NTFC Official Statement re:ACL (24 Viewers)

[Deleted member 5849]

Didn't they spurn the chance of buying the ground when they took over

...because the board at the time thought spending money on a gamble of players in the hope of instant success was more important than actually stabilising the club, and allowing it to have some foundations.

 

---

[Deleted member 5849]

We got relegated because SISU kept a totally inept manager in charge and sold our top goalscorer in January.

We got relegated because our club has no foundations to generate any cash, as such has no cash, and as such has been the target of people who desire get rich quick schemes ahead of actually building a club as club!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Spunked money ?

Yes, spunked money. Here's what Ranson said about our priorities.

It isn’t our priority – the success of the team is. The funds should be spent on the team. It is about getting the product right on the pitch.

Hopes of short term gain = very long term pain if the gamble fails.

 

[DaleM]

We got relegated because our club has no foundations to generate any cash, as such has no cash, and as such has been the target of people who desire get rich quick schemes ahead of actually building a club as club!

And we were one of the shittest 3 teams in that division

 

[torchomatic]

Too right. When we were relegated our wage bill was 125% of our income.

We got relegated because our club has no foundations to generate any cash, as such has no cash, and as such has been the target of people who desire get rich quick schemes ahead of actually building a club as club!

 

[cochese]

We got relegated because SISU kept a totally inept manager in charge and sold our top goalscorer in January.

Spunked money ? Dann and Fox turned a profit didn't they ? Some of the others contracts were allowed to run down so we didn't get a fee.

Look at us now. 3rd division and still haven't got a pot to piss in . I would rather be PL without a pot to piss in.The parachute payments alone would more than cover the investment needed to get up there.

I am sure we have had this convo before . The rent was 6 million out of a debt of 60 to 70 million over the 5 years Sisu have been in charge.


Where has the rest of the money gone ? Exactly how much in management fees have Sisu payed themselves ? Is it more than the rent ?

Not so much the management fees, but i would question how much that management dream team including orange ken took in salaries from the club? That and how much it cost to sack dowie, followed by employment and sacking Coleman.

But, as I've said, it's noticeable that they are no longer a part of the running of the club. SISU realising too late that their choice of directors were doing more harm than good. Having waggot on board seems to have improved things on the pitch at least.

 

[Grendel]

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

The percentage game is ultimately pointless. It is arbitary and open to conjecture.

We know certain things. There is general acceptance among the general football world that the council dealt the club a very poor hand when they agreed the Ricoh deal. This, whatever arguments anyone cares to deploy is ultimately beyond argument. In fact no-one has ever produced any examples of a council treating its club so shabbily. Despite his bluster and fondness for admiration on here this is a question PWKH refuses to ever address.

The notion that anyone is a SISU fan is of course as absurd as absolving the council for their role in the clubs demise. Why is anyone a fan of the owners of the club? It's ridiculous and of course they have to accept responsibility for the decision to remove the club from its community and the potential catastrophic implications this may have.

However the irony of course is there for all to see isn't it? If our council and its management company had offered the club a fair deal at the beginning of its tenure and did not create a situation where the club had to increase its adult fanbase by 40% just to break even then we would not have even heard of SISU would we? It was only the unsustainable business model that introduced our evil hedge fund in the first place.

Fan hypocrisy is also significant. When fans bleat that the council saved us they also demanded the owners (prior SISU) purchased expensive players. They blasted the owners for selling McSheffrey but why? The council needed its pound of flesh didn't it?

Virtually every independent analyst said the model would never work and the club was dead the minute it entered into its pact with the council. They have been proved 100% correct.

 

[georgehudson]

the acute problem being that we, as fans, know nothing of income vs expenditure,
this through either failing to file accounts, or being economic with truth's,
certainly the hierarchy of recent years has provided little evidence,
bacvk to the fit & proper owners debate,
PUSB

 

[italiahorse]

The percentage game is ultimately pointless. It is arbitary and open to conjecture.

We know certain things. There is general acceptance among the general football world that the council dealt the club a very poor hand when they agreed the Ricoh deal. This, whatever arguments anyone cares to deploy is ultimately beyond argument. In fact no-one has ever produced any examples of a council treating its club so shabbily. Despite his bluster and fondness for admiration on here this is a question PWKH refuses to ever address.

The notion that anyone is a SISU fan is of course as absurd as absolving the council for their role in the clubs demise. Why is anyone a fan of the owners of the club? It's ridiculous and of course they have to accept responsibility for the decision to remove the club from its community and the potential catastrophic implications this may have.

