skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Or it's not for sale to the city's football team for the amount that the city's football team owners want to pay for it. How much did SISU value it at in court again?
Wasps in talks to takeover Ricoh (22 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
Or it's not for sale to the city's football team for the amount that the city's football team owners want to pay for it. How much did SISU value it at in court again?
We had a few weeks of from the politics Michael. Quite enjoyed it while it lasted - but yes, the PR machines are cranking up again. Will put people off parting with their hard earned while all this is going on. We just need to do what we can as fans and support the team on the pitch as best we can (I will for the games that I can make).
Nick
Administrator
Would this stop people from going to games?
covmark
Well-Known Member
Jesus, people don't need anymore excuses.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
whether we like it or not it is only the directors of Otium t/a CCFC that has a duty of care to the fans of CCFC. ACL has no fans - it is just a business.
You could argue there is some sort of moral duty by the ACL directors but faced with a client that says its future lies elsewhere, that repeatedly bangs on about ownership that is presently not available, repeatedly produces statements about a new ground, that has been intransigent and hostile (that's not saying ACL haven't ) but the simple truth is that ACL has no duty to CCFC fans moral, legal or otherwise.
The duty the directors of ACL have is to the company and its employees. If CCFC will not strike a more permanent deal then as has been said by ACL before they have to move on and source new income.
I do not like the implications for our club but I do understand that other options must be considered. That said it does seem to have a bit of hypocrisy about it remembering the legal threats by ACL ....... but then aren't Wasps already homeless (or about to be) and not in dispute .......rather than it being a tactic in an acrimonious dispute to distress a landlord.
You could argue there is some sort of moral duty by the ACL directors but faced with a client that says its future lies elsewhere, that repeatedly bangs on about ownership that is presently not available, repeatedly produces statements about a new ground, that has been intransigent and hostile (that's not saying ACL haven't ) but the simple truth is that ACL has no duty to CCFC fans moral, legal or otherwise.
The duty the directors of ACL have is to the company and its employees. If CCFC will not strike a more permanent deal then as has been said by ACL before they have to move on and source new income.
I do not like the implications for our club but I do understand that other options must be considered. That said it does seem to have a bit of hypocrisy about it remembering the legal threats by ACL ....... but then aren't Wasps already homeless (or about to be) and not in dispute .......rather than it being a tactic in an acrimonious dispute to distress a landlord.
Last edited:
duffer
Well-Known Member
Again, a really fair point this. I wish both sides would just step away from the microphone for a bit.
I don't want to hear Fisher talking about his plans for a new stadium.
I don't want to hear that ACL are looking for alternatives to CCFC.
I want them to sit down together, and actually look at the figures, and forget the personalities and all the legal bollocks. If they do that, the inescapable conclusion has to be that ACL needs CCFC and vice-versa.
Spending £20m on a newer, crapper, stadium is an embarassingly stupid idea - and scratching around publicly for a franchise club to fill the gap is equally daft. There's an obvious solution right in front of us - why don't they just grow up and sort it out.
skyblueinBaku
Well-Known Member
Before this becomes a disaster for CCFC, several things have to happen: Wasps need to buy a controlling interest, the RFU have to sanction the move and the FL have to enforce their rule of the football team taking precedence over any other activity in the stadium.
If those three things happen, then it may signal the end for CCFC because TF's 'Coventry area' stadium will have to be built with a consequential loss of part of the fan base.
Of course it may just be ACL's way of forcing Sisu's hand - if they want an interest in the Ricoh, Sisu will need to start meaningful negotiations (ie 'put up or shut up').
If those three things happen, then it may signal the end for CCFC because TF's 'Coventry area' stadium will have to be built with a consequential loss of part of the fan base.
Of course it may just be ACL's way of forcing Sisu's hand - if they want an interest in the Ricoh, Sisu will need to start meaningful negotiations (ie 'put up or shut up').
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Cov Support with a slightly bizarrely vague story; http://www.coventrycity-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/ricoh_arena_sold_to_london_wasps_841484/index.shtml?
MichaelCCFC
New Member
Life is full of situations where people have different interests and have to choose how to deal with reconciling that. The fundamental issue isn't whether acl or sisu are right or wrong to prioritise their profits - the issue is that as fans we are in the hands of two companies whose interest is contrary to what we want ie we want a successful team and not being ripped off over tickets, beer, parking etc. The whole Supporters Trust movement came about due to the recognition that fans need a greater say and having a real stake through fan led ownership models/fans' shares etc. Isn't that supposed to be the purpose of our own Trust too?
WiganSkyBlue
Member
"..............could cause another headache for the Football League whose rules state that clubs can only play home matches in venues where their fixtures “take precedence” over other activities."
Well that's bollocks - Wigan Athletic and Wigan Warriors play in the same stadium without, as far as I know, any consequences from the FL or SL
Well that's bollocks - Wigan Athletic and Wigan Warriors play in the same stadium without, as far as I know, any consequences from the FL or SL
Otis
Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Michael. Yes fans should have a bigger say in their club .......... but there is no firm connection between club and ACL any more. The club are a day renting client nothing more, nothing less. As such there is little fans groups can do to influence what ACL do or do not do. You talk as if ACL and CCFC are closely linked and inter dependent so fans have got leverage on both. It simply is not the case. There is no immediate likelihood of fans meaningful representation at CCFC and not a chance at ACL. It is in this case the Sky Blue Trust not the Sky Blue & ACL Trust. That is the reality.
ACL will take business decisions - decisions that make the most of what they do or have - they rent and provision of space for business & people. Most of their customers are not attracted because of CCFC. It is not an emotional decision. If CCFC supporters boycott the Ricoh then ACL would fill it with other things - as they have done
On the other hand Otium t/a CCFC customer base is made up of fans or businesses that have a connection trade or emotionally to CCFC. The club has to take the wishes, emotions and needs of its customers the fans in to some sort of account or as we have seen they stay away. Fans boycott affect a football club. That gives fans groups leverage
There is a clear separation between CCFC and ACL that no supporters movement can change. The supporters movement relates to the football club. Not ACL so how exactly does a supporters movement or group have any great leverage on ACL?
The fans are first and foremost in the hands of the club. That club has a duty to provide the team and matches for its fans. So long as ACL provide what the club are prepared to pay for what responsibility exactly does ACL have to the fans?
ACL will take business decisions - decisions that make the most of what they do or have - they rent and provision of space for business & people. Most of their customers are not attracted because of CCFC. It is not an emotional decision. If CCFC supporters boycott the Ricoh then ACL would fill it with other things - as they have done
On the other hand Otium t/a CCFC customer base is made up of fans or businesses that have a connection trade or emotionally to CCFC. The club has to take the wishes, emotions and needs of its customers the fans in to some sort of account or as we have seen they stay away. Fans boycott affect a football club. That gives fans groups leverage
There is a clear separation between CCFC and ACL that no supporters movement can change. The supporters movement relates to the football club. Not ACL so how exactly does a supporters movement or group have any great leverage on ACL?
The fans are first and foremost in the hands of the club. That club has a duty to provide the team and matches for its fans. So long as ACL provide what the club are prepared to pay for what responsibility exactly does ACL have to the fans?
Last edited:
MichaelCCFC
New Member
Just as with sisu over ntfc, you identify weak spots and go for it. acl is not going to act contrary to ccc. Therefore lobbying councillors is an obvious approach if acl are acting contrary to the interests of fans. The starting point though is believing that fans should be involved and then campaigning to make it happen rather than just accepting the status quo. None of this is 'militant' 'extreme' or anything like that - it's in the constitution of every supporters' Trust!
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
It will fuck the Coventry Rugby Club crowds up if it goes ahead
MichaelCCFC
New Member
I'm a Cov RFC fan too so the double-whammy of acl not telling wasps where to go is maybe adding to my absolute fury over this
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
but CCC do not have day to day involvement in the running of ACL. The board of directors can out vote the CCC appointed directors. CCFC fans like it or not are a only a large minority of the footfall now at the Ricoh that it seems can be replaced by other events or clients. If the decision is can the arena and City be more successful other than by having CCFC there then the directors have a duty to consider it at the very least if not actually implement it. If the best business case is elsewhere then the councillors have a duty to support it in the best interests of the City.
