Which is why they want out and would have accepted 5,5m therefore taking a loss.
Instead they were told their share is worthless, but Joy offered them 2m because they are a charity.
What other answer than F.O. should Joy have expected?
Opinion of CET (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter dongonzalos
- Start date
Which is why they want out and would have accepted 5,5m therefore taking a loss.
Instead they were told their share is worthless, but Joy offered them 2m because they are a charity.
What other answer than F.O. should Joy have expected?
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Have Sisu ever implied they would pay for it ?
For something to be sold you have to have a willing purchaser. Sisu have never been willing to purchase the Ricoh !!!!
They (ACL) have used the revenue to repay the mortgage. If the revenue increases, they can repay the mortgage quicker or maybe take something out. Apart from that, part ownership of ACL gives a share in the decision making and an interest to bring in more business. 100% ownership of the invisible P.i.T.S. stadium on the other hand is worth sweet F.A..
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
They had a bid for part ownership turned down in 2012, they have apparantly been willing to purchase atleast some of it , even if it was a half hearted effort
They recinded on the deal for 5,5m and said the share was worthless. Then offered 2m because Joy realised that Higgs was a charity.
That is not "half hearted", that is taking the proverbial and deserved a robust rebuke at least.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It's not too late-the club could withdraw their legal action at any time and join the negotiating table. I still see the Wasps talks more as a threat to get the club to drop it.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
The ball has always been in Sisu's court to do a deal !!
They obviously prefer not to !
How this means its everyone's but Sisu's fault is beyond me....
They obviously prefer not to !
How this means its everyone's but Sisu's fault is beyond me....
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Just to correct something here, otherwise we misrepresent the full extent of Joy's charitable nature. It was to be a £5.5m donation.
From the records (the answers are from Laura Deering):
8 MR JUSTICE LEGGATT: Sorry, you're suggesting she thought
9 the company was worth nothing, but still would pay
10 5.5 million for it?
11 A. She recognised that they were a charity, yes.
12 MR JUSTICE LEGGATT: You're not a charity, are you?
13 A. No.
14 MR JUSTICE LEGGATT: Why would she pay 5.5 million for
15 something worth nothing?
16 A. I don't know. I don't make the final decision. I can
17 only --
18 MR JUSTICE LEGGATT: Okay.
I hate the prospect of Wasps buying into ACL as much as anyone, but while Fisher keeps telling anyone that will listen to him that the club are building their own stadium and the move back to the Ricoh is only temporary, ACL are quite entitled to search for a new long term tenant.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Here's another Opinion of the CET..
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...t-the-football-club-to-stay-at-the-Ricoh-quot
No doubt those championing ACL on this will completely disagree...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...t-the-football-club-to-stay-at-the-Ricoh-quot
No doubt those championing ACL on this will completely disagree...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Rob S
Well-Known Member
For a more detailed response & a call for unity from GCBTTR:
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...to-the-Ricoh-response-to-Wasps-Ricoh-Takeover
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...to-the-Ricoh-response-to-Wasps-Ricoh-Takeover
Where does the 2m come in? as I am sure that was what offered in the end? ( especially as the deal was to be 5,5m - if she was happy to donate 5,5m why didn't she?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Well, if someone wanted to buy your house and the person who wanted to buy it was someone insistent on taking you to court and to also totally financially ruin you, would you sell it to them?
There needs to be a rebuilding of trust and a fresh start before we can go anywhere I feel. Sisu MUST drop the legal proceedings. That should be the first thing on the agenda.
Until that happens I just thing there will be continuing bad blood bubbling under the surface.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
That was a later offer based on cash up front I think, this was after Higgs decided that accepting the £5.5m based on a pinky promise of getting the money at some time in the future was perhaps a bit too risky.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Trust works one way, does it? I agree that SISU should drop legalities but ACL should reaffirm their promise to "rebuild trust" and not hawk the stadium to another franchise.
Houchens Head
Fairly well known member from Malvern
I think we should ground-share. Northampton sounds nice.
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
The way I see it if Wasps bought a controlling share of the Ricoh they would be the landlord and I am certain would need the revenue a pro. football team would bring in so I see ccfc getting the boot as a no goer. If Sisu did the same they would become the landlord, to me a frightening thought. I keep reading WE must own our own ground, we would all agree with that, but who are we ? Who could buy the Ricoh for us but only Sisu or Otium or is Arvo or could it be a yet to be announced investor. We don't even know for sure who owns the football club as I see it Wasps would perhaps be better landlords than people are giving them credit for. One question given the choice who would you rather pay rent to Wasps of Sisu and who would you feel safer with ?
I think we should ground-share. Northampton sounds nice.
Nah - too close. What about Wycombe?
This is what it is about.... because if SISU built a stadium with another subsidiary, as they have confirmed through TF, we would be paying them rent. We would not own the stadium, a SISU company would. The best landlords would in fact be CCC, because love them or hate them, they are accountable for their actions and will always be there ( no quick grab what you can and run ). Wasps would be in it solely for themselves. The best case is the long term lease for CCFC paying the council a reasonable rent ( low ) over a long period of time. CCC have the freehold and will not sell it to any chancers, and when the deal is done will have to take a backseat as just the freehold owner. The aim should be to bind CCFC to the lease as tightly as possible in return for very good conditions.