However the irony of course is there for all to see isn't it? If our council and its management company had offered the club a fair deal at the beginning of its tenure and did not create a situation where the club had to increase its adult fanbase by 40% just to break even then we would not have even heard of SISU would we? It was only the unsustainable business model that introduced our evil hedge fund in the first place.

Fan hypocrisy is also significant. When fans bleat that the council saved us they also demanded the owners (prior SISU) purchased expensive players. They blasted the owners for selling McSheffrey but why? The council needed its pound of flesh didn't it?

Virtually every independent analyst said the model would never work and the club was dead the minute it entered into its pact with the council. They have been proved 100% correct.

The club was dead because it gave up all its rights to the Ricoh from day one.
Any chance of recovery was thrown out when several chances to buy it at a bargain price were ignored by SISU obviously in favour of paying the agreed rent.

 

[italiahorse]

Love it how Grendull mentions 'every independent analyst' and then leaves it up to us to prove differently. Surely if you quote something you should relate to the article :facepalm:

Add to that 'general acceptance in the football world' ..... proof ?

Plus 'the council demanded Sisu purchase expensive players'

You do not have a clue mate.

 

[Moff]

Love it how Grendull mentions 'every independent analyst' and then leaves it up to us to prove differently. Surely if you quote something you should relate to the article :facepalm:

Add to that 'general acceptance in the football world' ..... proof ?

Plus 'the council demanded Sisu purchase expensive players'

You do not have a clue mate.

Are you sure you are using the correct user name, or are you just writing like Astute normally does?

 

[stupot07]

We got relegated because SISU kept a totally inept manager in charge and sold our top goalscorer in January.

Spunked money ? Dann and Fox turned a profit didn't they ? Some of the others contracts were allowed to run down so we didn't get a fee.

Look at us now. 3rd division and still haven't got a pot to piss in . I would rather be PL without a pot to piss in.The parachute payments alone would more than cover the investment needed to get up there.

I am sure we have had this convo before . The rent was 6 million out of a debt of 60 to 70 million over the 5 years Sisu have been in charge.


Where has the rest of the money gone ? Exactly how much in management fees have Sisu payed themselves ? Is it more than the rent ?

We made a measly £225k profit on fox, I doubt we sold dann for as much as was quoted in the media.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

 

[lewys33]

Yet again I look at the title of the thread, open the last page of the thread and see people talking about who's fault is it SISU or ACL/CCC??

Build a bridge gents. Get the fuck over it.

ACL charged a ridiculously vast sum of £1.3 million rent a year. Agreed. That is fact.

However we have been at the ricoh what 10 years? For arguments sake that is £13 million in rent. Yet we are £60 million in arrears according to JS? So we cannot just blame them for the demise can we?

SISU took over in 2007. Yet didn't do anything about the rent until 2012. Piss poor management at any level.

In reality the real culprits are the previous owners of the club. For grinding us down to bare bones before "nearly going in to admininstration". My personal view is the council bailed the football club out of the shit several times, yet people now want to blame the council? The poor management of CCFC was pre and post takeover. The root cause of all this lies way before ACL/SISU. We would have been better off in admin in 2007. It is better to just get over it and realise the position we are in.

Now with regards to the NTFC statement about ACL, not entirely sure what to think about all this. Im not big on law but I did think it was quite strange that ACL were threatening NTFC with legal action in the first place. Seemed a bit desperate to me. Now they have backed down it appears NTFC have got on their high and mighty horse and think they can act like johnny big bollocks. They may have incurred costs for legal advice but if ACL are not going to pay them for it what are they going to do take them to court over it as well? Ridiculous.

 

[skybluetony176]

The percentage game is ultimately pointless. It is arbitary and open to conjecture.

We know certain things. There is general acceptance among the general football world that the council dealt the club a very poor hand when they agreed the Ricoh deal. This, whatever arguments anyone cares to deploy is ultimately beyond argument. In fact no-one has ever produced any examples of a council treating its club so shabbily. Despite his bluster and fondness for admiration on here this is a question PWKH refuses to ever address.

The notion that anyone is a SISU fan is of course as absurd as absolving the council for their role in the clubs demise. Why is anyone a fan of the owners of the club? It's ridiculous and of course they have to accept responsibility for the decision to remove the club from its community and the potential catastrophic implications this may have.

However the irony of course is there for all to see isn't it? If our council and its management company had offered the club a fair deal at the beginning of its tenure and did not create a situation where the club had to increase its adult fanbase by 40% just to break even then we would not have even heard of SISU would we? It was only the unsustainable business model that introduced our evil hedge fund in the first place.

