We'll Come Back To The Ricoh... (8 Viewers)

Forums New posts
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Other bits. The appeal for the JR takes place on 28th November.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
"would I have preferred to stay at the Ricoh? Of course. Would I have preferred to reach a deal with the council? Of course. That's why we agreed to the heads of terms (for the Higgs' share last year). But for whatever reason they patently refused to authorise that purchase.

We're taking the club in the right direction bar the emotional angst its given to fans. Emotions are not lost on us. I feel very bad. Football is like a religion.

IF the status quo continued, Coventry City would not be here in a year or two."
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
"The last thing I wanted was for the club to go into administration. All I wanted was the heads of terms deal that was signed - involving removing the debt, buying the Higgs' stake, with lease extensions, community programmes and bringing in (events management company) AEG. We also wanted a programme to get greater (stadium) ownership eventually.

THere is not a chance I would do that deal now."
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
That's because he's a Shitzu rent boy apologist, I would imagine.

will am i said:
There is nothing new. Les seems to have forgotten to ask any questions.
Click to expand...
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Can't be arsed to type any more now. It'll be on the website soon enough.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
one last bit: "From the moment a decision was made for a joint venture with the council (in 2003) the club lost control."
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
"We didn't want to distress ACL, but the Club couldn't afford to pay the rent, especially given the Financial Fair Play rules. We wanted to do a deal (with the council and ACL). We wanted to go together to Yorkshire Bank (to buy out ACLs 'mortgage' for cheaper than the £14M the council paid in January).

Then, at the end of November, we were told the council wouldn't approve the deal over the 50% Higgs' share."
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Oh, sorry didn't realise. Yeah, the full thing will be up later. I guess they want people to go out and buy a paper copy first.

Sky Blues said:
I think that's a very similar preview piece to the one CCFCWay put up last night. The full piece will probably be online soon enough though.
Click to expand...
 
L

luwalla

Well-Known Member
so we still have the club saying that they had a deal in place for the higgs share, and the council wouldnt approve it.. yet we have the council saying that it was SISU who failed to proceed with that deal, and that they never actually had the deal put in front of them to approve or decline
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Seems that way. Mutton did say though that "hell would freeze over" before he sold the share to SISU...

luwalla said:
so we still have the club saying that they had a deal in place for the higgs share, and the council wouldnt approve it.. yet we have the council saying that it was SISU who failed to proceed with that deal, and that they never actually had the deal put in front of them to approve or decline
Click to expand...
 
W

will am i

Active Member
luwalla said:
so we still have the club saying that they had a deal in place for the higgs share, and the council wouldnt approve it.. yet we have the council saying that it was SISU who failed to proceed with that deal, and that they never actually had the deal put in front of them to approve or decline
Click to expand...

Sisu could just produce the signed heads of terms deal they keep talking about. It might convince a few more to go to Sixfields.
 
L

luwalla

Well-Known Member
torchomatic said:
Seems that way. Mutton did say though that "hell would freeze over" before he sold the share to SISU...
Click to expand...

fair point.. if your trying to insinuate that your opposing party are telling lies, it doesnt really help when you go on the radio and make a strong statement that totally backs up what they have accused you of!! haha
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Ha! To be honest, don't trust either side.

luwalla said:
fair point.. if your trying to insinuate that your opposing party are telling lies, it doesnt really help when you go on the radio and make a strong statement that totally backs up what they have accused you of!! haha
Click to expand...
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
I know it has been pointed out regularly before but ............. heads of terms are not a binding contract and either side can change their mind and walk away from them ...... would seem both sides have done exactly that when it suited them
 
W

will am i

Active Member
oldskyblue58 said:
I know it has been pointed out regularly before but ............. heads of terms are not a binding contract and either side can change their mind and walk away from them ...... would seem both sides have done exactly that when it suited them
Click to expand...
Id like to see the document if it exists. As its now a PR battle it would seem to suit SISU to prove there was an agreement binding or not.
 
A

Ashdown1

New Member
So in short, after a period of time supporting the club and being unable to stem the tide of unsustainable losses SISU went after getting the Arena on the cheap and they did this primarily by refusing to pay the full rent in an attempt to distress the management company. Pretty much everything else that followed has been a combination of poor relations, distrust and spite !
So where do we go from here then????
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
To be honest it is difficult to believe who is right and wrong on this in reference to moving this forward.

What both ACL and SISU need to do is publish the details.

SISU show us your offers you have made .... Not just "we made them an offer". We can see how you are thinking and if it's reasonable.

ACL / CCC show us what you want .... Not just "they want it for nothing". We can see if you are being fair.

ACL/CCC FFS just let it go and start talking business. Ccfc have lost out, now be prepared to loose out something before you loose the lot. Forget future profits, make a big decision for the sake of Coventry people and the cities prestige.

The first dominoe is tottering......
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
but how would it change things now ...... The Council apparently walked away from it and you would think they had reasons that were good enough for them ..... Seppala is saying she wouldnt accept that deal now anyway ............ just leaves us fans raking over the coles of things that cant be changed, we need to start looking forward not back. How does the situation get resolved now is the important thing.

the comment about the agreement muddies the waters but really doesnt add to the solution....... it is old stuff repeated again, that can be rebutted by a simple we changed our mind. Good PR would be something that was binding that was reneged on or better still plans for the new stadium
 
R

RoboCCFC90

Well-Known Member
Has anyone seen the full article yet I can't find it anywhere :(

Edit: Just reading it now.
 
K

kmj5000

Member
torchomatic said:
"We didn't want to distress ACL, but the Club couldn't afford to pay the rent, especially given the Financial Fair Play rules. We wanted to do a deal (with the council and ACL). We wanted to go together to Yorkshire Bank (to buy out ACLs 'mortgage' for cheaper than the £14M the council paid in January).

Then, at the end of November, we were told the council wouldn't approve the deal over the 50% Higgs' share."
Click to expand...

The club couldn't afford to pay the rent!??

But it can afford to lose millions in ticket season sales, match day tickets, kit sales and sponsorship for the next 5 years, and also fork out substantial legal fees to fund the JR.

What utter bullshit, Joy!
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
will am i said:
Id like to see the document if it exists. As its now a PR battle it would seem to suit SISU to prove there was an agreement binding or not.
Click to expand...

I've reached the point where I don't care what's happened.
Let's move it forward with ACL/CCC making a "this is what it's worth offer". Tie it too the club, offer 50% stake, give it to CCFC for what you owe! Or something. FFS if nothing happens the area will die so base your valuation on that.
 
K

kmj5000

Member
torchomatic said:
"We didn't want to distress ACL, but the Club couldn't afford to pay the rent, especially given the Financial Fair Play rules. We wanted to do a deal (with the council and ACL). We wanted to go together to Yorkshire Bank (to buy out ACLs 'mortgage' for cheaper than the £14M the council paid in January).

Then, at the end of November, we were told the council wouldn't approve the deal over the 50% Higgs' share."
Click to expand...

OSB - does the rent have any impact on the FFP rules?
 
S

SkyBlueHomer

New Member
Without seeing the exact facts of what went on I'm blaming the lot of them.

I think they are all as bad as each other & I'm going right back to when the decision was made to leave Highfield Road. Everything was based on staying in the Premiership, as a result things fell apart around them. Its seems that deals were poorly done out of desperation.

Problem now as I see it I think for each party involved it has become personal & they have forgot the basics, its us the supporters that are suffering.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
I know it has been pointed out regularly before but ............. heads of terms are not a binding contract and either side can change their mind and walk away from them ...... would seem both sides have done exactly that when it suited them
Click to expand...

unless hands were shaken?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)
Top