Joy's Programme Message - Preview (2 Viewers)

[RPHunt]

From the Coventry City Programme 26 April 2014

"I would like to take this opportunity to thank all you truly loyal Sky Blue fans for supporting SISU this last season.

I realise it has been difficult for a few of you that live in Coventy to travel to Nottingham to watch your team, but that has not been our fault – we were thrown out of the Richo stadium by a vindictive council and, despite the many offers of increased rent that we made, the council would not allow us to return. Despite this, you wonderful fans have turned out in your hundreds, which has far exceeded both my estimates and those of Tim Fisher. Tim also tells me that you create an extraordinary atmosphere at our temporary home that often reduces him to tears. Give yourselves a pat on the backs!

Unfortunately, it does look as if we will be playing at this place for a few more years as the council are refusing all the offers we make to return. They have got so stubborn about this now, that the council leader is refusing to get on a train and come down to my office in London to listen to my latest demand – who does she think she is? She might not even be in the job after the May elections, when a political group (that are not SISU affiliated in any way) field a candidate against her. They are currently seeking anyone that (a) is actually qualified to stand (i.e. lives in Coventy) and (b) is capable of speaking in something more than monosyllables.

We did intend to build another stadium anyway. Tim and Mark will be announcing details in the next few weeks and I gather from the forums hosted by Ms Garlick that you are all very excited by the prospect of moving to a new stadium and are adamant that it should NOT be in or near Coventy. We do pride ourselves on listening to our loyal fans, so I think you will all be very pleased when the announcement is finally made.

So thank you once again and let’s give the boys today your usual tremendous roar and cheer them to victory over today’s opponents.

God bless you all."

 

---

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

 

[ccfcway]

this can't be real, it contains less spelling mistakes than they have on the front page of the programme !

 

[steveo1987]

Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

As funny as it maybe RPHunt it highlights something, people ask why Joy Seppala doesn't come out and face the fans, then I read your post here and it's obvious..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[covmark]

You could have at least made an effort to be funny.

 

[skybluetony176]

As funny as it maybe RPHunt it highlights something, people ask why Joy Seppala doesn't come out and face the fans, then I read your post here and it's obvious..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems to me that she only comes out and faces the fans when she wants to spin how their actions (that are killing the club) are something positive and how it's everyone else's fault. It really wouldn't surprise me if her opening isn't too dissimilar to Mr Hunt's and like you unless it says we're about to play our last game in suxfields as we're returning to the Ricoh she can fuck off.

 

[Spagbol]

I thought it was a good attempt, hit the mood spot on !

 

[Matty_CCFC]

Cannot respect a woman who hides from her customers.

 

[Lorksalordy]

A "teaser" excerpt is up on the website. Amazingly it basically blames everyone else, shows no sign of compromise or change of direction and contains no sign of any positive action to resolve the situation regarding where we play

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Seems to me that she only comes out and faces the fans when she wants to spin how their actions (that are killing the club) are something positive and how it's everyone else's fault. It really wouldn't surprise me if her opening isn't too dissimilar to Mr Hunt's and like you unless it says we're about to play our last game in suxfields as we're returning to the Ricoh she can fuck off.

What Joy says is irrelevant to me personally unless it includes the sentence "We will be returning to the Ricoh". Problem is however Joy only got involved in the Football Club 2 1/2 years ago (As per her comments in the CT) for that time Tim Fisher has been running the Club, with the apparent contact from the owners on a regular basis.

It's not just Joy though is it? Who are the investors who continue to fund this Club? What background do they have? There are so many questions regarding Sisu, it doesn't start and end with Joy Seppala. These are the real questions that we need answers on regarding Sisu, Joy Seppala has obviously no knowledge regarding Football, or the business of it, I would assume that's why Joy Seppala hasn't been involved in the Clubs daily activities, or spoken with the fans.

