chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Whilst I'm sure Fisher and Labovich will both be there we know that it's not them making the decisions so for me if SISU are saying all those involved should be there it is vital Sepalla is there. If she isn't they can't complain if anyone else doesn't show up.
To be honest I don't really see why everyone needs to be there, these things only tend to be a couple of hours and it's hard enough to get a straight answer when it's just Fisher or Labovich talking. If everyone shows up nothing will come of it and it will be a complete waste of time.
I'd rather have just our club owners there and have them cover the following (and by cover I mean actually explain with some detail, not a soundbite that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny)
1) where is the site for the new ground, why is there so much secrecy this is never an issue for other clubs, why us?. given we are 12 months into a 36 month plan and appear to have got nowhere how can we have any confidence in the new ground being ready on time.
2) explain the financing and ownership of the stadium.
3) having built a new stadium and having lost millions whilst being out of the city how will SISU every recover their investors money, Sepalla has stated this is her main concern.
4) why can we not play at the Ricoh while a new stadium is being built. we can't get on with CCC / Higgs / ACL is not an acceptable answer, nor is matchday fees etc. It is clear that the net benefit to the club would be in the millions by agreeing a short term deal before you even consider the damage being done to the fan base with an extended period playing out of the city.
5) if there is no new ground or plan a is the Ricoh state this clearly and state what type of Ricoh deals the club would consider.
6) if ownership of the Ricoh is the preferred option why has no formal bid been submitted to force the councils hand.
7) if a rental agreement is acceptable state a total (inc matchday costs) figure the club would find acceptable to force ACLs hand.
Sure those questions won't get answered and we'll end up with the usual old rubbish, both from those asking questions and those answering them. I think answering those would be in SISUs benefit as it would make it clear what they want and pressure can then be applied to the relevant parties on the other side.
To be honest I don't really see why everyone needs to be there, these things only tend to be a couple of hours and it's hard enough to get a straight answer when it's just Fisher or Labovich talking. If everyone shows up nothing will come of it and it will be a complete waste of time.
I'd rather have just our club owners there and have them cover the following (and by cover I mean actually explain with some detail, not a soundbite that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny)
1) where is the site for the new ground, why is there so much secrecy this is never an issue for other clubs, why us?. given we are 12 months into a 36 month plan and appear to have got nowhere how can we have any confidence in the new ground being ready on time.
2) explain the financing and ownership of the stadium.
3) having built a new stadium and having lost millions whilst being out of the city how will SISU every recover their investors money, Sepalla has stated this is her main concern.
4) why can we not play at the Ricoh while a new stadium is being built. we can't get on with CCC / Higgs / ACL is not an acceptable answer, nor is matchday fees etc. It is clear that the net benefit to the club would be in the millions by agreeing a short term deal before you even consider the damage being done to the fan base with an extended period playing out of the city.
5) if there is no new ground or plan a is the Ricoh state this clearly and state what type of Ricoh deals the club would consider.
6) if ownership of the Ricoh is the preferred option why has no formal bid been submitted to force the councils hand.
7) if a rental agreement is acceptable state a total (inc matchday costs) figure the club would find acceptable to force ACLs hand.
Sure those questions won't get answered and we'll end up with the usual old rubbish, both from those asking questions and those answering them. I think answering those would be in SISUs benefit as it would make it clear what they want and pressure can then be applied to the relevant parties on the other side.
Same as my meetings with Mr Fisher. I wonder if either of them will reveal the real reason talks stalled:thinking about:
