Sisu - repulsive vultures (4 Viewers)

[covcity4life]

nick cant you do anything about blatant wumming? going back and forth and getting aggro is one thing but dismissing someone elses opinion by calling them sisu employees is something else. you need to throw a few bans around imo

p.s my xmass party also at ricoh soon,i wont spend any money at the bar though...........cos i am stingy.

 

---

[Sky Blue Dal]

Maybe there are Cov fans who are also Cov taxpayers, and don't expect or want the club to be subsidised by the council when there are other more pressing needs on local finances.

And maybe there are some others who think that SISU are such terrible owners that the best thing for the club would be to get shot of them. File this latter point under 'prioritising the club above the (current) owners'.

Glad you can see what I am seeing .. :claping hands:

 

[Grendel]

Sisu are not vultures. Vultures feed off carrion that is already dead - they do not proactively cause the death.

True the term more fits an organisation that charged a dying organisation 10 times the market rent value just because it could

The council are the vultures no question.

 

[dadgad]

Are SISU not also trying to protect their asset? The football club?

In light of what Sisu have done - systematically reduce the prospects of the club, actively pursuing relegation, and ripping it from its fanbase - your post holds no water.

 

[magic82ball]

why are you talking to me as if i am a sisu fan? i need problems resolved, not blame being shifted to sisu

i am well aware sisu have made numerous mistakes and still are to this day. thus you dont see fans praising sisu for most part. but you do see fans kissing councils arse which is plain weird.

they charged a silly rental rate, refused to negotiate it till sisu played hardball, this completely fucked up the working relationship from get go. they have flat out said they will never sell ricoh in past,then pretended they might and when it comes down to it rejected any plans again. they are messing about with the club and fans just like sisu

as far as i am concerned any real ccfc fan HATES both sides.

The reason I was perhaps implying you were pro SISU (apologies if you are not) is your reluctance to hold them accountable for their failures in tenure and would prefer to blame ACL/CCC.

ACL/CCC have no case to answer. Simple. Both have no loyalty or concern to the business practices of CCFC as they are completely independent businesses.

Of course you would be right to suggest that there is a vested interested in the fortunes of CCFC for both parties and probably from their own business standpoint, could have done thing differently to facilitate a smoother working relationship, but that's their cross to bare - and ACL don't seem to be doing too bad without CCFC as it is so probably wont be losing too much sleep.

Stop blaming other people for SISU mistakes.

 

[cochese]

They don't. Quite simply.

In order to be an effective business going forward they need to be in a position to have income streams on par with the rest of the football league. Organically speaking as a club we are a bit of a sleeping giant (I use that term very loosely) in respect to our potential fan base and our one team one city status. To ever fulfil our potential we need to be maximising all revenue streams, this cannot be argued against. So how do we do it?

Firstly and ideally the Ricoh would be 100% club owner - the problems I see here are the council/ACL do not with to sell (as is there right, I cannot force you to sell me your house for 10% of its market value just because I would be homeless otherwise)
Secondly, if option 1 is not going to happen, a sensible rent agreement needs to be in place to benefit both parties - The problem with this is that SISU are so hell bent on option 1 that as we have now found out are willing to continue holding the club hostage even when there is a seemingly good rental offer on the table.

Ring-fencing all of these variables and what ifs is the true nature of ownership SISU would have. As I understand it they have said that it would be SISU and not CCFC who own the ground and surrounding areas, something most have known to be the game plan some time ago. Meaning they could sell the club and charge rent to the club for use of the Ricoh, and if you thought ccc were unreasonable, I would dread to think what prices SISU would charge.

So for me the only option they have is to renegotiate rent (building a new ground on the outskirts of cov and spending millions with predicted gates of 3000 or so is not a viable option, even in the world of Joy and Tim) which is not ideal but its all we've got. You cant then start throwing law suits around the place because you didn't do your due diligence properly before you bought the club.

SISU don't want to rent. The council don't want to sell.

Returning to a rental agreement would get us right back where we started. A football club with no assets other than the players, that no future buyer would want to touch. It would suit us fans because we'd be back playing at the Ricoh, but SISU would still be no closer to realising the full potential of owning a football club and the stadium. The potential that a future buyer would jump at the chance of owning if everything was in place.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

good post, works same if you replace sisu with council

i like how you have done that to show both sides are to blame.

What gets me about your anti-council rhetoric; is that you are so intent on following this route, you never bother to truly think through SISU's actions.

Even someone with the most pro-SISU of leanings must acknowledge that their end-game is ownership of the Arena.

But to achieve that, can't you see that they are imperilling the very existence of our football club? That's the football club you purport to support being used as a bargaining chip. Not by the council, but by SISU.

As such - and I'm sorry to say this - I can't see how you can support anyone using our football club as collateral in a wager in a business acquisition. And I can't see how any fan would think so is fit.

So, it may be rude; but I don't support your stance. It's perverse and I don't for one resect it one iota

 

[covcity4life]

What gets me about your anti-council rhetoric; is that you are so intent on following this route, you never bother to truly think through SISU's actions.

Even someone with the most pro-SISU of leanings must acknowledge that their end-game is ownership of the Arena.

But to achieve that, can't you see that they are imperilling the very existence of our football club? That's the football club you purport to support being used as a bargaining chip. Not by the council, but by SISU.

As such - and I'm sorry to say this - I can't see how you can support anyone using our football club as collateral in a wager in a business acquisition. And I can't see how any fan would think so is fit.

So, it may be rude; but I don't support your stance. It's perverse and I don't for one resect it one iota

i dont support sisu,in fact i think they are dumb shits

so your post is irrelevant.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

i dont support sisu,in fact i think they are dumb shits

so your post is irrelevant.

No it's not. Your posts are constantly making out ACL/CCC to be more to blame than SISU. Everyone who uses this forum regularly will know as such.

But the council aren't using the football club's very existence as a few chips on a roulette table.

As such, it's not my post that's irrelevant. It's your support for the club you acclaim to love that is

 

[tuousis]

good post, works same if you replace sisu with council

i like how you have done that to show both sides are to blame.

Tell your mummy,cant you think for yourself.

 

[bezzer]

Tell your mummy,cant you think for yourself.

Why the insult? What good is that going to do??

 

[magic82ball]

Why the insult? What good is that going to do??

Bezzer, on another thread you stated, and I quote "you sir, are a mug"

Mmmm....

 

[covcity4life]

Bezzer, on another thread you stated, and I quote "you sir, are a mug"

Mmmm....

BECAUSE THAT GUY SAID HE DIDNT MIND THE CLUB GETTING HURT AS LONG AS SISU DID TOO!

wtf is wrong with you people


MMM-if i see people kissing sisus ass i will have a go at them too, but i only see council lovers so far

p.s what sort insult was that? ha

 

[magic82ball]

SISU don't want to rent. The council don't want to sell.

Returning to a rental agreement would get us right back where we started. A football club with no assets other than the players, that no future buyer would want to touch. It would suit us fans because we'd be back playing at the Ricoh, but SISU would still be no closer to realising the full potential of owning a football club and the stadium. The potential that a future buyer would jump at the chance of owning if everything was in place.

My post stated return to the Ricoh on beneficial terms for both parties, to my mind that has already been offered.

The club are never going to own the Ricoh, SISU might with their gorilla tactics but not the football club.

Everyone wants the ground and the club united, but not at any cost. If SISU want it they should offer a fair price which to date I doubt has happened. If there is no way out of the mess they find themselves in, they should sell up at what the club us worth and stop holding my club to ransom.

 

[covcity4life]

no rent free offer has been made officially by all accounts so how can sisu reject it?

and before you ask, YES they should accept it,of course they should.

 

[Ashdown1]

BECAUSE THAT GUY SAID HE DIDNT MIND THE CLUB GETTING HURT AS LONG AS SISU DID TOO!

wtf is wrong with you people


MMM-if i see people kissing sisus ass i will have a go at them too, but i only see council lovers so far

p.s what sort insult was that? ha

You ought to make your mind up, 1 day you blame the council but 3 days ago you were hammering away at the hedge fund saying it was all their fault, is there a bit of schizophrenia going on ??

 

[magic82ball]

BECAUSE THAT GUY SAID HE DIDNT MIND THE CLUB GETTING HURT AS LONG AS SISU DID TOO!

wtf is wrong with you people


MMM-if i see people kissing sisus ass i will have a go at them too, but i only see council lovers so far

p.s what sort insult was that? ha

Yes I know what was said, I said it.

And in context what I was saying is its irrational and petty to think like that and should a gun be held to my head I probably would not choose that but the depth of hate I have for the basturds that have done this is clouding my judgement somewhat.

P.P.S - the only person I see round here obsessed with the council is you my friend.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Yer we know all 60 million pounds of it?



. QUOTE=Nick;597644]What about the massive rent they charged when we first moved in?[/QUOTE]

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

nick cant you do anything about blatant wumming?

Yeah he could start by giving you a ban.

 

[magic82ball]

no rent free offer has been made officially by all accounts so how can sisu reject it?

and before you ask, YES they should accept it,of course they should.

Its been lodged with the football league, its hardly going to be rhetoric if its been lodged with them is it. And SISU response was something along the lines of "There is no way we will return to the Ricoh under the tenant/landlord relationship that has crippled the club in the past and resulted in a forced admin and 10 point deduction" - that's not a direct quote but along those lines, oh and something about match day costs that everyone pays even them now at Northampton.

It cant be spelled out any clearer what SISU's intentions are.

 

[Nick]

Come on Nick, that's an easy one:

This all comes down to SISU's inability to negotiate a better rent deal when they took over. If they knew the rent to be excessive, either renegotiate or don't sign on the line to buy the club that was hamstrung into a unrealistic business model.

This also further emphasises the councils position of trying to achieve what's best for the tax payer, which as we have already established is their priority, not CCFC.

I am talking before SISU.....

People go on about morals and principles but is hammering the club for rent at the start ok?

 

[covcity4life]

You ought to make your mind up, 1 day you blame the council but 3 days ago you were hammering away at the hedge fund saying it was all their fault, is there a bit of schizophrenia going on ??

wow,is it really that hard to believe that some cov fans love ccfc and hate sisu/council?

you pick a side all you like,i already have one and its the sky blues.

 

[magic82ball]

I am talking before SISU.....

People go on about morals and principles but is hammering the club for rent at the start ok?

what's that got to do with anything? The rent being charged is exorbitant, no one denies this, but why do you think the council/ACL shouldn't be charging whatever the mugs in control of the club are prepared to pay? Is it Newcastle's fault Liverpool were willing to pay £35mil for Andy caroll? Or adebayors fault man city wanted to pay him £150k pw? Its business and you get what you can, and the succession of mugs at the club have all been prepared to pay it, inc sisu when they took over.

 

[wingy]

wow,is it really that hard to believe that some cov fans love ccfc and hate sisu/council?

you pick a side all you like,i already have one and its the sky blues.

The Mark up on ACL's own rent on move In was the same as The terms offered as operating costs currently ,not a lot really .

ACL were paying the council £900K. per an at that point .


EDIT; Sorry wrong quote ,meant as reply to Nicks post

 

[Astute]

wow,is it really that hard to believe that some cov fans love ccfc and hate sisu/council?

you pick a side all you like,i already have one and its the sky blues.

And back Joy and SISU all the way because of it.

 

[Ashdown1]

wow,is it really that hard to believe that some cov fans love ccfc and hate sisu/council?

you pick a side all you like,i already have one and its the sky blues.

I have not picked any sides but I'm very aware that hedge funds are utterly ruthless money sharks