D
Les reid's ct article (14 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sky Blue Pete
- Start date
terryhallsboots
New Member
As you say no survey can be relied upon and a lot of that survey is dealing in spurious hypotheticals. As Les Reid says, very eloquently, we have to deal with what we have in front of us and move forward. For fecks sake please move forward.
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
Agree but HOW is the $64,000 question
terryhallsboots
New Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
It's a personal choice. I'm not sure what new info this brings to the table aside from "Sisu won't move so may as well sell".
If all you want is Cov in Cov that's always been a reasonable outcome. However personally I don't want to support an organisation that acts like this. They're not the club, we are, and I'll continue to care about results and go away. I just can't trust them to just leave once they get their way and handing them something to add value to the club also puts a massive obstacle in the way of a progressive ownership model in the future.
I don't want to just roll over when the bully tells me to give him my lunch money. In my experience that's the best way to ensure he's asking you for more tomorrow.
Sky Blues
Active Member
Reading Les Reid's opinion piece, a condensed interpretation of his argument seems to be:
The Sisu-ACL dispute is primarily about land, not income or rent:
"this is overwhelmingly a dispute over land. It is a dispute over ownership of not just the stadium, but the potential development land around it."
In effect, he seems to suggest, Sisu/Otium are legally holding CCFC hostage in Northampton and the price for returning it to Coventry in the next few years is the sale of the stadium to Sisu/Otium:
"As things stand, Sisu company Otium is the club's legal and rightful owner. That is now likely to be the case for some time. If all parties genuinely want the Sky Blues back at the Ricoh, it is becoming increasingly accepted that the best way of ensuring it happens soon is to sell the stadium to Otium/Sisu."
He hopes a fair ransom, sorry, sale price, would be market value:
"There are independent means of assessing a market value for the Ricoh."
He seems to suggest that sale price would mean a loss for the taxpayers of Coventry:
"The council would expect some return on its investment - but in the gamble of football, people have to write off losses. Councils write-off millions of pounds in uncollected business taxes and council tax every year. Coventry City Council wrote off £3.3million of debt in 2011 alone."
And while taxpayers of Coventry lose, the Mayfair-based financiers would likely make a profit:
"A sale to Otium/Sisu may seem unpalatable... But it may also represent the best way of seeing Sisu/Otium ultimately exit the club and the city in the medium term. It would still appear to represent Sisu's best hope of a return on investment."
Opinion pieces are generally designed to provoke debate and this certainly seems to do that.
In essence, this one seems to be asking: Should Coventry's taxpayers write off some of the money spent on the stadium to get the football club back in Coventry and allow some financiers to profit from the subsequent resale of that asset?
The Sisu-ACL dispute is primarily about land, not income or rent:
"this is overwhelmingly a dispute over land. It is a dispute over ownership of not just the stadium, but the potential development land around it."
In effect, he seems to suggest, Sisu/Otium are legally holding CCFC hostage in Northampton and the price for returning it to Coventry in the next few years is the sale of the stadium to Sisu/Otium:
"As things stand, Sisu company Otium is the club's legal and rightful owner. That is now likely to be the case for some time. If all parties genuinely want the Sky Blues back at the Ricoh, it is becoming increasingly accepted that the best way of ensuring it happens soon is to sell the stadium to Otium/Sisu."
He hopes a fair ransom, sorry, sale price, would be market value:
"There are independent means of assessing a market value for the Ricoh."
He seems to suggest that sale price would mean a loss for the taxpayers of Coventry:
"The council would expect some return on its investment - but in the gamble of football, people have to write off losses. Councils write-off millions of pounds in uncollected business taxes and council tax every year. Coventry City Council wrote off £3.3million of debt in 2011 alone."
And while taxpayers of Coventry lose, the Mayfair-based financiers would likely make a profit:
"A sale to Otium/Sisu may seem unpalatable... But it may also represent the best way of seeing Sisu/Otium ultimately exit the club and the city in the medium term. It would still appear to represent Sisu's best hope of a return on investment."
Opinion pieces are generally designed to provoke debate and this certainly seems to do that.
