NTFC Official Statement re:ACL (17 Viewers)

Astute

Well-Known Member
I'm sure I've read somewhere that this was the case? No problems to be proven otherwise. Just going by what I hear.

That is a major problem we have. We have people like Grendull who make up facts and then others take it as the truth.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
I'm sure I've read somewhere that this was the case? No problems to be proven otherwise. Just going by what I hear.

Thats one of the problems with these boards. Someone comes on sounding knowlegeable and then it almost becomes fact.
It gets communicated around and around. We are all guilty.
 

RPHunt

New Member
I'm sure I've read somewhere that this was the case? No problems to be proven otherwise. Just going by what I hear.

You do need to be selective about what you read on this site. Otherwise you could end up believing that CCFC are owned by benevolent owners who have a golden future planned for the club.
 

cochese

Well-Known Member
Taken from les reids interview with everyones favourite JS. This was what I was going by.

“We didn’t want to distress ACL, but the club couldn’t afford to pay the rent, especially given the Financial Fair Play rules (which limits spending on the team to 60pc of revenue). We wanted to do a deal (with the council and ACL). We wanted to go together to Yorkshire Bank (to buy out ACL’s “mortgage” for cheaper than the £14million the council paid in January).
“Then, at the end of November, we were told the council wouldn’t approve the deal over the 50 per cent Higgs share.”
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Taken from les reids interview with everyones favourite JS. This was what I was going by.

“We didn’t want to distress ACL, but the club couldn’t afford to pay the rent, especially given the Financial Fair Play rules (which limits spending on the team to 60pc of revenue). We wanted to do a deal (with the council and ACL). We wanted to go together to Yorkshire Bank (to buy out ACL’s “mortgage” for cheaper than the £14million the council paid in January).
“Then, at the end of November, we were told the council wouldn’t approve the deal over the 50 per cent Higgs share.”

Were told by who though? It never came from anyone that have anything to do with it......and Joy has even admitted that they have lied to us during the same so called interview, although it might be a slip of the tongue just like she has done in court previously.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
"Plan A is building a new stadium. There is something very exciting about building something that is a new beginning. It feels like the club is at a new beginning."

No.

Have you any idea what this take it or leave it offer that Joy has said about.....and if so are you allowed to say?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
"Plan A is building a new stadium. There is something very exciting about building something that is a new beginning. It feels like the club is at a new beginning."

No.

What do you think about the fact that of all the deals established for council owned stadiums ours was by far the most punitive and ultimately destructive? It bankrupted the original owners and has again with new owners led to virtual oblivion.

Does it make you proud to have part contributed to this? Do you wish in hindsight you has made a fairer deal to the club along the lines of Swansea, stoke, Ipswich, hull etc.

Or doesn't it bother you at all?
 

cochese

Well-Known Member
Were told by who though? It never came from anyone that have anything to do with it......and Joy has even admitted that they have lied to us during the same so called interview, although it might be a slip of the tongue just like she has done in court previously.

If it was a lie, I would expect her to retract her comments though. In this day and age, if you print something that isn't factually correct in the media, you don't get away with it.
Just because she lied once, doesn't mean she'd do it again, and certainly not through the media. For balance, I'm also not saying she will only tell the truth from now on...
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Were told by who though? It never came from anyone that have anything to do with it......and Joy has even admitted that they have lied to us during the same so called interview, although it might be a slip of the tongue just like she has done in court previously.

as far as i can see the only 2 people she has spoke to has been les ried and nikki Sinclair, maybe 1 of those 2 told her?
 

PWKH

New Member
The next question is .... have ACL moved on ?

No, we are still at CV6 6GE, still in Coventry.

Seriously though, if we are to believe what was in the interview that Mrs Seppala gave to Mr Reid the lady is not for turning. ACL has developed its business and will continue to do so. If Otium want to make a proposition it will be listened to, but from what both Mrs Seppala and Mr Fisher have said such an offer would seem to be highly unlikely.