It has to be said I don't want bullshit from Joy Seppala, I want facts, Who are Sisu's investors? What's there long term aim for the Club? How do they intend to repair damages? Will they sell up and move on? Who are the people in behind the mist of Sisu?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Owner Joy Seppala has spoken exclusively to our official matchday programme PUSB. Read an excerpt of the interview below with the full version available in PUSB which can be purchased from Sixfields for today's home tie with Wolverhampton Wanderers.


"If I had known then what I know now, we would certainly have done things differently. Sadly, everything always looks clear with the benefit of hindsight. I say this by way of explanation not excuse.

"I cannot change the past, but players, management, supporters and investors can shape the future. I take my share of the responsibility for where we are and it is time for others to set aside personal and political ambitions and do what is right, not what is convenient and popular.

"Every political, economic and sports pundit agrees that Coventry City must own its stadium. The club must benefit from every element of revenue generated and that money we must be used to fund the team – from the Academy to the first team.

"We are moving forward with plans to build a stadium. As many fans have pointed out is seems absurd to build a new stadium when there is a perfectly good, purpose-built stadium already in Coventry.

"The ownership control and management of the Ricoh Arena is manacled by multiplicity of diverse interests – political and economic.

"Whether because of ideology, ignorance, ambition or politics, the refusal to complete the restructure based on heads of agreement we signed in 2012 and the subsequent rejection of the CVA, forced the club to leave the stadium and start the season on minus ten points, testing the mettle of supporters, investors, players and managers to the limit."



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bigfatronssba]

Joy Seppala is basically a coward who stays in hiding whilst sending out hired goons to bully the opposition into submission.

A disgusting and vile woman.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Owner Joy Seppala has spoken exclusively to our official matchday programme PUSB. Read an excerpt of the interview below with the full version available in PUSB which can be purchased from Sixfields for today's home tie with Wolverhampton Wanderers.


"If I had known then what I know now, we would certainly have done things differently. Sadly, everything always looks clear with the benefit of hindsight. I say this by way of explanation not excuse.

"I cannot change the past, but players, management, supporters and investors can shape the future. I take my share of the responsibility for where we are and it is time for others to set aside personal and political ambitions and do what is right, not what is convenient and popular.

"Every political, economic and sports pundit agrees that Coventry City must own its stadium. The club must benefit from every element of revenue generated and that money we must be used to fund the team – from the Academy to the first team.

"We are moving forward with plans to build a stadium. As many fans have pointed out is seems absurd to build a new stadium when there is a perfectly good, purpose-built stadium already in Coventry.

"The ownership control and management of the Ricoh Arena is manacled by multiplicity of diverse interests – political and economic.

"Whether because of ideology, ignorance, ambition or politics, the refusal to complete the restructure based on heads of agreement we signed in 2012 and the subsequent rejection of the CVA, forced the club to leave the stadium and start the season on minus ten points, testing the mettle of supporters, investors, players and managers to the limit."



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How did rejection of the CVA force the club to leave the stadium?

Is she saying that had ACL accepted it then the club would have stayed?

Contradicts the old line of "Conditions cannot be attached to a CVA" slightly doesn't it?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

How did rejection of the CVA force the club to leave the stadium?

Is she saying that had ACL accepted it then the club would have stayed?

Contradicts the old line of "Conditions cannot be attached to a CVA" slightly doesn't it?

I am not sure you can put it as finely as "The Club would have stayed" but the key word in that part is "Restructure". Restructuring was needed and surely if that was achievable why was the CVA rejected only for ACL to throw out new terms of there own?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Astute]

It is not true that everyone says that we need to own our own stadium. Most clubs don't. If she doesn't want to pay Higgs for their share she should learn the meaning of negotiation.

 

[skybluetony176]

It is not true that everyone says that we need to own our own stadium. Most clubs don't. If she doesn't want to pay Higgs for their share she should learn the meaning of negotiation.

Depends on what she means when she says own their stadium. I would be quite happy for the club to own the leasehold (and I mean the club, not a sisu company outside of the club) after all, that's all the club needs. It's her investors that need the freehold. Bet she doesn't mention that in the full version.

