Not good News (29 Viewers)

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

ACL introduced it as being key to even getting the negotiating table I meant by b that comment.

While I hate to agree with you I think you're right about the war of attrition.

#CarlBakerDay #ClivePlattWeek #JohnGayleMonth

I think they were right to include it, as it sort of gets SISU to face up to what should be - in most negotiations - a landscape needed to negotiate from. But; as above SISU in my view have no interest in candid, daily, running-a-business contract discussions. Whilst there's a slither of the bigger-prize being delivered; they'll chase that at all costs, and to the detriment of all other

 

---

[dongonzalos]

As has been clear all along it is the only bargaining tool they've got. Otherwise, to be frank, they're at the mercy of the not so generous ACL.

#CarlBakerDay #ClivePlattWeek #JohnGayleMonth

Generous? Without them where exactly was our destination?

 

[dongonzalos]

Not really unexpected is it

TF can try to distance the club from the legal action but it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny really does it. The two entities named on the court documents are ARVO and SBS&L who are the only share holders in Otium trading as CCFC. The only reason they can attempt a legal challenge is because they own Otium. He is trying to point attention in another direction (an old and oft repeated SISU tactic) and say "not me guv". Bottom line is that SISU and CCFC are inextricably linked at this point - they are not two separate things. Therefore CCFC is absolutely involved in any legal action - it is, has always been and remains the tool to an objective

Clearly there is a clear split however between the needs and intentions of SISU/ARVO/SBS&L and the needs of CCFC. Unfortunately I don't see how you split the involvement in all aspects of this for all of those four though. Not only that but the only one who makes decisions for all those entities is JS. Nothing gets agreed unless she says so ..... rent deals, returns to Coventry, fantasy ground builds and above all legal actions. So this TF idea of separation is to be honest sheer bunkum

ACL certainly had input in to the FL decision however there was no power held by them to accept or reject the £471k - they were not nor ever were part of the contract between FL & Otium. Therefore they had no choice in accepting the £471K to imply they did is wrong. I wonder if the FL have paid it over yet?

I am not sure they will, but there may be a chance that ACL will see beyond this latest court action and negotiate to a conclusion that brings the club back now. But I suspect they wont be inclined to after this. From their point of view why do they need to include as part of negotiations whether or not legal action continues. They have said clearly all the legal actions have to stop. I would suspect at this stage they feel confident the appeal will be rejected and their need for CCFC to be back is less than the need CCFC has to return. Is this the only legal challenges going on?

What this does do even if ACL negotiate is to harden what is going to be on offer. It will only ever be a rent deal and with the other legal distractions there is no real incentive for ACL to jump through hoops in negotiating rights to income etc. No rights to income or agreed costs for using those income streams and the decision maker at CCFC will reject any deal, most likely stating a refusal by ACL to negotiate as the reason ...... but will it really be the case? or has any negotiation been set up to fail in the first place and the objective remains as it always has.

As they say leopards do not change their spots

Altogether disheartening ............ interesting to see how this latest news affects the travelling support "home" or away

Never got anything wrong so far in my book.

So this particular post is not great reading....

 

[skybluetony176]

I don't see it. As a bargaining chip for what? Lower rent, better catering cut? That's all that's open to them now and they don't want it. They've ploughed millions into this venture, and a share of the £150K profit from food and drink as per the last accounts aren't it.

They need freehold, or at least long leasehold with all revenues to feather the nest of their exit strategy. Neither are on the table, so the court cases, with their dwindling likelihood of success is their only chance. Even if it's a 1% chance, they're duty bound by desperation to persue it.

That's what we're now seeing. Despite what's publicly stated, they have no interest in cutting a deal with ACL. So there's no point in gaining leverage for a discussion they don't want

That's the way I see it.

 

[kevinleftpeg]

Im fed up of DIY on Saturday's so please can we come back to Coventry.
I am also going shopping at Aldi later. I am very excited about buying something else I do not need from the middle isle.
Then I am going to cut the lawn, trim the edges & admire my hanging baskets.
I will then listen to a Marillion album on repeat just so I can practice self harming which is a new hobby I have taken up.
By now it should be 6pm......... I will peel the potatoes ensuring Sunday lunch is on time.
However, I will leave the Ironing until tomorrow so I can watch reality TV.

KLP

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Does anyone find it strange that we have not heard anything from ACL? Not one statement, City have come out with four statements regarding the subject but nothing from ACL...?

 

[Hobo]

What should they be commenting on?