Fan hypocrisy is also significant. When fans bleat that the council saved us they also demanded the owners (prior SISU) purchased expensive players. They blasted the owners for selling McSheffrey but why? The council needed its pound of flesh didn't it?

Virtually every independent analyst said the model would never work and the club was dead the minute it entered into its pact with the council. They have been proved 100% correct.

pointless or not i would still like to know in your opinion what % of the blame can be apportioned to shitsu, because your post seem to indicate that you hold ACL as most to blame for the poor running of the club, when it is clear that the vast majority hold shitsu to account for the bad management of the club since they arrived.

evryone knows that the club had a shit deal at the ricoh from day 1 so why didn't shitsu either take up the options to buy or renegotiate the rent from day 1, thats shitsu's fault not ACL. so why dont you address the question to why shitsu left it years before giving examples of other rents in simular leagues and then go on rent strike?

do you not see that focusing all your energy at ACL as the bad guys ditracts from what shitsu are doing to our club? you are stepping over a pound to pick up a penny.

have you any links or statements from these indipendant analyst? i cant say i've seen any from the time the deal was done, loads of late but we had all worked it out for ourselves by then. but again if these "indipendant analyst" did say at the time why did shitsu not heed their advice, apparently the information was there according to you.

 

[lewys33]

The percentage game is ultimately pointless ........... create a situation where the club had to increase its adult fanbase by 40% just to break even .......... They have been proved 100% correct.

Sorry I couldn't help myself.

 

[olderskyblue]

Not so much the management fees.....

As the management fees were £10M + I think they are pretty important in all this. Grendel never seems to worry about this huge amount being paid out to ARVO, and I don't know why. Surely this is as important as the rent isn't it Grendel?

Should Tim have stopped paying those fees?

And then try to renegotiate them? Maybe if they had got them down to 10% of that figure it would have helped CCFC?

These fees always seemed to be ignored for some reason. What am I missing? (Apart from the obvious, that they go straight back to a SISU owned Company)

 

[italiahorse]

Are you sure you are using the correct user name, or are you just writing like Astute normally does?

If you check back you will see I started using the name in error first.

 

[Moff]

If you check back you will see I started using the name in error first.

Apologies I was only joking...I just had time on my hands and saw the devilment in my post

 

[italiahorse]

As the management fees were £10M + I think they are pretty important in all this. Grendel never seems to worry about this huge amount being paid out to ARVO, and I don't know why. Surely this is as important as the rent isn't it Grendel?

Should Tim have stopped paying those fees?

And then try to renegotiate them? Maybe if they had got them down to 10% of that figure it would have helped CCFC?

These fees always seemed to be ignored for some reason. What am I missing? (Apart from the obvious, that they go straight back to a SISU owned Company)

Always wondered why a hedge fund would want a football team.
I'm slowly piecing together the reasons and it doesn't look good for CCFC.
It seems to me that we are a financial dumping ground.

 

[italiahorse]

Apologies I was only joking...I just had time on my hands and saw the devilment in my post

No problem. If you don't have fun on the board you would be suicidal.
Dangling a hook and getting a bite is a good sport.:claping hands:

 

[RPHunt]

These fees always seemed to be ignored for some reason. What am I missing? (Apart from the obvious, that they go straight back to a SISU owned Company)

I think in the last year accounts were published, interest and management fees were over £3m, but I think you are wrong to say they are being ignored.

It's just about priorities. Some people consider SISU being able to maintain its Mayfair office and the owner being able to maintain her Holland Park mansion are more important than the club playing in a decent stadium.

 

[dongonzalos]

I think in the last year accounts were published, interest and management fees were over £3m, but I think you are wrong to say they are being ignored.

It's just about priorities. Some people consider SISU being able to maintain its Mayfair office and the owner being able to maintain her Holland Park mansion are more important than the club playing in a decent stadium.

I never knew that
The irony, Joys house would rent out for more than the latest rent offers for the Ricoh.

The average rent in her square is 32k a month

 

[No future with SISU]

The percentage game is ultimately pointless. It is arbitary and open to conjecture.

We know certain things. There is general acceptance among the general football world that the council dealt the club a very poor hand when they agreed the Ricoh deal. This, whatever arguments anyone cares to deploy is ultimately beyond argument. In fact no-one has ever produced any examples of a council treating its club so shabbily. Despite his bluster and fondness for admiration on here this is a question PWKH refuses to ever address.

The notion that anyone is a SISU fan is of course as absurd as absolving the council for their role in the clubs demise. Why is anyone a fan of the owners of the club? It's ridiculous and of course they have to accept responsibility for the decision to remove the club from its community and the potential catastrophic implications this may have.

However the irony of course is there for all to see isn't it? If our council and its management company had offered the club a fair deal at the beginning of its tenure and did not create a situation where the club had to increase its adult fanbase by 40% just to break even then we would not have even heard of SISU would we? It was only the unsustainable business model that introduced our evil hedge fund in the first place.

Fan hypocrisy is also significant. When fans bleat that the council saved us they also demanded the owners (prior SISU) purchased expensive players. They blasted the owners for selling McSheffrey but why? The council needed its pound of flesh didn't it?

Virtually every independent analyst said the model would never work and the club was dead the minute it entered into its pact with the council. They have been proved 100% correct.

"So every independent analyst said the model would never work" and SISU still took over and only relised after 5 years and still you think they are not at fault. You do not care if they are at fault because it suits you to bash the council as you are a council hater. People like you are always waiting to complain about what the councils do, if they are right or wrong.

 

[RPHunt]

He hates everyone - except those on GMK who he seems hero-worship.

 

[Astute]

Are you sure you are using the correct user name, or are you just writing like Astute normally does?

Yeah don't take my job just because I have been busy at work.

And leave the Grendull facts alone. He must be right because he earns nearly a million pounds a year because he is worth it.

 

[lewys33]

Yeah don't take my job just because I have been busy at work.

And leave the Grendull facts alone. He must be right because he earns nearly a million pounds a year because he is worth it.

I thought it was Joe Hart that did the shampoo adverts??

 

[Sutty]

My personal view is the council bailed the football club out of the shit several times, yet people now want to blame the council?

I agree with a lot of the points you've made there, just wanted to pull up this one specifically because it comes up a lot.

Sisu also bailed the club out when it nearly went to the wall in '07. The fact they saved the club at that time doesn't mean they should be absolved of criticism for mistakes made since. Equally, while the council did step in to sort out the stadium, that doesn't mean we can't apportion blame for what has happened since, in part due to the luidicrous rent deal imposed on the club.

As I say, I agree with a lot of your points, just think the argument that we can't apportion blame to a party that once helped the club out doesn't really stack up.

 

[fernandopartridge]

The council partly bailed the club out though they've had more benefit from the Ricoh than the club will ever get.

 

[lewys33]

I agree with a lot of the points you've made there, just wanted to pull up this one specifically because it comes up a lot.

Sisu also bailed the club out when it nearly went to the wall in '07. The fact they saved the club at that time doesn't mean they should be absolved of criticism for mistakes made since. Equally, while the council did step in to sort out the stadium, that doesn't mean we can't apportion blame for what has happened since, in part due to the luidicrous rent deal imposed on the club.

As I say, I agree with a lot of your points, just think the argument that we can't apportion blame to a party that once helped the club out doesn't really stack up.

I agree the council are still to blame in a lot of this. Both sides are far from angelic. I have thought on several occasions that ACL/CCC have acted strangely if as they say their best interests are to get CCFC back to Coventry. I just think people don't realise that on this long journey they have done a lot to get CCFC out of the shit (mostly pre-sisu) but they have become less and less helpful with SISU in control.

 

[Astute]

I agree the council are still to blame in a lot of this. Both sides are far from angelic. I have thought on several occasions that ACL/CCC have acted strangely if as they say their best interests are to get CCFC back to Coventry. I just think people don't realise that on this long journey they have done a lot to get CCFC out of the shit (mostly pre-sisu) but they have become less and less helpful with SISU in control.

The only help Joy will allow from CCC is the freehold for the price she has said. Nothing else is good enough. No free rent whilst in administration. No much cheaper rent. No pie money. Nothing that she said she wanted previously is good enough.

 

[AJB1983]

Which is precisely the problem, acl move significantly, sisu move the goalposts, as happened in the infamous 29th January 'shaking hands' meeting.
New rent terms were agreed, when sisu emailed back with the contract written up it was completely different to what was agreed at meeting.

 

[skybluetony176]

The council partly bailed the club out though they've had more benefit from the Ricoh than the club will ever get.

you could say the same about shitsu

 

[skybluetony176]

I thought it was Joe Hart that did the shampoo adverts??

i wish shitsu would wash & go, well they can skip the wash and just fuck off.

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

i wish shitsu would wash & go, well they can skip the wash and just fuck off.

Beautifully put sir... well made me smile anyway- the simplicity of it has cheered me up on a very gloomy work day!!!

 

[Grendel]

Apologies I was only joking...I just had time on my hands and saw the devilment in my post

Beautifully put sir... well made me smile anyway- the simplicity of it has cheered me up on a very gloomy work day!!!

Interesting the Northampton fc rejection of an out of court settlement for their legal action is getting little attention on here.