 

[CovFan]

How did rejection of the CVA force the club to leave the stadium?


Is she saying that had ACL accepted it then the club would have stayed?

Contradicts the old line of "Conditions cannot be attached to a CVA" slightly doesn't it?

You aren't accusing a side in this conflict of being contradictory? Quelle Surprise.

 

[Nick]

Interesting the tone of the article in the cet compared to the higgs one

 

[bigfatronssba]

Interesting the tone of the article in the cet compared to the higgs one

Is it on the website yet?

 

[SimonGilbert]

Is it on the website yet?

Here:

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/joy-seppala-it-seems-absurd-7035600


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skyblueweeman]

A "teaser" excerpt is up on the website. Amazingly it basically blames everyone else, shows no sign of compromise or change of direction and contains no sign of any positive action to resolve the situation regarding where we play

Apart from the piece, and I quote "If I had known then what I know now, we would certainly have done things differently. Sadly, everything always looks clear with the benefit of hindsight. I say this by way of explanation not excuse. I cannot change the past, but players, management, supporters and investors can shape the future. I take my share of the responsibility for where we are"

Yeah she's monumentally cocked up, yeah they're pretty crap owners, but lets not say she blames everyone else when she says 'I take my share of responsibility for where we are'.

Pretty accurate statement if you ask me.

 

[stupot07]

How did rejection of the CVA force the club to leave the stadium?

Is she saying that had ACL accepted it then the club would have stayed?

Contradicts the old line of "Conditions cannot be attached to a CVA" slightly doesn't it?

Rejecting the CVA was vindictive and in the end has achieved ACL nothing.


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

 

[smoo310pusb]

I sincerely hope that she.....

Fill in the gaps yourselves

 

[will am i]

Rejecting the CVA was vindictive and in the end has achieved ACL nothing.

However vindictive, it didnt force them to leave the Ricoh
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[RegTheDonk]

As she said its daft to throw money into a new stadium when we have the ricoh.

All you have to do joy is pick up the phone and be sensible.

 

[oldskyblue58]

"Whether because of ideology, ignorance, ambition or politics, the refusal to complete the restructure based on heads of agreement we signed in 2012 and the subsequent rejection of the CVA, forced the club to leave the stadium and start the season on minus ten points, testing the mettle of supporters, investors, players and managers to the limit."



As I understand it the HOT signed between SISU and CCC included not only some sort of agreement on the loan but also the key agreement of SISU purchasing the Charity shares. It might be useful to see the chronology of what ms seppala has said

This is what we know as facts

March 2012 Club ceases to pay rent

April 2012 Club relegated from Championship

May 2012 Club and Charity agree time limited HOT's for purchase of Charity shares

31/07/12 HOT's expire and are not renewed or extended.

31/08/12 by this date the Judgement of Justice Leggatt is that both sides (AEHC & SISU) had no appetite for the deal and it had failed. There was no new or alternative deal

October 2012 cash "offer" put forward by Seppala to Mr Harris (AEHC) but not even put to the AEHC Trustees because the value was not acceptable.

December 2012 HOT's with CCC which included term for SISU to purchase Charity shares (there was no deal HOT or ITS with charity to do so however so the question has to be how were the SISU/CCC HOT's worth anything let alone binding )

14/01/13 CCC refinance ACL with a loan of £14m

21/03/12 CCFC Ltd placed in administration. The first administrators action is for CCFC Ltd to move from the stadium (normal practice for an administrator in similar circumstances). CCFC Ltd owned the lease therefore CCFC H, Otium, SBS&L had no legal right to be there. Bottom line is CCFC had become homeless by this action and had to agree a pay as you play deal somewhere - a separate such deal to play at the Ricoh for 3 matches was done.

