Apologies Michael (13 Viewers)

[letsallsingtogether]

Michael I would like to offer sincere apologies from the posters who abused you over the Rent deal.

I know they are not big enough to do it.

:claping hands:Well keep up the good work the majority of us are behind you........:claping hands:

 

---

[Grendel]

You don't need to apologise on my behalf.

Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.

 

[sky blue john]

I'm sure more will be onside with getting Sisu out now !!
Grendels along with RFC and Andreas will be in a minority of now less than 1%

 

[letsallsingtogether]

And so do I

You don't need to apologise on my behalf.

Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.

 

[skybluetony176]

You don't need to apologise on my behalf.

Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.

You really are a poor parody of a CCFC fan.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

No need to tell us that Tony we already knew.

You really are a poor parody of a CCFC fan.

 

[Astute]

You don't need to apologise on my behalf.

Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.

So what is your great idea to get our club home then Grendel?

 

[olderskyblue]

You don't need to apologise on my behalf.

Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.

You have apologised though....

 

[lordsummerisle]

The offer was never going to be accepted and was never rent free.

If Sisu wanted to be at the The Ricoh they would be there, offers of free rent that actually aren't offers of free rent at all would never change that.

 

[italiahorse]

The offer was never going to be accepted and was never rent free.

If Sisu wanted to be at the The Ricoh they would be there, offers of free rent that actually aren't offers of free rent at all would never change that.

It was a starting point. Sisu could have negotiated something more favourable to themselves but never bothered to progress it.

When will people realise that Sisu say what they want and will not comprimise even if if it means oblivion for the club.
Rent refusal, court cases etc etc are just a continuous process for them and if they lose the club was just a bit of collateral damage.
How can people play to them, in this board, at Sixfields, when they don't care about them. Weak willed and selfish IMHO .... get some balls.

 

[Grendel]

So what is your great idea to get our club home then Grendel?

This is why the "offer" was so frustrating and only put out there to get a cheap headline for Kcic.

Lets put a couple of myths to bed here.

1. No one going to sixfields will force the football league to do something. No it will not. There is nothing in the leagues ruled that say matches have to have minimal attendances. Given that the vast majority to not go shows fans are not considered by the league.

2. The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.

So we then get a supposed rent free deal. However this offer of no rent is of course spurious as the attendance figure is low. So, is there a million available or not?

If there is agree the deal with ACL to give them all match day costs and rent for 3 years. Then this constitutes a free offer. The Kcic / ACL offer then should be publicly displayed and should be discussed with the league. The trust should then take legal advice to see if the continued refusal to play for free at a stadium In the city does constitute a breach of their rules regarding allowing movement away.

The problem is Michael answers no questions.

If the offer is genuine this could all be done.

That's what I would do.

 

[The Gentleman]

This is why the "offer" was so frustrating and only put out there to get a cheap headline for Kcic.

Lets put a couple of myths to bed here.

1. No one going to sixfields will force the football league to do something. No it will not. There is nothing in the leagues ruled that say matches have to have minimal attendances. Given that the vast majority to not go shows fans are not considered by the league.

2. The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.

So we then get a supposed rent free deal. However this offer of no rent is of course spurious as the attendance figure is low. So, is there a million available or not?

If there is agree the deal with ACL to give them all match day costs and rent for 3 years. Then this constitutes a free offer. The Kcic / ACL offer then should be publicly displayed and should be discussed with the league. The trust should then take legal advice to see if the continued refusal to play for free at a stadium In the city does constitute a breach of their rules regarding allowing movement away.

The problem is Michael answers no questions.

If the offer is genuine this could all be done.

That's what I would do.[/QUOTE]


Well fucking do it then, you makes claims of being some sort of Alan Sugar like business man closing deals for hundreds of thousands of pounds just by phone yet you seem to spend most of your life on here. Spend less time on here, try to do what Michael did instead of picking holes in other people and pony up and have bash yourself, unless of course you are full of shit. I'll let others make their opinions on that.

 

[Astute]

This is why the "offer" was so frustrating and only put out there to get a cheap headline for Kcic.

Lets put a couple of myths to bed here.

1. No one going to sixfields will force the football league to do something. No it will not. There is nothing in the leagues ruled that say matches have to have minimal attendances. Given that the vast majority to not go shows fans are not considered by the league.

2. The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.

So we then get a supposed rent free deal. However this offer of no rent is of course spurious as the attendance figure is low. So, is there a million available or not?

If there is agree the deal with ACL to give them all match day costs and rent for 3 years. Then this constitutes a free offer. The Kcic / ACL offer then should be publicly displayed and should be discussed with the league. The trust should then take legal advice to see if the continued refusal to play for free at a stadium In the city does constitute a breach of their rules regarding allowing movement away.

The problem is Michael answers no questions.

If the offer is genuine this could all be done.

That's what I would do.

If any offer was genuine and Joy gave up on getting the freehold for her investors then it could happen.

On the other hand if there was an offer that came in for Joy to consider and it ended up being not as it was supposed to be then Joy could let us know. But it is obvious why there isn't a deal to be done as things stand now. And it isn't CCC or Higgs. Or do you believe TF that the judge was wrong again?

