coverage following the disclosure of the overstated profits, General Electric sold Kidder Peabody's assets to PaineWebber for $670 million in October 1994, closing the transaction in January 1995.
From 1992 She worked for a number of years in the mergers and acquisitions departments of Kidder Peabody & Co.
this is what happened to them during this period
Kidder, Peabody was later involved in a trading scandal related to false profits booked over the course of 1990–1994. Joseph Jett, a trader on the government bond desk, was found to have systematically exploited a flaw in Kidder's computer systems, generating large false profits. When the fraud was discovered, it was determined that Jett had lost 75 million dollars over the four years instead of the apparent profit of 275 million dollars over the same period. The SEC later concluded Jett had committed securities fraud and banned him from the industry.
In the rush of bad press coverage following the disclosure of the overstated profits, General Electric sold Kidder Peabody's assets to PaineWebber for $670 million in October 1994, closing the transaction in January 1995.
sw88
Chief Commentator!
If you think it is bad now, how do you think it will be under SISU? Have you not seen ow poorly SISU have ran a football club, let alone being allowed to run the arena?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Stating false profits not really the problem with us!
deanocity3
New Member
Instead of Bruce Springsteen, it would be Bob Brolly's Calvery
duffer
Well-Known Member
I think it's worth pointing out that nothing in this ten-year deal would stop SISU still building a new stadium if they really, really wanted to.
At £150k per year, SISU could buy out the whole lease at any point for a maximum £1.5m and just walk away. That's peanuts compared to the cost of a new stadium, and they could offset a large part of it against the debt that ACL have to write off by signing the CVA.
They'll also earn more money whilst at the Ricoh under this deal than they will at Northampton.
I think we're going to find out pretty soon what SISU's real aim is. If it's a genuine concern about FFP and making the club 'sustainable', then why not take the deal. They can save money and retain fans whilst planning for life elsewhere.
However, if it's really just about getting the Ricoh on the cheap, then they'll continue along their current path.
At £150k per year, SISU could buy out the whole lease at any point for a maximum £1.5m and just walk away. That's peanuts compared to the cost of a new stadium, and they could offset a large part of it against the debt that ACL have to write off by signing the CVA.
They'll also earn more money whilst at the Ricoh under this deal than they will at Northampton.
I think we're going to find out pretty soon what SISU's real aim is. If it's a genuine concern about FFP and making the club 'sustainable', then why not take the deal. They can save money and retain fans whilst planning for life elsewhere.
However, if it's really just about getting the Ricoh on the cheap, then they'll continue along their current path.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Well more fool you they would charge City more saying that it is a business.
Wouldn't trust them with a piece of land to build a 12,000 Lego stadium ether.
Wouldn't trust them with a piece of land to build a 12,000 Lego stadium ether.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
How about false losses?
Fisher isn't going to be pleased with you when he gets back in the office, Andreas.
Spreading it all over the internet that he is on holiday when his address is readily available on company searches.
Looks like your school holiday job is going to be cut short.
deanocity3
New Member
we should put a sky blue through his letter box
BurbageSkyBlues
New Member
Exactly my take on it. A very good deal for the club and Sisu.
Plus, what seems to have been missed on this thread , it gives a period of stability to both sides, during which there could be an opportunity to build some trust, and hence move towards part transfer of ownership on a staged basis as that trust develops.
In short, it is dificult for Sisu to reject the offer, based on their stated goals and objectives so far.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
is the option to buy back the 50% Higgs own now off the table or is it that the council won't sell their 50% or the freehold?
Hopefully the fat twat has got a one way ticket to the moon.
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
I'm going to hazard a guess that the club will agree to this, why? i here you cry, well it's based on timmy's shocked reaction to it, "well i didn't see that coming". No out of hand rejection or comments about pie money, but a more concilliatry response to think about it. Plus i don't think either side wants the investigations that not signing the cva would bring as it may highlight shenanigans on both sides. Just a guess though.
duffer
Well-Known Member
The impression I get is that the Higgs trust simply don't trust SISU enough to re-enter negotiations. In fairness though PWKH has always been pretty upfront about this, so maybe he could advise?
As far as the Council go, I wonder if they'd ever sell the freehold to anyone. Generally speaking, isn't it something that landlords try to avoid? It doesn't mean they wouldn't sell their stake in ACL though, but as above I don't think they trust SISU enough to do it at the moment. Just mho all this, I should add.