28/03/13 FL deduct 10 points because of the administration

08/07/13 FL give permission for CCFC to play at Sixfields

02/08/13 CVA rejected
02/08/13 Otium awarded the golden share by FL but CCFC deducted 10 points

so questions

1)if a major part of the CCC/SISU HOT's could not have been achieved because both Charity & SISU had no appetite to progress it then how valid/workable are those HOT's?
2)Surely all sides must have known there was no deal for the Charity share purchase?
3)If CCFC left the Ricoh March 2013 how did the CVA rejection August 2013 affect that decision to leave?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Rejecting the CVA was vindictive and in the end has achieved ACL nothing)

This is why I rarely post on here anymore. It's like groundhog day. Every day. With people like you refusing to see anything.

The administration process was fundamentally flawed, with the Golden Share and it's whereabouts a mystery, assets shuffled from one entity to another - which needed forensic accountants to investigate, and a net result of seemingly everything migrating from the entity ACL contracted with, bar a worthless bit of paper; and a tenant who had moved their business to another county.

And still, you keep on going on about ACL objecting to it due to 'spite'. Incredible

 

[Nick]

This is why I rarely post on here anymore. It's like groundhog day. Every day. With people like you refusing to see anything.

The administration process was fundamentally flawed, with the Golden Share and it's whereabouts a mystery, assets shuffled from one entity to another - which needed forensic accountants to investigate, and a net result of seemingly everything migrating from the entity ACL contracted with, bar a worthless bit of paper; and a tenant who had moved their business to another county.

And still, you keep on going on about ACL objecting to it due to 'spite'. Incredible

Ahh you mean people with different views than you?

 

[Ian1779]

He's right though - what did ACL 'achieve' by rejecting the CVA? How did it benefit CCFC, or the City of Coventry?

You may be right about process being flawed, but it is for the court to investigate the process if they feel something untoward has occured.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Ahh you mean people with different views than you?

No. I mean people who over simplify things to the absurd. If you, like him, genuinely think that 'spite' was the only driver in ACL's decision, then you too are delusional. Even those labelled 'council lovers' see there's a shades if grey responsibility in this farce, and don't childishly simplify a complex situation in the way this poster does on this issue. Time, time and time again...

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

He's right though - what did ACL 'achieve' by rejecting the CVA? How did it benefit CCFC, or the City of Coventry?

You may be right about process being flawed, but it is for the court to investigate the process if they feel something untoward has occured.

They wanted the process revisited, hence their approaches to the FL, etc. Or a situation whereby their proposed side deal could be entered into; so at least one outcome gave rise to them having at least something their directors could run with.

The fact that neither transpired isn't to question the motivation; but hindsight is a fine tool with which to look wise. If you're that desperate to appear so

 

[Ian1779]

They wanted the process revisited, hence their approaches to the FL, etc. Or a situation whereby their proposed side deal could be entered into; so at least one outcome gave rise to them having at least something their directors could run with.

The fact that neither transpired isn't to question the motivation; but hindsight is a fine tool with which to look wise. If you're that desperate to appear so

ACL's obligations were to their shareholders to recover the maximum amount of monies owed. The amount of money they would receive was the same whether they rejected or accepted the CVA? So again - where is their benefit?

The only benefit ACL could have got with the process being revisited would be if they wished to acquire the company. So was that their intention?

 

[stupot07]

This is why I rarely post on here anymore. It's like groundhog day. Every day. With people like you refusing to see anything.

The administration process was fundamentally flawed, with the Golden Share and it's whereabouts a mystery, assets shuffled from one entity to another - which needed forensic accountants to investigate, and a net result of seemingly everything migrating from the entity ACL contracted with, bar a worthless bit of paper; and a tenant who had moved their business to another county.

And still, you keep on going on about ACL objecting to it due to 'spite'. Incredible

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

 

[limoncello]

No. I mean people who over simplify things to the absurd. If you, like him, genuinely think that 'spite' was the only driver in ACL's decision, then you too are delusional. Even those labelled 'council lovers' see there's a shades if grey responsibility in this farce, and don't childishly simplify a complex situation in the way this poster does on this issue. Time, time and time again...

So how come the Higgs side of ACL wanted to accept but the council side wanted to reject the CVA? Surely if they were unhappy with the process there would have been unanimity?