 

[WiganSkyBlue]

There you all go - pandering to this person. You will never get him to admit he/she is wrong.

Said it before and I'll say it again - ignore these pathetic posts as without the oxygen of publicity he/she will wither away.

Well - I can but dream

 

[Grendel]

Well fucking do it then, you makes claims of being some sort of Alan Sugar like business man closing deals for hundreds of thousands of pounds just by phone yet you seem to spend most of your life on here. Spend less time on here, try to do what Michael did instead of picking holes in other people and pony up and have bash yourself, unless of course you are full of shit. I'll let others make their opinions on that.

Michael claims to have £1 million to pay the rent.

You are effectively saying he hasn't.

Don't you believe he has?

 

[The Gentleman]

Michael claims to have £1 million to pay the rent.

You are effectively saying he hasn't.

Don't you believe he has?

Please show me in my post where I 'effectively' said that.

Stop trying to move the goalposts like Labovitch or Fisher continually do and put your money where your mouth is or as I said in my last post and you certainly not proved otherwise, are you really full of shit?

I'm off to work now in my medium paid job which I do full time. You stick around on here for the rest of day (like every other day) and show that you really are full of shit. Deals over the phone my arse, you probably negotiated a loan from the social.

 

[Grendel]

Please show me in my post where I 'effectively' said that.

Stop trying to move the goalposts like Labovitch or Fisher continually do and put your money where your mouth is or as I said in my last post and you certainly not proved otherwise, are you really full of shit?

I'm off to work now in my medium paid job which I do full time. You stick around on here for the rest of day (like every other day) and show that you really are full of shit. Deals over the phone my arse, you probably negotiated a loan from the social.

Your emotional diatribe is irrelevant to the discussion.

If the money is there it should be used to create a situation where publicly sisu have no wriggle room and their objections can be countenanced.

Your emotional ranting suggests a lack of understanding as to what I am saying.

Hope it's not too hot in the burger van today.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

Michael claims to have £1 million to pay the rent.

You are effectively saying he hasn't.

Don't you believe he has?

yawn.

Here we go again. Time to grow up Grendel and embrace the first signs of positivity we've seen here for at least 18 months, even though it may not suit your agenda.

A positive thread turned into another confrontational, attention seeking pile of drivel. What a bore you are.


To the OP: Well said.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

That is the problem on here the same couple of posters want to wreck every post then shove the blame on others? What is their objective?

Easy to keep the fans decided as that way we will fail.
About time they just admit it just as bad as sisu.

All this shit about phone calls not answering questions is there is there not money, who are the faceless backers Michael only wants publicity fuck me he does it all for free .
What the fuck do you expect so Grendel would make a mark and would have struck a deal but not enough money in it for him?


Sorry show him for what we all knew he was .

yawn.

Here we go again. Time to grow up Grendel and embrace the first signs of positivity we've seen here for at least 18 months, even though it may not suit your agenda.

A positive thread turned into another confrontational, attention seeking pile of drivel. What a bore you are.


To the OP: Well said.

 

[Gint11]

yawn.

Here we go again. Time to grow up Grendel and embrace the first signs of positivity we've seen here for at least 18 months, even though it may not suit your agenda.

A positive thread turned into another confrontational, attention seeking pile of drivel. What a bore you are.


To the OP: Well said.

Because Grendal doesn't agree with your opinion?

 

[Gint11]

Please show me in my post where I 'effectively' said that.

Stop trying to move the goalposts like Labovitch or Fisher continually do and put your money where your mouth is or as I said in my last post and you certainly not proved otherwise, are you really full of shit?

I'm off to work now in my medium paid job which I do full time. You stick around on here for the rest of day (like every other day) and show that you really are full of shit. Deals over the phone my arse, you probably negotiated a loan from the social.

Regardless of your argument, cheap insults doesnt win you the argument, just makes you look silly.

 

[italiahorse]

Your emotional diatribe is irrelevant to the discussion.

If the money is there it should be used to create a situation where publicly sisu have no wriggle room and their objections can be countenanced.

Your emotional ranting suggests a lack of understanding as to what I am saying.

Hope it's not too hot in the burger van today.

SISU don't care.
Fisher would just turn it down and then we would have you justifying his decision and flaming anyone who disagrees with it.

Hope its not too hot chauffeuring today.

 

[stupot07]

It wasn't a positive post, it was a dig at those (Nick, Grendel, Torch, etc) who dared to question the offer:

Michael I would like to offer sincere apologies from the posters who abused you over the Rent deal.

I know they are not big enough to do it.

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

 

[covmark]

It wasn't a positive post, it was a dig at those (Nick, Grendel, Torch, etc) who dared to question the offer:




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

Totally agree, nothing positive at all about the op. Just another thread to cause pointless arguments. I find the brown nosing of Michael quite comical. He comes forward with a deal that is completely pointless, then refuses to answer any questions about it, and refuses to answer a poxy phone call. Then all we get is 'at least he's doing something'. Well, for all the progress it's made is there any need for all the back patting.