Right now ACL can point to the football club wanting away and wanting to build their own stadium ....... do you think ACL should just wait see, or even just roll over and sell up to the club? Would suggest it is in the clubs interest to provide its supporters what they want and to do a proper deal or build the new stadium. Ball is in their court
Right now ACL can point to the football club wanting away and wanting to build their own stadium ....... do you think ACL should just wait see, or even just roll over and sell up to the club? Would suggest it is in the clubs interest to provide its supporters what they want and to do a proper deal or build the new stadium. Ball is in their court
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Just to be absolutely clear I am absolutely against Wasps taking control of the stadium and making CCFC second class citizens there
MichaelCCFC
New Member
My concern is solely the interests of the team and fans and I will oppose anything that is detrimental to those interests. I criticised sisu for what they've done and I'll criticise acl over this. As Duffer said, acl-sisu should be sitting down and planning a mutually beneficial future not engaging in all this nonsense yet again. The return to the Ricoh showed fans do have power and can influence things.
Otis
Well-Known Member
In saying all that, OSB, it is the Ricoh Arena, with their name emblazoned upon the top of a football stand, in a football stadium that was a CCFC badge on and sky blue seats all round.
CCFC may not be the best customer but let's not forget, the Ricoh Arena was built especially for Coventry City Football Club and at the end of the day the main part of the facility is a sports stadium.
Nick
Administrator
WestEndAgro
Well-Known Member
I assume this is what LAST has been referring to over the last few days, unless we have another "shit storm" heading our way
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
which the owners seem to be willing to kiss goodbye to for the second time as they go for this new stadium.
Actually the stadium bowl is less than 50% apparently
skyblueinBaku
Well-Known Member
I assume this is what LAST has been referring to over the last few days, unless we have another "shit storm" heading our way
I was thinking that, too.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Its a nonsense for CCFC & the Arena to be split, this is about the cost & the lost trust basically.. rebuild trust & pay a sensible amount so the debt can be removed & AEH charity can get out without too much of a hit and all will be resolved.. but it ain't likely to happen while litigation is still in the air is it!
covmark
Well-Known Member
But I got the impression LAST had some good news. This is anything but good news, unless he has a new found love of London Wasps.I assume this is what LAST has been referring to over the last few days, unless we have another "shit storm" heading our way
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
well apparently TF knows of 1, 2 3 or even 4 sites in the Coventry area that are available that Wasps could build their own stadium on if they are intent on moving up here perhaps he could tell them where ..........
If building a new stadium is a sensible option then why aren't Wasps doing that... well its bacause it is much more sensible to by a stake in an existing stadium innit!
Otis
Well-Known Member
Wasn't talking in revenue, OSB. Meant more in terms of sq ft of the complex. Just reinforces what the thing was built for in the first place.
Last edited:
WestEndAgro
Well-Known Member
He did appear to indicate it would be good news, however he may just see it as the beginning of the end of SISU ?
or purely coincidental and we still await news from LAST.
Hobo
Well-Known Member
Firstly if true, the main outrage would have to come from Wasps fans. If they objected to it, I would be surprised if they didn't, I would fully support their campaigns.
If the fans supported it, then my objection would revert to, it is potentially damaging to Coventry Rugby Club with such a big side moving into their catchment area.
some people think this is spin, I don't as I first heard about it last season and again that it was going ahead a few weeks before City moved back. Time will tell.
SISU have continued their threat of legal action and intent to build a new stadium. They therefore can't blame ACL for exploring other avenues to secure their future, rather than rolling over to die like SISU hoped.
Ultimately, teams should represent their locality and fan base....however if their fans support the move who are we to say it shouldn't happen?
If the fans supported it, then my objection would revert to, it is potentially damaging to Coventry Rugby Club with such a big side moving into their catchment area.
some people think this is spin, I don't as I first heard about it last season and again that it was going ahead a few weeks before City moved back. Time will tell.
SISU have continued their threat of legal action and intent to build a new stadium. They therefore can't blame ACL for exploring other avenues to secure their future, rather than rolling over to die like SISU hoped.
Ultimately, teams should represent their locality and fan base....however if their fans support the move who are we to say it shouldn't happen?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I meant the sq ft Otis. The stadium bowl represents under 50% of the complex sq ft apparently