CCLSC conversation with TF (10 Viewers)

[duffer]

F/B - yes, sold by the club many years ago. But times are very different now. The lease is gone, the club is playing elsewhere, new politicians at the CCC, new owners, a different financial climate and a new Financial Fair Play regime.

Everyone says 'time to move on' but in fact seems to be firmly stuck in the past.

Anyway, the profit of the F/B is not much. Was it 10% but increased some after the Compass deal?
So not much to share. Not much to give away. Not much to buy.
This really shouldn't be too difficult to agree a deal on. But the revenue MUST go through the club and count towards the FFP calculation.

The JR appeal? Well, I think I am just about the only poster who think it should not be dropped. And if the appeal is rejected they should take the case to the EU. As long as no final ruling is made the JR will have a bargaining value. This is important as the deal that may be struck is an interim solution. A short term deal. It definitely won't work for the club long term. Another deal is needed. A deal to bring ACL into a SBS&L group.

You're not the only poster, but I think you probably are in the minority. And politely, I can see why. At the moment SISU are attacking ACL and threatening their business with the insistence on continued court action. And yet you, and a few others here are saying that ACL are "blackmailing" SISU into dropping it.

That, I'm sorry, is utterly backwards to my mind. What company could negotiate a deal with the threat of court action at a later date changing (or even breaking) their business.

If SISU are serious about moving on, then dropping the court action has to be central to it. Realistically there's no prospect of a deal with ACL whilst it is still in place - why would anyone here support it continuing? You can't claim 'peace & reconciliation' as Mr Fisher does, whilst this is still in play.

In terms of a longer term deal, I wouldn't even get into those discussions yet - the short-term, low rent deal is the one that needs sorting, and that's the easier target to focus on.

 

---

[sky blue john]

They're not suing anybody

lol !!
So your turning a blind eye to the fact that at the recent JR sisu asked the judge that they be awarded damages ?
Has the JR process finished ?

 

[fernandopartridge]

What would you call it? They are doing it for the people of Coventry and making sure taxpayers money is spent correctly?

They're trying to 'correct' a decision made by a public authority as they believe the decision was unlawful.

They have no grounds to sue ACL and are not doing.

 

[Kingokings204]

This has nothing to do with 'you' or 'me' or 'Johnny' or 'Mary'.

It's a dispute between two businesses who greatly depend on each other. Who both suffers when they don't work together. Who can't in the short term satisfy their customers, business partners and their owners if they do not work together.
They disagree about a thing in the past - so they use the legal system to sort it out.
Customers and business partners depend on them to continue to work together while the historical dispute is settled in court.

No I see what you're saying but dropping of the JR appeal needs to be part of the deal. I don't mind it being used as a bargaining chip at all. That's business.

But I really don't see how they can keep the jr appeal and a deal done. Well it won't happen.

 

[fernandopartridge]

lol !!
So your turning a blind eye to the fact that at the recent JR sisu asked the judge that they be awarded damages ?
Has the JR process finished ?

Again. It isn't ACL who they've taken a case against. ACL are the 3rd party. If the council pay damages it should have no affect on ACL as a trading entity.

 

[sky blue john]

Also John. I work in an organisation that can be simultaneously in dispute with a contractor whilst also allowing them to bid for further business. In the real world this does happen. Furthermore. The case is SISU against Coventry City Council. It isn't ACL.

ACL are 50% owned by CCC I hardly think they would take your view point.
If this was the case as you say why would even ACL make it a pre-condition ?

 

[fernandopartridge]

ACL are 50% owned by CCC I hardly think they would take your view point.
If this was the case as you say why would even ACL make it a pre-condition ?

Are you saying that ACL can't survive without council support and are not independent from the council?

 

[duffer]

Yes, another group trying to sound important, how many are there ? a fucking fanny full at most, meeting a lot, saying a lot and achieving fuck all, as I said little more than a tea and biscuit brigade.

What utter bollocks, frankly. There's no one trying to sound important, just some people trying to get answers and passing on information.

The London supporters club is well established and well supported, and well known to the club, more to the point. Their annual meetings are probably as well attended as the trust ones, for what it's worth, and the club (as far as I can recall) has always sent someone along to chat and listen.