Mrs Seppala has said that she wants the freehold. That doesn't belong to ACL. ACL has paid for the use of the Arena for the next 42 years. It will then be handed back to the freeholder, if the lease isn't extended.

If I remember it was Mr Fisher who said that the Club had moved on, wasn't it?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
No, we are still at CV6 6GE, still in Coventry.

Seriously though, if we are to believe what was in the interview that Mrs Seppala gave to Mr Reid the lady is not for turning. ACL has developed its business and will continue to do so. If Otium want to make a proposition it will be listened to, but from what both Mrs Seppala and Mr Fisher have said such an offer would seem to be highly unlikely.

Mrs Seppala has said that she wants the freehold. That doesn't belong to ACL. ACL has paid for the use of the Arena for the next 42 years. It will then be handed back to the freeholder, if the lease isn't extended.

If I remember it was Mr Fisher who said that the Club had moved on, wasn't it?

He says lots of things.

Strangely you seem to only believe his statements and versions of events when it suits you. How odd.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
What do you think about the fact that of all the deals established for council owned stadiums ours was by far the most punitive and ultimately destructive? It bankrupted the original owners and has again with new owners led to virtual oblivion.

Does it make you proud to have part contributed to this? Do you wish in hindsight you has made a fairer deal to the club along the lines of Swansea, stoke, Ipswich, hull etc.

Or doesn't it bother you at all?

some serious questions grendel. what do you think of sisu? what % off blame do you apportion to them, if any? if no blame is to be apportioned to them, what did they get right and what did they do to stop us getting in this mess?

over to you
 

PWKH

New Member
What do you think about the fact that of all the deals established for council owned stadiums ours was by far the most punitive and ultimately destructive? It bankrupted the original owners and has again with new owners led to virtual oblivion.

Does it make you proud to have part contributed to this? Do you wish in hindsight you has made a fairer deal to the club along the lines of Swansea, stoke, Ipswich, hull etc.



Or doesn't it bother you at all?



The Directors of ACL that made the deal on rent with the Club were 2 from the Club, 2 from the Council, 3 independents. I was not one of them. The rent was set at the same cost as the last years at Highfield Road. The rent was agreed unanimously by the boards of CCFC and ACL.

Spleen is not a substitute for fact. You may not agree with the rent that was set, but you were not a shareholder of any significance, if at all, in the Club. The people who set the rent were the people who had put their own money into the Club and made their own decisions. Would you have made those decisions at the time? Would they have made the same decision looking back with the benefit of hindsight? Neither you nor I can do other than speculate.
You have shown that fact doesn't get in the way of a comment but actually facts stand and empty comments are just that: empty.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
He says lots of things.

Strangely you seem to only believe his statements and versions of events when it suits you. How odd.

Are you talking about yourself Grendull?
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
He says lots of things.

Strangely you seem to only believe his statements and versions of events when it suits you. How odd.

Do you respect anyone?
If someone says something, you don't hang around for them to change their mind, you start to plan for the worse.
Sisu are playing with fire. The safe bet is slowly disappearing.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
The Directors of ACL that made the deal on rent with the Club were 2 from the Club, 2 from the Council, 3 independents. I was not one of them. The rent was set at the same cost as the last years at Highfield Road. The rent was agreed unanimously by the boards of CCFC and ACL.

Spleen is not a substitute for fact. You may not agree with the rent that was set, but you were not a shareholder of any significance, if at all, in the Club. The people who set the rent were the people who had put their own money into the Club and made their own decisions. Would you have made those decisions at the time? Would they have made the same decision looking back with the benefit of hindsight? Neither you nor I can do other than speculate.
You have shown that fact doesn't get in the way of a comment but actually facts stand and empty comments are just that: empty.

Ooooo, Burned Grendal :slap:
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
some serious questions grendel. what do you think of sisu? what % off blame do you apportion to them, if any? if no blame is to be apportioned to them, what did they get right and what did they do to stop us getting in this mess?

over to you

Not a chance. He would have to reveal who he is !!!!
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
some serious questions grendel. what do you think of sisu? what % off blame do you apportion to them, if any? if no blame is to be apportioned to them, what did they get right and what did they do to stop us getting in this mess?

over to you

I will respond to you before the end of the evening.
 