 

[RegTheDonk]

Does anyone find it strange that we have not heard anything from ACL? Not one statement, City have come out with four statements regarding the subject but nothing from ACL...?

They set their stall out weeks ago. Money and dropping the legals. Until that is satisfied no point spinning. Its black and white.

 

[RFC]

Can you tell us who and I mean which company is paying the lawyers who are doing all this court work? Is it the club i.e. Otium Entertainment Group and/or SBS&L, or Joy personally or Sisu Capital Partners etc.

Because the Club lost £7m last year I seem to recall and if we're likely to lose a similar sum again this year I don't think adding the legal fees for a case that's not got much to do with the club (well it's about the council loan to ACL not the club) to our debt mountain is fair.

Sorry no idea on costs or which company is paying.

 

[RFC]

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask you to quantify your comments, especially as on the surface it appears to shut the door on a return.

If you know something... just tell everyone. If there is some good news to follow - don't you think we deserve to know?

Everyone deserves to have it confirmed (including myself) and despite yesterday's events, I still expect a return during early September.

As soon as it's confirmed I'm sure they'll be an announcement.

 

[Kingokings204]

Does anyone find it strange that we have not heard anything from ACL? Not one statement, City have come out with four statements regarding the subject but nothing from ACL...?

What statement should ACL be making?

They briefly stated the other day they have been paid the 471k but "nothing has changed"

They set out 2 very reasonable and simple criteria and once they have been met then talks can happen. We know both haven't been met yet so we know the score.

 

[Kingokings204]

Everyone deserves to have it confirmed (including myself) and despite yesterday's events, I still expect a return during early September.

As soon as it's confirmed I'm sure they'll be an announcement.

BREAKING NEWS:

Once a deal is confirmed RFC is sure there will be an announcement on it.

Couldn't write it

 

[BackRoomRummermill]

I would say SISU have there own company legal team which they use for all business dealings, it wont be like you or me where we call one in. It will be part of the business structure, the shame in all this was where were their legal team when it came to signing up with ACL and the RICOH to do it properly !

 

[Kingokings204]

I would say SISU have there own company legal team which they use for all business dealings, it wont be like you or me where we call one in. It will be part of the business structure, the shame in all this was where were their legal team when it came to signing up with ACL and the RICOH to do it properly !

I spoke to a season ticket holder the ther day and he explained why he wanted to go to "support the lads" fair enough but when asked why he said: "well the blame is 50-50, the council are joint to blame even though they won the court case, sisu aren't great owners but they wanted to buy the Higgs share at a fair price and they weren't allowed to buy it, also when the rent was 1.3m it was ripping off the club. Also Coventry and sisu only want match day Revnues is that so bad?"

I proceeded to tell him actually sisu didn't want to pay market value for the Higgs share (proved in high court) and it was that share why we don't get match day Revenues as we sold them fair and square. I also told him 1.3m rent was around 8% of the clubs actual turnover and the 1.3m was being reduced and shook on by TF at 400k,

He just completely looked blank and me and said "you won't change my mind" I said I don't want to change your mind I just wanted you to state facts that we know.

This is a true story and I believe most 100 adult season tickets they have sold him being 1 think like this and when I said it's morally wrong as Cov should play in Cov he just said "well I want to support my team and I will go wherever as it's a cheap season ticket as well."

True story

 

[skybluetony176]

BREAKING NEWS:

Once a deal is confirmed RFC is sure there will be an announcement on it.

Couldn't write it

I reckon they'll just staple an A4 sheet (even too tight to laminate it) to the front door of Suxfields saying "we have moved" and Cardoza will just mark all post "no longer at this address" and put it back in a post box.

(edit)

 

[James Smith]

Sorry no idea on costs or which company is paying.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, will continue with the depressing assumption that it is Otium and SBS&L.

 

[skybluetony176]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, will continue with the depressing assumption that it is Otium and SBS&L.

At best you would expect it to be 50/50 ARVO/SBS & L. But then what's stopping ARVO retrieving their cost's by way of more share issues in the club or a hike in the interest rates being lumped onto the club?

 

[Jack Griffin]

Does anyone find it strange that we have not heard anything from ACL? Not one statement, City have come out with four statements regarding the subject but nothing from ACL...?

You want them to back pedal I suppose?

I think they've been crystal clear, nothing more to add is there?

Meanwhile Timmy makes misleading statements about talking when he knows the appeal will go ahead, stopping all prospect of talks.

 

[James Smith]

Does anyone find it strange that we have not heard anything from ACL? Not one statement, City have come out with four statements regarding the subject but nothing from ACL...?