In that sense, they've got a bit more clout than someone having an ill-informed and lonely rant on here. I'm not a member, but I know a good few of them, and some of them are good mates. I can tell you that most of them prefer beer to tea.

 

[mark82]

I will try and take you to court for over a year and then I get battered in court and I still insist on appealing against you and see if you do a deal with me?

Is this for real? You're saying businesses should do deals with people who take them through stressful and costly court hearings. For real?

Yes. CCFC are the only football team in town (of an appropriate size). The Ricoh is the only stadium in town. Both sides should do whatever it takes. Sisu are being unreasonable not paying money owed - this will hopefully be sorted soon. ACL are being just as unreasonable asking Sisu to drop their statutory right to appeal a judges decision.

 

[duffer]

They're trying to 'correct' a decision made by a public authority as they believe the decision was unlawful.

They have no grounds to sue ACL and are not doing.

ACL are a named party in the JR, which is why they had a barrister in court for it.

It's simply impossible to claim that the court case doesn't threaten them directly.

To me it's blindingly obvious that there cannot be a deal whilst SISU press on with the appeal. If you want CCFC back at the Ricoh sooner rather than later (or possibly ever), then I'd honestly suggest you think again if you support SISU in that strategy.

 

[mark82]

ACL are a named party in the JR, which is why they had a barrister in court for it.

It's simply impossible to claim that the court case doesn't threaten them directly.

To me it's blindingly obvious that there cannot be a deal whilst SISU press on with the appeal. If you want CCFC back at the Ricoh sooner rather than later (or possibly ever), then I'd honestly suggest you think again if you support SISU in that strategy.

I do of a fashion. I understand it. As a reasonable person I say they are entitled to appeal so should they feel they have grounds they should be allowed.

As a ccfc fan I want them to drop it and do whatever it takes to come back to Coventry and would be happy to apply pressure on them to do so.

 

[duffer]

I do of a fashion. I understand it. As a reasonable person I say they are entitled to appeal so should they feel they have grounds they should be allowed.

As a ccfc fan I want them to drop it and do whatever it takes to come back to Coventry and would be happy to apply pressure on them to do so.

Yep, I see exactly what you're saying and it makes good sense. I wouldn't want to stop anyone seeking respite through the courts either, unless I thought perhaps that it was being used as a bullying tactic rather than a genuine appeal for justice.

Regardless, I guess what I'd say though, is that as a reasonable person I can see why a business being threatened by court action might not wish to negotiate with those threatening it. I wouldn't consider that unreasonable, personally.

 

[AJB1983]

So if I am reading this right, fisher would only be prepared to pay rent to cover match day facilities.
Presumably then the club offices and shop etc would still be down the foleshill rd somewhere and not based at the Ricoh?
Because the football club used the Ricoh 365 days a year before the exile.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Or how much CCC / ACL really want CCFC there or whether they still see the Ricoh primarily as a "cash cow" for CCC?

You see when people say things like this I have to ask have they ever actually looked at the figures and known facts ....... or simply relied on other peoples rhetoric

- Neither CCC nor AEHC have taken a return on investment, a dividend
- none of the appointed directors from CCC or AEHC is paid by ACL or IEC or receives the salaries they do from their employers or parties they represent because they are ACL directors
- The CCC now receives a payment of interest on loan they have made - quite legitimate but hardly matching the £1.5m + that certain football clubs pay
- The involvement of CCC and AEHC far from being cash cow has actually drained resources because of the legal costs. If even if a claim for costs were successful it doesn't pay all the costs (they are taxed or assessed by the Judiciary and usually that means discounted)
- You would have to assume that ACL are not just sitting there twiddling their thumbs - you know actually doing some trade so it doesn't rely on a football club to pay the bills or to be a cash cow ........ of course the effect of that being they have room to negotiate a rate to entice the club back if they are serious

But hey carry on believing that the club is a cash cow going forward :facepalm:

 

[Monners]

What utter bollocks, frankly. There's no one trying to sound important, just some people trying to get answers and passing on information.

The London supporters club is well established and well supported, and well known to the club, more to the point. Their annual meetings are probably as well attended as the trust ones, for what it's worth, and the club (as far as I can recall) has always sent someone along to chat and listen.

