But we all know that sisu doesn't care about the club or the fans, while on the other hand ACL have repeatedly said their actions is all about 'what is best for the fans and the club'. So by your argument it should be ACL coming forward with a 'we have listened to the fans and think a short term deal is the best for the club' offer.
SISU's Cash Flow Budget (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter Voice_of_Reason
- Start date
But we all know that sisu doesn't care about the club or the fans, while on the other hand ACL have repeatedly said their actions is all about 'what is best for the fans and the club'. So by your argument it should be ACL coming forward with a 'we have listened to the fans and think a short term deal is the best for the club' offer.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
If we put sarcasm to one side (
), looking at it seriously SISU should be moving heaven and earth to get a deal done with ACL.In the short to medium term the increased crowds that would undoubtedly come at the Ricoh would fund pretty much any rent that ACL might ask (including any penalties for terminating early, if ACL insist on a minimum term of 10 years) leaving SISU better off than they would be at Northampton.
In the longer term if they really do intend to build a new stadium, then returning to the Ricoh would minimise the risk of (potentially) a large proportion of the fan base "losing the habit". If we really stay away for 5 years (how long before that increases?), I have serious worries about what support would be left - and one has to presume that investors in a new stadium would have the same worry.
jimmyhillsfanclub
Well-Known Member
This should just be posted on the multitude of the ACLv SISU threads.....
as soon as a new thread decends into the borefest of ACL v SISU.... lets just post this and have done with it.
Think of all the time some of you will save yourselves....you'll no longer have to type out the same dull as fuck arguments 10 times per day!
Result.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
jimmyhillsfanclub
Well-Known Member
good luck with that.....I fear its a full time job.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Putting one hat on...
It may not be good for you
or others, but strange though it is, staying away for five years could well be better now than returning next week.Do that, and managing a return to the city well could see a massive upsurge in interest, goodwill, attendances, gain new fans who wouldn't otherwise have been fans.
As I said, not good for the likes of yourself, where your statement is indeed perfectly true.
The worst of all worlds could well be them coming back next week however. The bad feeling is still there, some will have already lost the habit, and there's no opportunity to pick up new fans or have some appreciate what isn't there.
So the uncomfortable truth could be that having made the leap away, it might be better to stay away for a bit!
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
until the liquidation process has been completed nothing will be sorted out between OTIUM & ACL
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Can't believe people blindly follow Sisu plan without really knowing what it is or how it is being financed.
If they publish plans for a 22k stadium with an obvious option of moving it up to Ricoh standard/capacity some people might hang around. A backward step will not be acceptable to many.
But without doubt the new kids/fans will be lost for 5 years and I suspect that a lot of kids from the past few years are doing something else now.
Surely you should be pushing to see SISI plans ?
If they publish plans for a 22k stadium with an obvious option of moving it up to Ricoh standard/capacity some people might hang around. A backward step will not be acceptable to many.
But without doubt the new kids/fans will be lost for 5 years and I suspect that a lot of kids from the past few years are doing something else now.
Surely you should be pushing to see SISI plans ?
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
Godiva. I do not agree, the Club do not have to own the Stadium. They do however need access to the revenues it generates. That will require dialogue and respect for and from each party. For reference Man City do not own their Stadium and West Ham will not own the Queen Elizabeth Stadium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Stadium_(London).
The big difference between these two big clubs and CCFC is the mind-set of the owners. Both Man C and West Ham's owners are, First, fans of football, Second they respect the fans and the local community, Third they have an understanding of how to create value from football. The evidence to date suggests that SISU can not claim to be capable in any of these.
I am OK with SISU returning to the RICOH with CCFC. But they do not need to own it. Further I would not trust them with it. They have only ever demonstrated a level of disregard and disrespect for Coventry football fans and the City of Coventry.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I'll grant you Man City, but not convinced West Ham is a great example to counter with. Give it a decade and they'll be in a total mess!
Of course by that time their current owners will have long scarpered, leaving some other fools to deal with it...
Of course by that time their current owners will have long scarpered, leaving some other fools to deal with it...
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
For sure time will prove if West Ham, works. The point is that other football clubs can make the lease model work, so to state that clubs 'must' own the stadium is clearly not correct. They do need access to the revenue streams, and that in CCFC case can be accomplished via a lease agreement. The problem in my view is SISU don't want a successful football club they want the RICOH and its associated assets. The Club is just an inconvenience that has to be worked around.
Last edited:
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Are you saying they've done something similar before :thinking about:
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Putting one hat on...
It may not be good for you
Do that, and managing a return to the city well could see a massive upsurge in interest, goodwill, attendances, gain new fans who wouldn't otherwise have been fans.
As I said, not good for the likes of yourself, where your statement is indeed perfectly true.
The worst of all worlds could well be them coming back next week however. The bad feeling is still there, some will have already lost the habit, and there's no opportunity to pick up new fans or have some appreciate what isn't there.
So the uncomfortable truth could be that having made the leap away, it might be better to stay away for a bit!
That seems a pretty optimistic view of the world to me.
Our core support is probably much like us, people who've grown up with the club - who booked holidays around the fixture list, made excuses to miss family events if there was a home game etc etc. If that habit is broken over 5 years, will it come back? I really don't know.
As for the new fans - I guess you're looking at a younger generation. Shall we call them the Sky Sports watching, Man U/Chelsea/Man City supporting generation? Just how excited will they be to watch League 1 or 2 football (maybe even Conference, given small attendances and FFP) in a 12,000 seater stadium (even if capacity can be increased.....)?
We're all guessing, but I'm increasingly worried about the future.
skybluefred
New Member
That's not true--Fisher & Sisu put the Club into administration not ACL.It was always Sisu's intention to get out of the lease agreement without paying any money to do so, and that's why sisu went into admin.
Don't be fooled - ACL effectively put us in administration. Sisu simply used the possibility to do it themself to influence the selection of administrator. And they did pay money to get out, to lawyers and even settled some - if not all - of the debt owed to ACL.
But it was money well spent in terms of it being peanuts compared to the overall burden of staying as tenant without access to all income streams and no possibility of building assets to secure their investment.
A
alphapappa
Guest
I am really confused by how it could be possibly be argued that offering a 3 year deal to sisu "while they build a new stadium" is in anyway beneficial to the fans. Surely all this would do is in effect put a green light to sisu, and if they are in effect going to build this stadium surely all allowing sisu to get away with this will simply give sisu more money to put towards the new stadium! So in effect all it would do is condone the disgraceful antics of sisu! Once you give in to bullies it is a slippery slope. What happens down the line, and sisu have relied on the academy to keep the club up and it fails? What is to stop sisu once more coming back and saying they cannot afford the £150k for a league 2 club? At some point you have to draw the line! Otherwise you might as well admit absolute failure and give away the ricoh for free! Sisus are bullies, and must be purged from the club asap.
Dhinsa's_Millions
Well-Known Member
Good points - I totally agree about FFP: Even if the total crock of shite Stadium were to be built it would be a little too late to 'fund' CCFC as that funding of wages at a sustainable level wouldn't be allowed. Unfortunately unless SISU get a deal with ACL in relation to the Ricoh (rent or a < 100% ownership) then the playing side will be totally crippled by FFP - We wouldn't be able to afford the likes of Clarke and Baker who will effectively keep us just afloat (If we don't get injuries this season!).
Remember in all of this - SISU have 'moved on' though. Its hilarious!
Last edited:
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
"Don't be fooled"
Are you saying that in your view, if ACL hadn't initiated administration proceedings, SISU would have allowed CCFC Ltd to continue as was, with the lease still in existence?
"Don't be fooled"
Are you saying that in your view, if ACL hadn't initiated administration proceedings, SISU would have allowed CCFC Ltd to continue as was, with the lease still in existence?
I meant 'by semantics'. ACL did exactly what they should do and what any other business would. I even believe sisu have calculated with it as an outcome.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Sounds like we're in broad agreement.
