My tuppence worth on the events over last few days.
Firstly the march. Great to see so many fans still care and a terrific turnout all things considered. The tone was "bring city home" and that was loud and clear. Clearly that was the primary drive for nearly all those that attended. The FL came in for some well deserved criticism - they have been indecisive and inept through out this saga, they have clearly misunderstood much of what has gone on. You only have to read the statements they issue to know they are largely clueless, focussed only on "the integrity of the competition" and support of their members. In addition there were some regular chants against SISU. But over ridingly it was a good show of fans unity organised by the Trust.
What the march seemed to do was to bring out all sorts of responses from interested parties. If nothing else it has stimulated some debate and comment. To some degree to me the March felt like it was being hijacked though including by the CT
- ACL have issued details of their start point. Unlike others here I do not see that as obstacles - surely for any negotiations to be worthwhile there has to be a clear statement as to what gets you to that point. In the past goal posts have kept moving in the dispute and no one knew what the bottom line was. Now you could say that the £590k and demand for no more legal action blocks any approach but should it? Surely if you are serious about making an approach then you seek to find out if there is any way round these items is there a compromise? . Personally I think the legals are the bigger obstacle - I would not be doing deals with anyone who is taking legal action against me. All the legals do is divert time money and energy from running the business - who gains from that? Should ACL be chasing CCFC/SISU for a deal? - well if their business is sound then why would they, surely it is CCFC to make the approach they benefit most by any arrangement that could be made and are the ones in need?. To say negotiate and at some point in the future maybe the legals will go away I find a little naiive
The Fisher & Seppala letter. For me the timing said it all, last thing on a Friday. Both have been encouraged for weeks to make an approach, it has been pointed out to them how even a short term deal makes more sense than being at Sixfields. But why do it in the press at all? Surely it would have been even better to have said we have talked to ACL, there are issue that we will try to resolve and work round, we are setting up meetings, then go to the press. I understand when people say the tone was more conciliatory- but why was it changed. There is a old adage about leopards and spots. Nothing has in fact been done other than to divert attention on to ACL. Havent we seen these tactics so many times before? Action not words has any proper attempt at contact been made or is it just an exercise to curry favour with the fans in an exercise actually designed to fail? Much of the letter was to be honest just flannel, and shall we say economic with the mechanics & effects of FFP (well smcp in L1). Why would they think that threatening to take further legal action can be put to one side and a deal done - ask yourself would you deal with someone doing that to you, surely we all understand the cost alone colours our thinking?
CCC- Basically the door is open to talk but don't bother talking about the freehold because right now it is not for sale. So in reality what is there to talk about? SISU/CCFC say they want a short term rent deal at the Ricoh whilst they build a new stadium. Why do they think that CCC are going to be the ones granting such a deal - there is actually no reason for them to be involved other than to encourage ACL and CCFC to get the deal done. Yes CCC is a stakeholder and lender but they are not in a position to grant a short term deal - they can influence it but isn't everyone agreed they all want the club back at the Ricoh
CT - initially disappointed with the coverage to be honest. The Sky Blue Trust march became the CT backed march and oh yes the SBT helped organise it. Glad to see that has been corrected, understand the need to sell papers but I found it a little tacky doing that.
the £590k. This is as many things are in this dispute becoming muddied and the actual basis lost. It is not a payment of rent, it is not payment of the CVA, It isn't even a legal debt to be included in the liquidation. IT IS a payment required by the FL of a sum of money under the FL insolvency policy. As such it is part of a contract between FL and Otium where Otium got the golden share. ACL can not chase it because they are not party to the contract (I suspect they do not expect to receive it) but the FL are going to be hard pressed to reduce it or write it off - to do so would be non payment of a football creditor. Why is that important? because it puts in doubt the football creditor rule and has far bigger implications than being sued by SISU.
The fact still remains that the only people who can bring the club back to Coventry are the owners. If there is no will to compromise then there is no deal. There is no conciliatory tone without actions to match. The only action that has happened is the show of unity by the fans on Saturday - as far as I am aware there has been no contact between SISU and the other parties. If it were so important, then surely there would have been by now? Instead we are waiting to see if costs will be awarded and appeals allowed - that perhaps tells us the real situation and future:thinking about:
Final thought. Looking at the financials set up I would estimate that CCFC could break even at Sixfields following the sale of Wilson & Christie. There is no great pressure therefore to up sticks and return to the Ricoh. SISU & ARVO will not need to fund further this season unless they choose to (I suspect they wont). So that places SISU under far less pressure than thought and they can wait out the season there in my opinion. So just how committed to a return are they? Actions not words prove so much...... I can not help this nagging feeling of something set up to fail