In that sense, they've got a bit more clout than someone having an ill-informed and lonely rant on here. I'm not a member, but I know a good few of them, and some of them are good mates. I can tell you that most of them prefer beer to tea.

I am a member - and this is an accurate summary (and yes, utter bollocks is about right for the dullard rant). I would advise anyone to join, even if you don't like football - the ale houses at away games are always spot on! By the way, you don't have to live in London or the SE to join. Even those of us in sunny Northampton are allowed in (there are 3 of us from that particular backwater)!

 

[skybluetony176]

So if I am reading this right, fisher would only be prepared to pay rent to cover match day facilities.
Presumably then the club offices and shop etc would still be down the foleshill rd somewhere and not based at the Ricoh?
Because the football club used the Ricoh 365 days a year before the exile.

They wouldn't want the "dingy" offices or a shop/ticket office on sight that could sell merchandise and tickets to fans on their way into a game. That would just be silly, wouldn't it. It would be much more sensible to have a shop in a completely different location and offices in a different location again :facepalm:

 

[Noggin]

I do of a fashion. I understand it. As a reasonable person I say they are entitled to appeal so should they feel they have grounds they should be allowed.

As a ccfc fan I want them to drop it and do whatever it takes to come back to Coventry and would be happy to apply pressure on them to do so.

So you are happy to apply pressure on Sisu to drop their appeal but consider ACL to be unreasonable by asking for the JR to be dropped?

Just because sisu have a right to appeal doesn't mean that appealing is right.

 

[Rob S]

Just to back up someone's addition that the club are asking for all match day revenues so inc. car parks, ads etc. And to add that anyone who thinks one or other side is posturing or PR-ing...well they both are. However, if we can get both sides beyond this we can get CCFC back home.

In terms of actual deals & conditions I'd expect both sides to stick to their positions but to then get down and negotiate.

I don't think it gets stressed enough as to how much the city can benefit financially from having the club back and this is the area where the council should be taking charge. From another recent CCLSC email reporting on the march:

It was a welcome return to our other "home", the Whitefriars after the march. Everyone misses it and we joked about a new campaign #bringCCLSChome to get us back to the Whitefriars. If you think that on a Ricoh match day there were regularly 25 or more members eating and drinking before the match. We can only imagine the losses they must have made during the time we have been away.

Even if ACL only broke even on match days, the city would be far richer.

 

[Monners]

They need to drop the JR stuff Rob. TF talks about Goodwill in the write up by Ian. What better way to demonstrate that Sisu are serious about a return (and in good faith) than dropping the threat of litigation. Ball is then in ACL's court. Otherwise this is just rhetoric

 

[sky blue john]

Just to back up someone's addition that the club are asking for all match day revenues so inc. car parks, ads etc. And to add that anyone who thinks one or other side is posturing or PR-ing...well they both are. However, if we can get both sides beyond this we can get CCFC back home.

In terms of actual deals & conditions I'd expect both sides to stick to their positions but to then get down and negotiate.

I don't think it gets stressed enough as to how much the city can benefit financially from having the club back and this is the area where the council should be taking charge. From another recent CCLSC email reporting on the march:


Even if ACL only broke even on match days, the city would be far richer.

I don't think the council will be oblivious to this.
Personally I would be more concerned with how many fans have been lost to Sisu's blatant neglect of the fans and self obssesed destruction of our club !!
Not to mention the dubious 50-70 million of debt and 1.8 million yearly unsustainable interest payments to Arvo.
Also let me get this right you expect Acl to break even on match days but Sisu can line their pockets ?

 

[fernandopartridge]

I don't think the council will be oblivious to this.
Personally I would be more concerned with how many fans have been lost to Sisu's blatant neglect of the fans and self obssesed destruction of our club !!
Not to mention the dubious 50-70 million of debt and 1.8 million yearly unsustainable interest payments to Arvo.
Also let me get this right you expect Acl to break even on match days but Sisu can line their pockets ?

Line their pockets with what you fool?

 

[sky blue john]

Line their pockets with what you fool?

Lol !!
Maybe the cash cow called CCFC !!
Where's the CW money gone ?
Where's the Arsenal money gone ?
Where's the LC money gone ?
Where's the Juke money gone ?