 

[Jim]

How is the deal pointless?

The club win either way if they take the offer:

If attendance is equal to sixfields but less than double then they have saved on the rent paid at sixfields and are able to charge a higher rate on tickets ie the rate before the move.

If attendance moves over double that of sixfields, then ticket revenue will have more than doubled and will cover the sliding scale of re-imbursement for the rent offer.

In either case the club is better off and this does not even take into account the fact that corporate sponsors might come back on board once we are back in our proper stadium.

The goodwill of the fans will be vastly improved (although still damaged), and there will be a platform to start negotiations with the council on a way for for revenues or ownership.

SISU, Tim Fisher and Joy just do not have the best interests of the club at heart. It has now developed into a petty childish squabble of 'If I cant have exactly what I want then i'm not playing and i'm taking my ball with me'.

 

[lordsummerisle]

How is the deal pointless?

The club win either way if they take the offer:

If attendance is equal to sixfields but less than double then they have saved on the rent paid at sixfields and are able to charge a higher rate on tickets ie the rate before the move.

If attendance moves over double that of sixfields, then ticket revenue will have more than doubled and will cover the sliding scale of re-imbursement for the rent offer.

In either case the club is better off and this does not even take into account the fact that corporate sponsors might come back on board once we are back in our proper stadium.

The goodwill of the fans will be vastly improved (although still damaged), and there will be a platform to start negotiations with the council on a way for for revenues or ownership.

SISU, Tim Fisher and Joy just do not have the best interests of the club at heart. It has now developed into a petty childish squabble of 'If I cant have exactly what I want then i'm not playing and i'm taking my ball with me'.

Surely the crowds would always be over 5000 regardless of how many people hate Sisu?

Therefore the "offer" as such isn't an offer, it's what Sisu could do themselves at any time with ACL, but don't want to.

Of course if Sisu limited ticket sales to 4999(as Northern suggested), then it would work out quite nicely for Sisu and ACL, just cost Michael and his backers for 3 years.

 

[Grendel]

Surely the crowds would always be over 5000 regardless of how many people hate Sisu?

Therefore the "offer" as such isn't an offer, it's what Sisu could do themselves at any time with ACL, but don't want to.

Of course if Sisu limited ticket sales to 4999(as Northern suggested), then it would work out quite nicely for Sisu and ACL, just cost Michael and his backers for 3 years.

If the monies there it now has to be offered regardless of crowds.

 

[The Gentleman]

Regardless of your argument, cheap insults doesnt win you the argument, just makes you look silly.

Jesus, how many times has he had a dig at people and yet no sign of a post from you to him. If you don't like it, tough and no I don't look silly I look fanbloodytastic as per usual.

 

[Jim]

Surely the crowds would always be over 5000 regardless of how many people hate Sisu?

Therefore the "offer" as such isn't an offer, it's what Sisu could do themselves at any time with ACL, but don't want to.

Of course if Sisu limited ticket sales to 4999(as Northern suggested), then it would work out quite nicely for Sisu and ACL, just cost Michael and his backers for 3 years.

The rent repayments by CCFC / SISU would be on a sliding scale and would be more than offset by increasing ticket revenues. In all eventualities the club would be better off than being at sixfields.

 

[stupot07]

The rent repayments by CCFC / SISU would be on a sliding scale and would be more than offset by increasing ticket revenues. In all eventualities the club would be better off than being at sixfields.

Why wasn't I made aware of that......


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

 

[mark82]

What is there to apologise for? People questioned whether the details within the offer would be good enough as these were not made available - it certainly wasn't rent free.
People questioned whether Michael was being puppeted by someone in the background and why he wouldn't engage in active conversation with the club. It looks even more likely he was being puppeted now.

Personally I'm fed up of being messed around by everyone involved in this saga. You can now add Michael Orton, who I previously respected for his efforts, to that list. This was at best a publicity stunt.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

It was a starting point. Sisu could have negotiated something more favourable to themselves but never bothered to progress it.

When will people realise that Sisu say what they want and will not comprimise even if if it means oblivion for the club.
Rent refusal, court cases etc etc are just a continuous process for them and if they lose the club was just a bit of collateral damage.
How can people play to them, in this board, at Sixfields, when they don't care about them. Weak willed and selfish IMHO .... get some balls.

No offence Italia and not for one moment do I insinuate that Michael is a liar or conning us all, but no one has heard from ACL on this? What's to say that this offer would be accepted by ACL even if Sisu accepted it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chiefdave]

The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.

You're correct the FL can't force SISU to accept any deal offered by ACL but what they can do is enforce their own rules and state that they will only allow Coventry City to compete in the FL in the upcoming season if home games are played in Coventry.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

You're correct the FL can't force SISU to accept any deal offered by ACL but what they can do is enforce their own rules and state that they will only allow Coventry City to compete in the FL in the upcoming season if home games are played in Coventry.

But that then goes against the rules that the Football League stated that the Club would adhere by after being allowed take ownership of the Golden Share.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lewys33]

Fisher said its not about the rent.

Thread closed.