RPHunt

New Member
PWKH, you do realise that Grendel holds a senior position in Marketing, earns a six figure salary and constantly backs up his comments with fact?
 

cochese

Well-Known Member
some serious questions grendel. what do you think of sisu? what % off blame do you apportion to them, if any? if no blame is to be apportioned to them, what did they get right and what did they do to stop us getting in this mess?

over to you

I think fans need to stop thinking in terms of % of blame for the club being in this mess. The buck will always stop with SISU because they inherited a club in a mess to start with. They then managed to make an even bigger mess of it with their choice of directors and managers and didn't address the reasons why the club were doing so badly in the first place.
What I believe is that now, any attempt at trying to rectify the original mess is being hindered by those who have profited from the club. And whilst they were making money they were entirely within their rights to do so. I don't think ACL can offer the club the terms they want, or indeed need for this club to start making progress again. The kind of terms that would make ccfc an investable opportunity for a future buyer.
SISU are looking after their business interests, whilst ACL look after theirs. And the fans get stuck in the middle.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
I think fans need to stop thinking in terms of % of blame for the club being in this mess. The buck will always stop with SISU because they inherited a club in a mess to start with. They then managed to make an even bigger mess of it with their choice of directors and managers and didn't address the reasons why the club were doing so badly in the first place.
What I believe is that now, any attempt at trying to rectify the original mess is being hindered by those who have profited from the club. And whilst they were making money they were entirely within their rights to do so. I don't think ACL can offer the club the terms they want, or indeed need for this club to start making progress again. The kind of terms that would make ccfc an investable opportunity for a future buyer.
SISU are looking after their business interests, whilst ACL look after theirs. And the fans get stuck in the middle.

So who has profited from our club?

Can't think of anyone but ex players and other clubs.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
The Directors of ACL that made the deal on rent with the Club were 2 from the Club, 2 from the Council, 3 independents. I was not one of them. The rent was set at the same cost as the last years at Highfield Road. The rent was agreed unanimously by the boards of CCFC and ACL.

Spleen is not a substitute for fact. You may not agree with the rent that was set, but you were not a shareholder of any significance, if at all, in the Club. The people who set the rent were the people who had put their own money into the Club and made their own decisions. Would you have made those decisions at the time? Would they have made the same decision looking back with the benefit of hindsight? Neither you nor I can do other than speculate.
You have shown that fact doesn't get in the way of a comment but actually facts stand and empty comments are just that: empty.

PWKH did sisu try to get ACL around the negotiating table on rent before the rent strike?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
The Directors of ACL that made the deal on rent with the Club were 2 from the Club, 2 from the Council, 3 independents. I was not one of them. The rent was set at the same cost as the last years at Highfield Road. The rent was agreed unanimously by the boards of CCFC and ACL.

Spleen is not a substitute for fact. You may not agree with the rent that was set, but you were not a shareholder of any significance, if at all, in the Club. The people who set the rent were the people who had put their own money into the Club and made their own decisions. Would you have made those decisions at the time? Would they have made the same decision looking back with the benefit of hindsight? Neither you nor I can do other than speculate.
You have shown that fact doesn't get in the way of a comment but actually facts stand and empty comments are just that: empty.

The "rent" was I assume to a private organisation and not to a council that viewed the club as a community assett. Also I assume it was not a rent untrue terms as I assume it was a deal tied with the sake of the stadium and the length of time to vacate. So frankly the amount is neither rent or relevant.

We can all vent spleens however historical fact will prove one thing. This club played out of its city for the only time in its 130 year history under your watch.

History will record this as a statistical fact. It will make the judgement of apportionment of blame. Whatever you, me or anyone else says will not change that but for sure you and no one else in here will have played a part in that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top