 

[Hobo]

"the will of local people and local tax payers” ” might play a part with CCC , as the creditor-lender, positively encouraging both ACL and Higgs and thereby answering the question everyone is asking – which is just how much does the Council want its club to play back in the community."

TF it would be also good if SISU took into consideration the will of local people and local tax payers" and how much do SISU want the club to be back in the local community?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Lol !!
Maybe the cash cow called CCFC !!

You live in another world

 

[sky blue john]

Lol !!
Maybe the cash cow called CCFC !!
Where's the CW money gone ?
Where's the Arsenal money gone ?
Where's the LC money gone ?
Where's the Juke money gone ?

Fernando I make that lot about 4 million where is it ?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Fernando I make that lot about 4 million where is it ?

They've pocketed it cos the club is making millions playing in Northampton.

 

[Monners]

I believe that an Argument thread is nnow open for business chaps. :slap:

 

[Godiva]

You're not the only poster, but I think you probably are in the minority. And politely, I can see why. At the moment SISU are attacking ACL and threatening their business with the insistence on continued court action. And yet you, and a few others here are saying that ACL are "blackmailing" SISU into dropping it.

That, I'm sorry, is utterly backwards to my mind. What company could negotiate a deal with the threat of court action at a later date changing (or even breaking) their business.

If SISU are serious about moving on, then dropping the court action has to be central to it. Realistically there's no prospect of a deal with ACL whilst it is still in place - why would anyone here support it continuing? You can't claim 'peace & reconciliation' as Mr Fisher does, whilst this is still in play.

In terms of a longer term deal, I wouldn't even get into those discussions yet - the short-term, low rent deal is the one that needs sorting, and that's the easier target to focus on.

I totally respect your opinion.

- Blackmail. It is not the right term, ultimatum is, but the effect is the same. ACL have set a condition and make the club choose to either get a seat at the negotiations without any security a fair deal will be the outcome, or stay away.

What if they agree to drop the JR and ACL say we want $500K per year plus 10k per match, no access to any revenues and on a 10 year lease? What if they can't afford a better deal than something like that?

BTW, to be clear: It's the owner of the club who brought a case against the part-owner of ACL. I don't think ACL are involved directly, other than they may have to repay the loan should CCC lose at some point?

But one issue you do not raise: Are the ultimatum not effecting the businesses of the casino, compass, the hotel other businesses in and around the arena? So ACL is not only blocking for negotiations with the football club, they are potentially blocking for the businesses they should service.

As long as there is no long term deal that suits and benefits the club I think sisu should hold on to any appeal option they have. And the only long term solution is ACL being part of the club company structure.

 

[shmmeee]

I totally respect your opinion.

- Blackmail. It is not the right term, ultimatum is, but the effect is the same. ACL have set a condition and make the club choose to either get a seat at the negotiations without any security a fair deal will be the outcome, or stay away.

What if they agree to drop the JR and ACL say we want $500K per year plus 10k per match, no access to any revenues and on a 10 year lease? What if they can't afford a better deal than something like that?

BTW, to be clear: It's the owner of the club who brought a case against the part-owner of ACL. I don't think ACL are involved directly, other than they may have to repay the loan should CCC lose at some point?

But one issue you do not raise: Are the ultimatum not effecting the businesses of the casino, compass, the hotel other businesses in and around the arena? So ACL is not only blocking for negotiations with the football club, they are potentially blocking for the businesses they should service.

As long as there is no long term deal that suits and benefits the club I think sisu should hold on to any appeal option they have. And the only long term solution is ACL being part of the club company structure.

So you're happy to sit in Northampton while we sort the long term out?

Even if it's say 3-5 years while a new ground is built?

 

[fernandopartridge]

So you're happy to sit in Northampton while we sort the long term out?

Even if it's say 3-5 years while a new ground is built?

You're happy for the club to pay an above market rate to play at the Ricoh just to prop up ACL?

I think they should get round the table and discuss a deal that is SUBJECT to dropping the JR. The deal should be one that cannot be renegotiated to CCFC's detriment during its life.

Nothing is stopping a discussion.

 

[sky blue john]

I totally respect your opinion.

- Blackmail. It is not the right term, ultimatum is, but the effect is the same. ACL have set a condition and make the club choose to either get a seat at the negotiations without any security a fair deal will be the outcome, or stay away.