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Lets be clear the problem is Sisu.
I'm sure ACL/CCC would have no problem selling a full/part share of the Ricoh to a new owner. But Sisu have proved such a failed, unethical and untrustworthy business there is no way they can have any part of a key strategic Coventry asset.
I'm sure ACL/CCC would have no problem selling a full/part share of the Ricoh to a new owner. But Sisu have proved such a failed, unethical and untrustworthy business there is no way they can have any part of a key strategic Coventry asset.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Why does it matter about buying the Ricoh now, Sisu are going to build us a new ground remember.....
Sisu should except the offer and play at the Ricoh until Fishers new shed is built.
Unless, lets say this is all about trying to send ACL under, then what is the problem?
Sisu should except the offer and play at the Ricoh until Fishers new shed is built.
Unless, lets say this is all about trying to send ACL under, then what is the problem?
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Perhaps they will for the right price which is market value - PLUS any losses incurred. That's what it seems SISU are doing...adding everything to the bottom line - that realistically makes the Club virtually un-buyable. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. None of which is done with the fans in mind, but the fans don't invest into the Club in the business sense. Just emotion & paying mugs...I mean customers.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
We obviously don't know the ins and outs of the legal contracts (mind you, contracts seem to be broken at will as far as the City are concerned), but I thought the club had an option to buy the stadium shares until 2015. Is this in LIMITED, HOLDINGS?
Weather or not the council or Higgs want to sell, do they have a legal obligation TO sell if pushed? And is there a minimum legal PRICE that they must sell at (a bit like Dublin going to Villa)?
Perhaps PWKH can clear this up?
duffer
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that - I'm going to have a really irritating tune stuck in my head all night now!
[video=youtube;sWpUQBsRHGs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWpUQBsRHGs[/video]
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Why does the freehold matter anyway?
Give it a long enough lease with a peppercorn rent and, effectively, who cares who owns the land it's built on?
Give it a long enough lease with a peppercorn rent and, effectively, who cares who owns the land it's built on?
deanocity3
New Member
Thanks for that - I'm going to have a really irritating tune stuck in my head all night now!
[video=youtube;sWpUQBsRHGs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWpUQBsRHGs[/video]
boney m song again the 3rd one this week.
all we want now is there biggest hit 'By the river in Rowley's green'
Delboycov
Active Member
I've got a feeling they will turn it down because it doesn't help their probable mission of distressing ACL and getting the Ricoh on the cheap. If anyone thinks that the way forward is for them to move away for years on end and build 'Arena Tinpot', incurring massive losses both in revenue and fanbase in the process and building up an even bigger debt for our club then you're completely barking!! I hope it's accepted because although I do want to see the back of these sad excuses for owners my priority is watching CCFC this season in the city I'm so proud to come from.....getting rid of SISU can wait for another day.
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
It doesn't. This is a deal to have them realise an exit strategy surely? 10 year lease n the Ricoh adds value to the sale of the football club especially with such peppercorn style rent. ACL will hope they take it and they sell up in a season or two. If not they know that such low rent is likely to be paid even by SISU annually (and there may be a caveat to how that's done which secures that)
They run a football club without any real encumbrance and should at least turn a profit and get us up the leagues thus ensuring bigger crowds and bigger pay days for all.
saltaire bantam
Well-Known Member
I hope you all get a happy ending, but with owners prepared to use you, it's captive fanbase, as a bargaining chip and happily put you through so much long term pain, I can't see one.
[h=1][/h]
[h=1][/h]
Skybluesquirrel
New Member
3,000 at Sixfields @ £12 per head = £36,000 per game
F&B at Sixfields @ £3 per head = £9,000 per game
Total Income £45,000 per game
10,000 at Ricoh @ £12 per head = £120,000 per game
No F&B at Ricoh @ £3 per head = £0,000 per game
Total Income £120,000 per game
Its all about the pies eh?
F&B at Sixfields @ £3 per head = £9,000 per game
Total Income £45,000 per game
10,000 at Ricoh @ £12 per head = £120,000 per game
No F&B at Ricoh @ £3 per head = £0,000 per game
Total Income £120,000 per game
Its all about the pies eh?