I assume that they aren't talking whilst the legals are still ongoing. If we had heard nothing from them regarding the preconditions for negotiations then yes I might find it a bit odd, but as we have those I don't think it's too far from the norm.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, will continue with the depressing assumption that it is Otium and SBS&L.

On CWR they reported the plaintiffs are ARVO, SISU and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure Ltd (directors Tim Fisher & Mark Labovich).

I don't believe it is necessary for each party to share costs equally, so it is possible for all the costs to end up on Sky Blue Sport & Leisure's books.

 

[ccfcway]

we are now 13 months into a 36 month new stadium plan.

 

[RegTheDonk]

On CWR they reported the plaintiffs are ARVO, SISU and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure Ltd (directors Tim Fisher & Mark Labovich).

I don't believe it is necessary for each party to share costs equally, so it is possible for all the costs to end up on Sky Blue Sport & Leisure's books.

And the laughable thing is Fisher said it was unfair on the taxpayer. Don't see our names as plaintiffs.

 

[Cityfan1]

What statement should ACL be making?

They briefly stated the other day they have been paid the 471k but "nothing has changed"

They set out 2 very reasonable and simple criteria and once they have been met then talks can happen. We know both haven't been met yet so we know the score.

To my mind it is not as simple as that , I believe ACL have a moral obligation to the people of Coventry to do whatever they can (within the context of there own business requirements) to bring CCFC home, and are entrenched as much as SISU in there own petty issues. As we stand SISU own CCFC and have (Through there own negligence and scheming) put them selves in a no win position holding only one card, which is the chance of the appeal, if ACL sat down with them now they could negotiate an agreement and get the appeal revoked as part of that package.

 

[Samo]

You twattle on about respect in the other thread and then post that, straight off. Is it
national irony week?
Read the post, you thick ork. It's all in there if you read and try and ponder, as opposed to trying to play the game you're eminently I'll-equipped to play. Again.

Seriously, I'm not being funny. You're too thick for this. You don't do humour. You're unintelligent. Your forced confrontation doesn't boast grace nor subtlety to even slightly motivate me to engage with you; and your modus operandi has grown more desperate as the boredom of the school holidays have taken their toll. In essence, dear chap, you're a buffoon of biblical proportions

And yet you do engage, and at length too. Why dont you just ignore me? You seem intent on calling me all manner of names. Is it because you know I have your number? Your intellectual vanity is misplaced MMM. Your little better than some of the real Ugs on here and you spout the same shit.

 

[James Smith]

I would say SISU have there own company legal team which they use for all business dealings, it wont be like you or me where we call one in. It will be part of the business structure, the shame in all this was where were their legal team when it came to signing up with ACL and the RICOH to do it properly !

The barrister they used wasn't an "in house" one even if the other lawyers were.

 

[James Smith]

ū

To my mind it is not as simple as that , I believe ACL have a moral obligation to the people of Coventry to do whatever they can (within the context of there own business requirements) to bring CCFC home, and are entrenched as much as SISU in there own petty issues. As we stand SISU own CCFC and have (Through there own negligence and scheming) put them selves in a no win position holding only one card, which is the chance of the appeal, if ACL sat down with them now they could negotiate an agreement and get the appeal revoked as part of that package.

The JR is about the validity of the council loan to ACL and ACL aren't directly involved. Why would they negotiate now when they can wait to see how Sisu and the council get on with the appeal (against the decision not to allow Sisu) to appeal. ACL appear open to negotiations but were perfectly clear on what the conditions were that they needed to sit down and start. They obviously think that they can get by without us until the appeals are exhausted, as do Sisu.

Sisu appear to be playing the one card (as you say) that they have left in the deck. If they wanted us to return to Coventry quickly they'd have been better off not doing so but they do have the right to appeal and have chosen to do so. Tim reckons that the High Court Judge was wrong and wants the chance to prove that. If it does go all the way to Europe then we'll either have the comparable size debt to a small African country or have gone out of business.

Anyway my break is over and we have a game to win today. PUSB.

 

[duffer]

I thought a bit more about the 'appeal as a bargaining chip' argument again this morning, after I'd calmed down a bit.

In truth, if you're genuinely looking to seek a short-term rent deal, it still makes little sense. It's an obvious obstacle to talks, and from ACL's point, it actually gives them a stronger position in some ways. As long as this is in play they're not going to get much in the way of public pressure to strike a deal.

Of course, if SISU only want to pretend to negotiate whilst they're actually intent on prolonging the amount of time they are able to distress ACL, then I guess it makes some sense. The reason for the pretence, I assume, is to keep the FL and the fans off their backs a bit longer.

I hope that I've read this wrong, and that there really is something going on behind the scenes that we don't know about. Simon Gilbert gives me some hope on that front, but my gut feel is still that everyone is being played by SISU. Again.

 

[Samo]

I thought a bit more about the 'appeal as a bargaining chip' argument again this morning, after I'd calmeddown a bit.

In truth, if you're genuinely looking to seek a short-term rent deal, it still makes little sense. It's an obvious obstacle to talks, and from ACL's point, it actually gives them a stronger position in some ways. As long as this is in play they're not going to get much in the way of public pressure to strike a deal.

Of course, if SISU only want to pretend to negotiate whilst they're actually intent on prolonging the amount of time they are able to distress ACL, then I guess it makes some sense. The reason for the pretence, I assume, is to keep the FL and the fans off their backs a bit longer.

I hope that I've read this wrong, and that there really is something going on behind the scenes that we don't know about. Simon Gilbert gives me some hope on that front, but my gut feel is still that everyone is being played by SISU. Again.

But is it an obstacle for talks? Gilbert doesn't think so. I don't really see how SISU can play anyone anymore. They are roundly despised, no one believes a word they say, about the new stadium or anything else. It certainly doesnt look like ACL will be folding anytime soon. What cards do they have left to play?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

And yet you do engage, and at length too

No I don't

 

[Samo]

No I don't

:claping hands:

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

But is it an obstacle for talks? Gilbert doesn't think so. I don't really see how SISU can play anyone anymore. They are roundly despised, no one believes a word they say, about the new stadium or anything else. It certainly doesnt look like ACL will be folding anytime soon. What cards do they have left to play?

The ones I articulated above, which you roundly dismissed at the time in a failed effort to appear 'smart'. They have to now secure a significant tangible output. That's only a lengthy freehold with - preferably- access to non-matchday income streams, or freehold to load debt against.

Whats the thing about oyster fishermen diving through tunnels to get their catch? Sometimes they dive blind, and they teach a stage in an underground tunnel or cavern when they haven't got sufficient oxygen to turn back; so they have to swim ever harder and more desperately forward in hope they find a cave, oxygen and their catch. That's where SISU now are. They've swum to far to turn back

 

[italiahorse]

I spoke to a season ticket holder the ther day and he explained why he wanted to go to "support the lads" fair enough but when asked why he said: "well the blame is 50-50, the council are joint to blame even though they won the court case, sisu aren't great owners but they wanted to buy the Higgs share at a fair price and they weren't allowed to buy it, also when the rent was 1.3m it was ripping off the club. Also Coventry and sisu only want match day Revnues is that so bad?"

I proceeded to tell him actually sisu didn't want to pay market value for the Higgs share (proved in high court) and it was that share why we don't get match day Revenues as we sold them fair and square. I also told him 1.3m rent was around 8% of the clubs actual turnover and the 1.3m was being reduced and shook on by TF at 400k,

He just completely looked blank and me and said "you won't change my mind" I said I don't want to change your mind I just wanted you to state facts that we know.

This is a true story and I believe most 100 adult season tickets they have sold him being 1 think like this and when I said it's morally wrong as Cov should play in Cov he just said "well I want to support my team and I will go wherever as it's a cheap season ticket as well."

True story

I take it you go on the club coach.
That's the conversations I hear but I just sit there and bite my tongue.

 

[Samo]

I agree that the eventual goal will be a long term leasehold (I assume you meant leasehold) and have never disputed that or suggested otherwise.
But in terms of the Sixfilelds/distress ACL fiasco, they are, in my opinion, beaten, and must return to the Ricoh using a deal for revenues as a face saver and still unsure that they will ever achieve their objective or secure a return on investment.
As I stated earlier on this thread (of which you will have studied every word) their real victory is the breaking of the rental deal.

 

[shmmeee]

As I stated earlier on this thread (of which you will have studied every word) their real victory is the breaking of the rental deal.

Bit of a pyrrhic victory considering it cost them a bunch of fan goodwill, several million quid in lost revenue, the chance to own half of ACL, and arguably our Championship status.

 

[Samo]

Bit of a pyrrhic victory considering it cost them a bunch of fan goodwill, several million quid in lost revenue, the chance to own half of ACL, and arguably our
Championship status.

Agreed. But how will it be viewed in 10 years time I wonder?