What if they agree to drop the JR and ACL say we want $500K per year plus 10k per match, no access to any revenues and on a 10 year lease? What if they can't afford a better deal than something like that?

BTW, to be clear: It's the owner of the club who brought a case against the part-owner of ACL. I don't think ACL are involved directly, other than they may have to repay the loan should CCC lose at some point?

But one issue you do not raise: Are the ultimatum not effecting the businesses of the casino, compass, the hotel other businesses in and around the arena? So ACL is not only blocking for negotiations with the football club, they are potentially blocking for the businesses they should service.

As long as there is no long term deal that suits and benefits the club I think sisu should hold on to any appeal option they have. And the only long term solution is ACL being part of the club company structure.

How will Acl being owned by Sisu benefit CCFC. I hardly think CCFC would get away with only paying 175k a year rent to a Sisu/Arvo company ?

 

[Godiva]

ACL are a named party in the JR, which is why they had a barrister in court for it.

It's simply impossible to claim that the court case doesn't threaten them directly.

To me it's blindingly obvious that there cannot be a deal whilst SISU press on with the appeal. If you want CCFC back at the Ricoh sooner rather than later (or possibly ever), then I'd honestly suggest you think again if you support SISU in that strategy.

Wrote my previous reply before seeing this.

First - I stand corrected as you say ACL is a direct part having their own barrister. I wasn't sure and think I put appropriate question marks.

Second - It's true that any ruling to the lawfulness of the loan is effecting ACL directly. They could possibly go bankrupt. But if the loan is (eventually) found unlawful nobody can protest that it is repaid. Then ACL may have great difficulties finding new funding and that could lead to ACL becoming a member of the SBS&L family. The best outcome for the club surely.
But of course it could be too late if sisu really decide to build their own stadium.

 

[sky blue john]

They've pocketed it cos the club is making millions playing in Northampton.

Glad you can see that at last !

 

[shmmeee]

You're happy for the club to pay an above market rate to play at the Ricoh just to prop up ACL?

I think they should get round the table and discuss a deal that is SUBJECT to dropping the JR. The deal should be one that cannot be renegotiated to CCFC's detriment during its life.

Nothing is stopping a discussion.

Look. I don't know what the club need (as opposed to what the club want) not do I know what ACL can give or want to give.

You don't know either side either. And as they're currently not talking neither ACL not CCFC know both sides. That's the point of negotiations.

It may well be that ACL simply can't offer what CCFC want and we have to build a new ground. Fine.

What I do know is that the club should not be in Northampton. I do know the club is better off in the short term at the Ricoh than at Sixfields.

Apparently some disagree and would rather we wait at Sixfields than come home in the interim. I'd just like to know why.

One other point, but for another thread is: if we're not far off breakeven at Sixfields on crowds of 1500. Why the hell do we need the pie money so badly? Thanks to the cost cutting and the reduced rent offer, our breakeven at the Ricoh is down to about 6k.

 

[Rob S]

Also let me get this right you expect Acl to break even on match days but Sisu can line their pockets ?

No. That's why I started the sentence with 'Even if...'. I'm illustrating the fact that ACL, a company owned by a local charity & the local council, could make an overall profit/benefit for the city if they only broke even. I'm not saying they should. Just that there are benefits beyond ACL's bottom line.

As for Sisu lining their pockets... I'm trying to work out if you think that they're making or losing money on this whole CCFC project? Like it or not, the more money that CCFC earn from pies, sponsorship, car parking, replica shirts or whatever, the more there is to spend on not only player wages, but also all the other things that can improve the team. We could do with better scouting of our opponents, better scouting for new players, better medical & fitness, better tactical & analysis and so on & so forth. Hell, I'd pay someone a boatload if they were a successful head of the 'not letting goals in during injury time' department.

Getting out of sodding League 1 is a priority but so is making a decent fist of sustaining a team in the Championship. Added to that, we, and Sisu have a choice. Do we look to the likes of Arsenal & Swansea who are relatively successful Premier league clubs that actually sustain their activities and make money, or do we look to the others who are part of some geopolitical dick-waving contest between various gajillionaires who are happy to piss money into their respective clubs? No matter which way we go, that will ultimately be the way we see the back of Sisu and we're not going to go that way until the club have some kind of success in having stability with their league position & home.