In essence, this one seems to be asking: Should Coventry's taxpayers write off some of the money spent on the stadium to get the football club back in Coventry and allow some financiers to profit from the subsequent resale of that asset?
play_in_skyblue_stripes
Well-Known Member
Yes me too.
I can't believe a few people are so souless as to ignore SISU terrible methods to make cash.
Just because SISU NORTHAMPTON team doing OK, to quote famous Coventry band lyric
"Doesnt make it allright".
Skybluerevolution (Pt2)
New Member
How do you know what Les gets paid? and what is IQ is? I think your comment tells us more about you than anyone else.
Skybluerevolution (Pt2)
New Member
You mean like a real journalist that worked in London for Nationals for 5 years?? that type? Again I have worked with and watched CCFC with Les and I am afraid you are way off the mark, Les is a top draw journalist that always challenges every story he covers, and from all angles, he is a real journalist - probably the only one that the CT has left, doorstepping Joy Seppala - why would he do that? Travel to London on the off chance she might be there? This story is probably only one of 10 that he is working on, and considering NO one knows what she looks like how would know it was her...
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
I'm not questioning Les's journalistic credibility- but his personal conclusion which simplistically I read as " Sell SISU the Ricoh- it is the only way forward" is one I cannot agree with. I'm not convinced that this is the only way forward, that it best serves CCFC or the people of Coventry.
Skybluerevolution (Pt2)
New Member
I think the piece was part informative to what he has done during this mess, and some opinion from him how does the saying go "opinions are like arseholes we all have one".
As I said I know Les and we have traveled to a few games to watch CCFC home and away, and he has an opinion as we all do - I guess he has heard the confidential BS from both sides, ACL will in my opinion do a deal with SISU, whether this is % ownership or a short term deal I am not sure.
ACL need CCFC(SISU)
CCFC(SISU) need ACL
And Coventry City Council need both of them....
Time to talk, the dick measuring contest was a draw - lets get talking for COVENTRY!! Not City Not Council COVENTRY!
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
The conclusion that selling the stadium to the owners Otium being the way forward is flawed is it not? This romantic notion that in so doing the football club would then own the stadium and thus we all live happily ever after is fallacy. I would suggest that if Otium acquired the stadium- the stadium would be rented to the football club how is this any different to the present set up... arguably worse as marking ones own homework leads to inaccurate results and instability moving forward?
Last edited:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It wouldn't be worse as effectively it would be the same company. Any organisation that owned the property and the football club would separate the two entities - any that didn't you wouldn't want owning the club as it would demonstrate financial incompetence.
There is no evidence that they would charge a high commercial rent and there is very little point in th doing do.
It's interesting that the journalist held on a pedestal is now a clueless local hack. How about the port vale chairman who said on Cwr the lease had to be broken and that the losses absorbed over 3 years will be containable? Don't tell me the self made multi millionaire knows nothing about business compared to the financial experts on here.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I doubt very much that Sisu will get full cost recovery for the money they have invested, let alone a profit even with half stadium. I imagine by 'making a return' he means some of their money back rather than profit, or £1 by selling to Hoffman.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
ah morning G....interesting you quote financial incompetence as a case for the defence.. really? :thinking about:. Did I say high rent- no just that it would be a rent. None of us know the amount as it is pure speculation like most? I just don't think its the way forward with the present incumbents, they have a disproven track record do they not?
I am not discrediting Les at all- please re read my posts... merely questioning the inferred conclusion to his report i.e sell the ground to Otium being the only way forward.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Didn't say you were trying to discredit - many are though arent they?
Any owner will separate the club as a separate entity - this is hardly news.
I am sure that if any media source said "joys an evil bitch never sell the ground to her" mad jack and his trusty council cohorts would be recommending them for the Pulitzer Prize.
Seems strange that very few independent observers (if any) are really saying that. Why do you think?
Did you hear the interview with the port vale chairman? Where did you think his sympathies lied. I was actually quite surprised by it.
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Nick you do know Sisu agreed the rental contract by now dont you?
As to them getting the Ricoh. Sisu are a failed and unethical business, most everyone wants gone. They will be nothing but trouble for Coventry.
But the non-starter will be they want it at way below market rate and the Council are legally obliged to get value for money- i.e. the market rate.
(plus politically the vast majority of the City hate Sisu and the Council selling to them would be political suicide). The Council and fans need to stand firm and Sisu will sell up, this sort of nonsense from Les Reid just makes them stay longer in the hope of getting the Ricoh on the cheap..
As to them getting the Ricoh. Sisu are a failed and unethical business, most everyone wants gone. They will be nothing but trouble for Coventry.
But the non-starter will be they want it at way below market rate and the Council are legally obliged to get value for money- i.e. the market rate.
(plus politically the vast majority of the City hate Sisu and the Council selling to them would be political suicide). The Council and fans need to stand firm and Sisu will sell up, this sort of nonsense from Les Reid just makes them stay longer in the hope of getting the Ricoh on the cheap..
Nick
Administrator
Is it sarcasm?.It was agreed way before sisu...
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Unfounded sanctimonious twaddle.
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Nick- how many times! Sisu took on all these previous contracts legally, after completing due diligence. They signed over the contracts and legally took them over. They agreed them. They could have negotiated and implemented contract changes, they didnt.
Its not a debating issue its a legal fact!
Its not a debating issue its a legal fact!
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
Another quality piece of debate from Grovel.
blueflint
Well-Known Member
your missing the point nick SISU could and even should of renegotiated the rent deal in a proper manner instead they went for the other route distressing ACL that hasn't worked so why should ACL sell up to a set of scoundrels
who don't have the club or city at heart.they have already proved that bit with northampton
Nick
Administrator
They didn't agree them they took them on. Is it a legal fact they could have negotiated? Haven't they tried a few times but flatly turned down?
You won't mind if sisu build a stadium and charge massive rents then will you?
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
So when SISU took us over they didnt calculate the rent figure at £1.2m/annum- they missed it.... due diligence failed to recognise it.. really? Come on... I dont like them- but they are nobody's fools?
blueflint
Well-Known Member
did you expect anything else i didn't
blueflint
Well-Known Member
havn't they been offered reductions and refused them
Nick
Administrator
Why should we care about acl? Look at how they treated the club when we moved in? Hasnt fletcher said how bad a deal it was for the club but they had no choice?
Nick
Administrator
My point is they didn't agree and negotiate it in the first place, fletcher who was involved has said how bad a deal it was for the club but they had no choice.
I'm not saying they are innocent but surely neither are the council and acl who screwed us over when the original deal was done.
Of course it should have been negotiated at the time but how do we know they didn't try at the time? They did try after and didn't get anywhere did they?
blueflint
Well-Known Member
i never said it was a good deal but was a starting point in negotiations the 400k offered was a good deal SISU refused that.400k for a top class stadium where else can you get that don't say doncaster as its nowhere near the same standard
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
There is no difference legally between 'agreeing' and 'taking on' . Sisu agreed the rental contract , after they conducted due diligence and signed on the dotted line. It doesnt legally matter who put the original contract together.
And of course they were in a position to negotiate the contract before signing it. After you sign it, with probably no change clauses for N years makes things a lot harder.
I would expect the club,like any professional business, to negotiate and agree a contract with an appropriate price, change clauses and level of risk - then to abide by the contract.
ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
I just don't buy SISU tried to do a deal re rent reduction prior to completion of sale- couldn't, so bought CCFC anyway- this is SISU- unless they had a cunning plan?
By all accounts in the intevening years; yes they have tried to renegotiate the rent, and as I have stated before I do have more than a degree of understanding and empathy with that position- they are right to do so- 100%. £1.2m in the championship and now league 1 is a ridiculous fee-and this is for me the only question ACL have to answer, but equally ACL have a business model geared around that original assumption and so? Continued negotiations are the way are they not?
Where SISU fall over though in my mind is in CEASING payment- end of, finito. That's not right- never in a million years is that right and proper, at a business level or other... and the JR verdict agrees with this- lets just do that again- a Judicial review concludes that SISU acted Illegally in withholding rent.
As a consequence we are where we are- it is that straw that breaks the back of any morality backed conscience in support of a SISU positon that might linger in my mind. In my humble opinion-SISU withheld funds to distress ACL such that a firesale was the inevitable consequencene- CCC bailed ACL- SISU JR failed- and now we are at Northampton.
Well done Tim.
ointlaugh::blue: