Reduced ticket prices next Tuesday (7 Viewers)

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
sadly you're not the first poster to say they'd rather see liquidation before sisu get the arena, tbh if they got it for free I couldn't care less as long as Coventry are playing back at home. Blinded by sisu hate, you aren't the first and won't be the last.

Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?

Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.
 

covmark

Well-Known Member
Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?

Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.
all I care about is having the team in Coventry, don't care about the why's and how's. Freehold, lease, rent, couldn't give a toss. I'm afraid my morals come 2nd to having city back home. If this makes me some kind of heathen, so be it.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Why do you care if Sisu own the Freehold?

Its not going to make any difference to the club long term.

Wouldn't that make the club more attractive to future purchasers?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't that make the club more attractive to future purchasers?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

Why? The freehold would be in a separate company.
 

Nick

Administrator
I hold no allegiance to Otium, Fisher or Seppala. I strongly believe that should she liquidate then the FL will be forced to let a phoenix club in with minimal penalty as it was their doing. If not I'm happy to start in the lower leagues.

So what is your allegiance to the council / ACL?
 

friendly_canary

New Member
As a sort of neutral I went to the match v Sheff United last sunday....


I risk being slated here but I actually sort of enjoyed it. But then a)I'm not a Coventry fan and b) I just enjoyed watching the football.

I am tempted to go to Walsall away mind you..
 

Monners

Well-Known Member
As a sort of neutral I went to the match v Sheff United last sunday....


I risk being slated here but I actually sort of enjoyed it. But then a)I'm not a Coventry fan and b) I just enjoyed watching the football.

I am tempted to go to Walsall away mind you..

If you are based in Cov, then why did you go all the way to Northampton to watch a game? Why not go and watch the local team like a lot of students do? Oh yeah - forgot! ;) (time to go home I think!)
 

simple_simon

New Member
If they get the Ricoh through these means, they are no longer my club. I disagree on a fundamental moral and philosophical level with their tactics and I don't want to see them prevail. Like I say, each to their own.

OF course, to take your argument that the legal construct that represents CCFC is "the club" then the club disappeared in the summer when Otium picked the bones. I don't think the FL would let us disappear, and the fact that you do is what Seppala is counting on.

I agree with You shimmere.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
I hold no allegiance to Otium, Fisher or Seppala. I strongly believe that should she liquidate then the FL will be forced to let a phoenix club in with minimal penalty as it was their doing. If not I'm happy to start in the lower leagues.

The FL won't have a say in it, they only have jurisdiction over the Championship, league one and league two.


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

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
The FL won't have a say in it, they only have jurisdiction over the Championship, league one and league two.


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

I think he means if Sisu liquidate then a Phoenix CCFC should be allowed straight back into the league as the FL would have contributed to the situation.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I think he means if Sisu liquidate then a Phoenix CCFC should be allowed straight back into the league as the FL would have contributed to the situation.

given the only reason a club bearing the name CCFC is in the league, is because the league have already bent over backwards to have that happen, it won't happen again.

Aldershot and Maidstone didn't even get the chances we did.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
given the only reason a club bearing the name CCFC is in the league, is because the league have already bent over backwards to have that happen, it won't happen again.

Don't you mean allegedly?

They also said we had nowhere else to play but Northampton. We also know this is false.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
given the only reason a club bearing the name CCFC is in the league, is because the league have already bent over backwards to have that happen, it won't happen again.

Aldershot and Maidstone didn't even get the chances we did.

So they hand the golden share over to a company which then liquidates the club a few months later and they deny any responsibility you mean?

Actually your right, I can see the league acting like that.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
So they hand the golden share over to a company which then liquidates the club a few months later and they deny any responsibility you mean?

If it's a choice between the club dead now, or the club maybe dead a bit later on, I'm sure they'd take the later on option.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Don't you mean allegedly?

They also said we had nowhere else to play but Northampton. We also know this is false.

They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.

There was still a rental agreement in place.
 

ohitsaidwalker king power

Well-Known Member
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.

Constructive vagrants....?
 
Last edited:

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.

Well technically no (also technically the club was never in admin and CCFC Ltd wasn't liquidated at that point).

But your answer begs the question: should the league have any power at all over moving a club? I thought after MK Dons the answer was yes, but if you make the argument that the league can't ever tell a club where they have to play, then what is to stop that situation happening again?

(note, I am not comparing our situation and theirs, just asking where the league's powers should extend to in your opinion)
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
Well technically no (also technically the club was never in admin and CCFC Ltd wasn't liquidated at that point).

But your answer begs the question: should the league have any power at all over moving a club? I thought after MK Dons the answer was yes, but if you make the argument that the league can't ever tell a club where they have to play, then what is to stop that situation happening again?

(note, I am not comparing our situation and theirs, just asking where the league's powers should extend to in your opinion)

You also have to ask if the league cant stop something like that, what exactly is its purpose?
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Well technically no (also technically the club was never in admin and CCFC Ltd wasn't liquidated at that point).

But your answer begs the question: should the league have any power at all over moving a club? I thought after MK Dons the answer was yes, but if you make the argument that the league can't ever tell a club where they have to play, then what is to stop that situation happening again?

(note, I am not comparing our situation and theirs, just asking where the league's powers should extend to in your opinion)

I can't see the FL or FA sanctioning another permanent relocation and refranchising, so can't see another MK Dons scenario happening again.


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

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I can't see the FL or FA sanctioning another permanent relocation and refranchising, so can't see another MK Dons scenario happening again.

I would generally agree with you although here's a nagging point...

What happens if no deal can be agreed for the Ricoh, and nobody gives planning permission for another stadium?

Isn't this another reason why it's imperative to pressure all sides to make *something* happen to get the club back in the right place? If we say 'alright then, go' we condone the possibility of MK Dons?
 
They didn't have anywhere else to play. Having gone into administration and subsequently liquidation the club was homeless. It isn't the leagues job to determine who should agree what regarding rental arrangements and neither should it be.
CCFC was being run by CCFC LTD and CCFC HOLDINGS, as only one went into liquidation the club itself did not.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I can't see the FL or FA sanctioning another permanent relocation and refranchising, so can't see another MK Dons scenario happening again.


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

Let's play hypotheticals for a second.

If a situation arose whereby a club could neither gain planning permission for a ground in the conurbation nor agree a rental deal for the stadium that's there, what would the FL do? They can't over turn planning law and apparently they can't force the club to accept the rental deal...

Edit: beaten like Ben Turner in the 100m
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Let's play hypotheticals for a second.

If a situation arose whereby a club could neither gain planning permission for a ground in the conurbation nor agree a rental deal for the stadium that's there, what would the FL do? They can't over turn planning law and apparently they can't force the club to accept the rental deal...

Edit: beaten like Ben Turner in the 100m

:D

it's worth pointing out as it stands, it's very unlikely.

It is however the best reason not to close off the idea of a new ground altogether!

I don't believe they'll build one, but I'm certainly not welded to the Ricoh at all costs. Time moves on, and all that.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
:D

it's worth pointing out as it stands, it's very unlikely.

It is however the best reason not to close off the idea of a new ground altogether!

I don't believe they'll build one, but I'm certainly not welded to the Ricoh at all costs. Time moves on, and all that.

Same here, but there is a real possibility that they won't be able to get planning permission. I wonder if the latest change in tack isn't because they're having trouble sorting out a new ground.

The question arises though, when do the FL step in? If they never do, how can they actually prevent another MK Dons by the back door?

Edit: forgot I was talking hypotheticals, regardless of our situation, surely this is a pressing issue for football governance as a whole?
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Let's play hypotheticals for a second.

If a situation arose whereby a club could neither gain planning permission for a ground in the conurbation nor agree a rental deal for the stadium that's there, what would the FL do? They can't over turn planning law and apparently they can't force the club to accept the rental deal...

Edit: beaten like Ben Turner in the 100m

They would just lengthen the temporary move, while the club explored every legal avenue, or threaten the club with the withdrawal of the GS. I honestly can't see another MK dons scenario, they certainly couldn't permanent move to Northampton.


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

Deleted member 5849

Guest
surely this is a pressing issue for football governance as a whole?

It is, but it's not as easy to solve as it seems, is it?

Even if in our specific instance you back ACL/CCC's stance 100%, to force a club to rent the one ground in existence at whatever cost because it's in the place that bears its name is blocking people into a corner, isn't it?

How can you tell some club's benefactor that OK, the ground owner's charging you £7mil pa rent, but you must stay there at all costs?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top