Otis
Well-Known Member
But that might slightly disingenuous, Torch. What if the talks started while we were in Northampton? If you recall, Fisher said 'that boat has sailed ' and quite clearly stated there would be no return to the Ricoh. That was the end of the matter according to Sisu. If ACL have recently started talks, then like Andy Turner says, that is a completely different matter.
No they are not - they are a consortium set up to run the Arena that Coventry City Football Club play in. They need to remember that instead of dicking about pimping the rights to play at OUR ground to anyone with half an interest in betraying their own market.
But according to Fisher the club are building a new ground aren't they????
So instead of him dicking about with all this shit of a new ground which is never going to happen, why doesn't he come out and say we're here to stay, and start negotiating with ACL, at which point they can tell Wasps to piss off.
Last edited:
The people dicking around are the ones who spend more time and money in court than on running a football club which they own. If they would say "we are CCFC, the stadium was built for us, we are here to stay long term.... Sell us a long-term lease on very favourable terms and we will make this club into something which puts the name of the city into a positive light through sporting achievement and is of great benefit to the citizens of Coventry...." there would be a great cheer and CCC would wet themselves in the rush to the negotiating table. Won't happen though so long as Joy and TF are in the driving seat of CCFC....
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The house analogy doesn't really follow with this. Agreeing to come back is already some admission of defeat but to drop the proceedings would be a full 180 turn on where we were earlier in the year.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Yes it is a shame that CCFC couldn't get married to the Ricoh and be as one.
CCFC will Always be the bridesmaid while Sisu are still here?
CCFC will Always be the bridesmaid while Sisu are still here?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I don't think too many people had a go at Northampton. It was their fault our owners had a crazy plan that gave them more money and the football league said it was ok.
It was our owners and the football league who were at fault. As would be the case in the wasps scenario.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
There's quite a lot of ill feeling towards Northampton in these threads
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/40293-Bothroyd-sacked
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/37691-NTFC-Official-Statement-re-ACL
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/33296-NTFC-move
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
It also shows that Higgs will hold out for an upfront payment of the bulk of the money they put in to buy their share of ACL.
duffer
Well-Known Member
There's quite a lot of ill feeling towards Northampton in these threads
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/40293-Bothroyd-sacked
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/37691-NTFC-Official-Statement-re-ACL
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/33296-NTFC-move
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I did. I had a proper pop at Northampton - not so much their club or fans (I hope), but their money-grabbing sh*te of a chairman who tried to pitch it as a philanthropic rescue mission.
Happy to have a pop at ACL if they're planning on doing the same thing to Wasps. Moving clubs away from their fan bases is just plain wrong, imho. (I almost said 'end of' then, must have been on the forum too long).
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
What a great idea.
Nick
Administrator
Some people should recognise some of these quotes
Wasn't many "It is just business" or "just looking after stakeholders" back then!
If I remember ACL took action against NTFC because of the move?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell seems a bit bizarre to have a go at them. Our owners approach them offering them some extra cash telling them the club will not be able to fulfil its fixtures otherwise.
The FL back this up.
How can we expect them to be the knights in shining armour.
Our owners should never had done it. The FL should definitely without any question have allowed it.
The FL back this up.
How can we expect them to be the knights in shining armour.
Our owners should never had done it. The FL should definitely without any question have allowed it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So wi ACL be lowlife scum I'm your eyes if they succeed in moving wasps and will you support Wycombe if they sue ACL.
The Fl would have acted illegally if they didn't allow it by the way.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
No that's the whole point the ones to blame would be the owners of wasps and the controlling body of rugby union.
ACL would be crazy not to talk to the consortium.
I assume you fully back that as you have always maintained a children's charity and a council have no business running a football stadium?
Astute
Well-Known Member
5.5m was offered, but it was offered over 10 years. And when Higgs asked for proof of funds SISU refused. Then the 2m was offered. And as was said the 2m offer was said to have been offered as Higgs are a charity. Stupid comment. If Joy wanted to be charitable why didn't she pay the 29k to Higgs as agreed instead of wasting multiples of it to get out of giving them anything?
And now we have those that were calling the Ricoh a white elephant and a drain on taxpayers money although taxpayers money wasn't used when our club went to Northampton crying about ACL looking at someone else to play there.
Nobody wants Wasps to take over the arena. But what have we had from SISU so far? We are back, but only on a temporary deal. Fisher tells us we are building a stadium still. Litigation is still ongoing. But the new line now is that we need to own our own stadium.
We know this isn't true. But even if it was true why not drop the litigation and negotiate....and keep to what is agreed this time. But no, they want it on the cheap. So I can't see them making an offer. Although this wasps thing could make them do meaningful negotiations for once.
One quick question for thosr blaming ACL for everything again. How are they supposed to force SISU into meaningful negotiations about our long term future at the Ricoh?
Last edited: