How long, accountability ? (3 Viewers)

[dongonzalos]

When will be the cut off when we can start judging SISU by their own decisions and actions?

Personally I think six years worth is a long enough time to stop hiding behind decisions made by previous owners.......

 

---

[play_in_skyblue_stripes]

Of course it is.

 

[Senior Vick from Alicante]

Unfortunately SISU will never accept accountability for anything they do. They operate in the shadows and treat everyone like mushrooms, theirs only ever denial and their version of events. Everything thing else is collateral damage that is a by product of them reaching their goals, its a good job our Joy is supposedly God fearing and religious as good ol St Peter will be waiting with a long list for her. That's if some hedge fund has not moved it to another part of heaven of course. NOPM

 

[Ashdown1]

When will be the cut off when we can start judging SISU by their own decisions and actions?

Personally I think six years worth is a long enough time to stop hiding behind decisions made by previous owners.......

SISU have been completely inept at running a football club but then lets be fair they were sold a basket case in the first place by unscrupulous predecessors ! I'm surprised that they haven't sued the people who did the due diligence !?

 

[Skyblueweeman]

They can be judged on everything they do now Dong. But...as I've just posted on another thread, our problems started in the Richardson era when we were living above our means. Before SISU took over, we were already significantly in debt....that cannot happen and many clubs are finding this out over the recent years.

Had the club been run within its means in the Richardson era (which probably would've been at the expense of the exciting football/players we saw in the 90's), there's unlikely to have been a need for anyone to buy us in 2007.

SISU can be judged on what they do now (and the past few years). However, we are were we are, because of SISU and previous owners, the two are linked unfortunately but both are responsible for their own actions.

My opinion only though....

WM

 

[Gint11]

When will be the cut off when we can start judging SISU by their own decisions and actions?

Personally I think six years worth is a long enough time to stop hiding behind decisions made by previous owners.......

Grow up mate!

 

[fernandopartridge]

They can be judged on everything they do now Dong. But...as I've just posted on another thread, our problems started in the Richardson era when we were living above our means. Before SISU took over, we were already significantly in debt....that cannot happen and many clubs are finding this out over the recent years.

Had the club been run within its means in the Richardson era (which probably would've been at the expense of the exciting football/players we saw in the 90's), there's unlikely to have been a need for anyone to buy us in 2007.

SISU can be judged on what they do now (and the past few years). However, we are were we are, because of SISU and previous owners, the two are linked unfortunately but both are responsible for their own actions.

My opinion only though....

WM

They can be judged on what they do now with the caveat that the Richardson era has completely hamstrung them. Completely. They're like a boxer with an arm tied behind their back.

 

[bigfatronssba]

The single biggest issue facing the club, playing in Northampton, is entirely their own doing and they must accept full responsibility for it.

Issues surrounding past rent costs can be blamed on past owners, but not the move.

 

[RPHunt]

Mike Ashley took control at Newcastle only a few months before SISU crawled in here.

You don't hear any Newcastle fans blaming the previous board for Ashley's disastrous management and even Ashley himself isn't daft enough to try that as an excuse.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Grow up mate!

For wanting people to take responsibility for their actions? I'd say that was already pretty grown up.

Is your definition of mature blaming everyone else?

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Mike Ashley took control at Newcastle only a few months before SISU crawled in here.

You don't hear any Newcastle fans blaming the previous board for Ashley's disastrous management and even Ashley himself isn't daft enough to try that as an excuse.

Yeah, let's compares Apples with Oranges. That'll make things clearer.....

 

[bigfatronssba]

Yeah, let's compares Apples with Oranges. That'll make things clearer.....

In which case can we stop comparisons to what other teams pay in rent or how much other stadiums ate worth?

 

[fernandopartridge]

The single biggest issue facing the club, playing in Northampton, is entirely their own doing and they must accept full responsibility for it.

Issues surrounding past rent costs can be blamed on past owners, but not the move.

Absolute drivel. The rent issue is secondary to the main and absolute number one cause of every problem, the sale of Highfield Rd.

 

[torchomatic]

The previous regimes didn't sell St James Park though did they?

Mike Ashley took control at Newcastle only a few months before SISU crawled in here.

You don't hear any Newcastle fans blaming the previous board for Ashley's disastrous management and even Ashley himself isn't daft enough to try that as an excuse.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Absolute drivel. The rent issue is secondary to the main and absolute number one cause of every problem, the sale of Highfield Rd.

Bullcrap.

As staying at the Ricoh, even under the high rent, would currently see the club better off, it has become a separate issue instigated by our owners and nothing else.

 

[torchomatic]

Agree and disagree. Northampton their fault. Rent down to Richardson and his cronies. which leads to Northampton. Vicious circle.

The single biggest issue facing the club, playing in Northampton, is entirely their own doing and they must accept full responsibility for it.

Issues surrounding past rent costs can be blamed on past owners, but not the move.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Bullcrap.

As staying at the Ricoh, even under the high rent, would currently see the club better off, it has become a separate issue instigated by our owners and nothing else.

....and owning Highfield Rd would see them better off still

 

[lewys33]

Unfortunate series of events of which all parties at least hold an ounce of blame.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Whilst not in any way taking away the damage done by previous regimes, the on going legacy of that should only have been the ramifications of the lease & licence at the Ricoh. Even then the club had a greater share of the incomes at the Ricoh in 2008 than it did when the keys were thrown back in 2013.

The massive debts incurred up until December 2007 were very largely written off, if you include the further write down in 2010 then it looks to me like the net debt taken over by SISU ended up at around £3m. We are presently north of £32m

The debt situation and living within means were known factors in 2008 and like the lease & licence SISU made a choice not to deal with it until 2012. If they did not make that choice then that points to poor management of a situation they have expertise in..... distressed companies. The debt problems was precisely why SISU were here in the first place - they saw an opportunity to buy debt cheap and then to sell on for a profit - it is what they do, how they making their living and they can not hide behind "I didn't realise but it was someone else's fault"

Currently they are in terms of CCFC alone adopting a far better approach to get a viable business, living within means, only increasing debt if absolutely necessary, dealing with the lease & licence etc.

But they made choices/decisions on every day of their tenure so far and they are responsible for those choices, no one else. You can not blame Richardson for something planned in 2008 2011 or 2014. Yes the previous regimes got us to a place of extreme vulnerability in December 2008 but nearly all the debt currently outstanding is derived since their takeover.

Ask yourself had they said in Feb 2008 the club has to be viable live within means but that means relying on youth, selling players for a few seasons, keeping wages down (like now) would you have gone with that - I suspect most fans would if for no other reason they would so relieved to still have a team. It was the sensible business thing to do at that time. 2008 they were in the driving seat and could make demands, relationships were new not broken, trust was starting not a word to be spat at.

Did they get the management wrong to begin with? yes. Did they adopt simple procedures like challenging expenses from the off (first thing anyone does taking over a company let alone a severely distressed one)? No Were there other choices? yes

They may have provided a team to hold its own in League 1 but that doesn't stop them taking responsibility for this mess much earlier than as of today

 

[torchomatic]

Funny after that line you totally dismiss the damage done by previous regimes. The damage done by selling Highfield Road is irreparable and can be directly attributed to where we find ourselves now. Yep, SISU should have done this and shouldn't have done that, but if we hadn't have made the catastrophic mistake of moving to a new stadium then we'd all be saying "SISU who?"

Whilst not in any way taking away the damage done by previous regimes,

 

[Skyblueweeman]

In which case can we stop comparisons to what other teams pay in rent or how much other stadiums ate worth?

Show me once where I've done/said that, and I will......

 

[fernandopartridge]

Whilst not in any way taking away the damage done by previous regimes, the on going legacy of that should only have been the ramifications of the lease & licence at the Ricoh. Even then the club had a greater share of the incomes at the Ricoh in 2008 than it did when the keys were thrown back in 2013.

The massive debts incurred up until December 2007 were very largely written off, if you include the further write down in 2010 then it looks to me like the net debt taken over by SISU ended up at around £3m. We are presently north of £32m

The debt situation and living within means were known factors in 2008 and like the lease & licence SISU made a choice not to deal with it until 2012. If they did not make that choice then that points to poor management of a situation they have expertise in..... distressed companies. The debt problems was precisely why SISU were here in the first place - they saw an opportunity to buy debt cheap and then to sell on for a profit - it is what they do, how they making their living and they can not hide behind "I didn't realise but it was someone else's fault"

Currently they are in terms of CCFC alone adopting a far better approach to get a viable business, living within means, only increasing debt if absolutely necessary, dealing with the lease & licence etc.

But they made choices/decisions on every day of their tenure so far and they are responsible for those choices, no one else. You can not blame Richardson for something planned in 2008 2011 or 2014. Yes the previous regimes got us to a place of extreme vulnerability in December 2008 but nearly all the debt currently outstanding is derived since their takeover.

Ask yourself had they said in Feb 2008 the club has to be viable live within means but that means relying on youth, selling players for a few seasons, keeping wages down (like now) would you have gone with that - I suspect most fans would if for no other reason they would so relieved to still have a team. It was the sensible business thing to do at that time. 2008 they were in the driving seat and could make demands, relationships were new not broken, trust was starting not a word to be spat at.

Did they get the management wrong to begin with? yes. Did they adopt simple procedures like challenging expenses from the off (first thing anyone does taking over a company let alone a severely distressed one)? No Were there other choices? yes

They may have provided a team to hold its own in League 1 but that doesn't stop them taking responsibility for this mess much earlier than as of today

The fans have never shown much appetite for supporting a longer term strategy of developing our own.

 

[SkyBlueHomer]

After this length of time they cannot blame anyone else anymore. They knew the situation when they bought the club.
Things like rent issue's should have been dealt with the minute they arrived.

Seems like to me their master plan was to buy us, throw a few £'s at us, get promoted to the premiership and then sell us on for a profit.
Once this had failed I have yet to see any sensible plan b from them

 

[olderskyblue]

Funny after that line you totally dismiss the damage done by previous regimes. The damage done by selling Highfield Road is irreparable and can be directly attributed to where we find ourselves now. Yep, SISU should have done this and shouldn't have done that, but if we hadn't have made the catastrophic mistake of moving to a new stadium then we'd all be saying "SISU who?"

How much debt were we in when we owned Highfield Road?

 

[Gint11]

For wanting people to take responsibility for their actions? I'd say that was already pretty grown up.

Is your definition of mature blaming everyone else?

His comment is anything but mature.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Trouble with that Torch is that with the assets and liabilities relating to the Ricoh project excluded the debt of CCFC Group in 2005 was £28m and growing ....... just how long do you think it would be before they had to sell HR or go bust.

I agree Richardson and co got us to that situation and without that we might not have seen SISU.............. we might still be at HR, debt might have stopped growing, we might have still been in Premiership. But circumstances changed in 2008, debt was written off, opportunities were presented and taken or not...... and the decisions made knowing what Richardson & co had done were taken by SISU. Eyes wide shut?

 

[oldskyblue58]

The fans have never shown much appetite for supporting a longer term strategy of developing our own.

seem to have taken it on board a little better recently though haven't they?

 

[Captain Dart]

Funny after that line you totally dismiss the damage done by previous regimes. The damage done by selling Highfield Road is irreparable and can be directly attributed to where we find ourselves now. Yep, SISU should have done this and shouldn't have done that, but if we hadn't have made the catastrophic mistake of moving to a new stadium then we'd all be saying "SISU who?"

The damage at takeover then amounted to about £3M debt a £1.2M rent and a wage bill that was actually higher than income.
SISU's strategy at that point was to spend money on more players and take a punt at getting to the premiership.
That is where the serious damage was done leading to today's dreadful situation.

 

[lewys33]

What rent price were we paying for the last couple of years at HR? Was it (rumoured) £1 mill a year?

 

[covcity4life]

stood up to council
removed extorinate rent
created a club philosophy playing wise
started to pick good managers
backed last 2 managers

took us out of coventry!
terrible communication
seem to love a lawsuit rather than concede anything at all
didnt back earlier managers, saw us relegated as a result.

stadium row will be the true definer, get us back to ricoh with a better deal and long term they will have helped take us forward, same goes for new stadium if built well and v close(in cov)

but if they dont bring us home and kill the club will be remembered as worst owners no matter the mess they took on in first place.

 

[Grendel]

Ask yourself had they said in Feb 2008 the club has to be viable live within means but that means relying on youth, selling players for a few seasons, keeping wages down (like now) would you have gone with that - I suspect most fans would if for no other reason they would so relieved to still have a team. It was the sensible business thing to do at that time.

There is no evidence supporters would accept that.

Trying to sign mcgoldrick on £10,000 a week would have been financial suicide but in football fans terms its "investment" or "commitment"

 

[Grendel]

What rent price were we paying for the last couple of years at HR? Was it (rumoured) £1 mill a year?

That wasn't a comparible rent it was the clause they had in the contract of sale of property.

 

[torchomatic]

Over £60M thanks to Richardson. Or would you like me to say it was SISU? And you said it yourself "owned". A very important word.

How much debt were we in when we owned Highfield Road?

 

[oldskyblue58]

There is no evidence supporters would accept that.

Trying to sign mcgoldrick on £10,000 a week would have been financial suicide but in football fans terms its "investment" or "commitment"

No evidence for or against

In a normal situation I agree Grendel but when the club is minutes from going bust? SISU could have done it, dressed it up as survival of CCFC, made future promises (different to the ones they did), explained the impact etc other teams have done it (fans might not like it but we all know fans are the last thing most clubs think about)................ hell they took a far harder decision when they went Northampton with far less fan support

Could argue that is hindsight but not to look at the costs from the get go is negligent in my opinion. But we are where we are and it is ultimately just academic

 

[Ashdown1]

Funny after that line you totally dismiss the damage done by previous regimes. The damage done by selling Highfield Road is irreparable and can be directly attributed to where we find ourselves now. Yep, SISU should have done this and shouldn't have done that, but if we hadn't have made the catastrophic mistake of moving to a new stadium then we'd all be saying "SISU who?"

The damage done to the club has been made primarily from paying players and staff way too much money, this now it seems can also include rent, management fees and debt interest. In short our expenditure has far exceeded our revenues for a long time. HR is a factor in that equation but not the be all and end all as we were losing money hand over fist way before that.