I was implying that irrespective of ACL's actions, CCFC Ltd would have ended up in administration - how else to get out of the lease?
I agree - the outcome was what sisu wanted. Maybe we should give them some credit and think they planned for it?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I guess that's true to a degree.
However, I think there's a large element of "be careful what you wish for".
I think that if they'd behaved and negotiated sensibly, they (and by extension "we") could be in a much better position than they currently find themselves.
Maybe, but when it comes to what exactly happened during the negotiations we are completely in the dark. We know bit and pieces but not the whole story and certainly nobody has yet told the true story.
There have been negotiations with ACL - with CCC - with ACL and CCC. In what order, what agenda and how the discussions went ... we don't know half of it.
We only know that they each have presented their own spinned versions of half truth.
I - maybe as the only one - believe Hoffmans appearance (that is re-re-reappearance) changed something or somebody's mind. To me it's like every time Hoffman goes public everything turns from bad to worse.
I also believe ACL chairman stepping down to become director at Yorkshire Bank influenced the whole game, but we'll probably never know.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It's a question I've wanted to ask for a while actually.
My accountant friend (yes, I have friends
) keeps telling me there are ways to do it beyond how they did... but refuses to go beyond that(!)
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
John mutton's public statements probably didn't help either. If they were his public ones, tempered for the press, christ knows what he said in private!
Astute
Well-Known Member
But didn't Joy admit that she had given a price for the Ricoh and it was a take it or leave it offer? Not interested in renting and only wants to own it.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yes to the latter, no to the former.
They didn't get as far as discussing the former, and she's open to negotiation on the former.
skybluefred
New Member
When did she say she was open to negotiation on price for the Ricoh and to whom.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
In her interview with Les Reid.
"“Realistically, this council don’t think they can work with me. I know I cannot work with them. It doesn’t mean I can’t negotiate a deal."
"“Realistically, this council don’t think they can work with me. I know I cannot work with them. It doesn’t mean I can’t negotiate a deal."
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Yeah but she also said
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-fc-owner-joy-6096912Les Reid interview said:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yup, in the context of wasting time talking to them about renting, when she had assumed "we were going to talk about a deal involving stadium ownership.”
BrisbaneBronco
Well-Known Member
As mentioned before. SISU are apparently prepared to take a financial hit over the next 3-5 yrs. Their hope is that it will bring ACL down and force CCC to offer a deal to purchase the Ricoh. The financial blow is a lot bigger than SISU expected as they did not envisage NOPM and gates of around 2k. I am sure they would have expected gates of around 5k.
We are where we are, and IMO the only way CCFC will ever play in the City of Coventry again will be if/when CCC sell SISU the Ricoh. If this does not happen, then there is no way CCC will approve plans for another stadium inside Coventry, even if SISU's plans to build one are genuine.
So, we are left to rot in Northampton or look at building a stadium outside Coventry or cheaper alternatives like Hinckley. If the Judicial review is again thrown out, then CCC/ACL will become history so far as SISU are concerned, that's if they are not already.
We are where we are, and IMO the only way CCFC will ever play in the City of Coventry again will be if/when CCC sell SISU the Ricoh. If this does not happen, then there is no way CCC will approve plans for another stadium inside Coventry, even if SISU's plans to build one are genuine.
So, we are left to rot in Northampton or look at building a stadium outside Coventry or cheaper alternatives like Hinckley. If the Judicial review is again thrown out, then CCC/ACL will become history so far as SISU are concerned, that's if they are not already.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
Its not about whether it cheaper apparently, Seppalla pretty much admitted so by saying the council wont work with her and she wont with them. On this stance I pretty much applaud the club as I dont think its correct the council can have so much of an effect over the clubs business especially when they are looking after there own affairs, its a total conflict of interest.
Not saying I agree with the fallout of this situation and in specific SISU's actions but looking at the councils own records over the last 30 or 40 years I certainly don't want them anywhere near the club.
Not saying I agree with the fallout of this situation and in specific SISU's actions but looking at the councils own records over the last 30 or 40 years I certainly don't want them anywhere near the club.