Sale v long-term lease (5 Viewers)

[MichaelCCFC]

Most people (on here and elsewhere) seem to be opposed to the wasps/consortium idea (based on current info) and it's very difficult to see how it wouldn't harm ccfc and cov rfc. sisu's interest is their own financial gain not the team and fans, and I wouldn't trust them with even part ownership of the Ricoh.

So is acl-sisu agreeing a long-term lease to give us a bit of stability, what people would prefer?

If as fans we can at the very least express a view (and I would argue sixfields proved we can create pressure for change) is the long-term lease option what people would want or are other options preferred?

 

---

[Monners]

To be honest Michael, I don't think it matters what the fans think unfortunately - a bit defeatest there I know, just a bit tired of it all though. A few weeks off to enjoy to footy would have been cool before it all cranked up again.

 

[Rob S]

You might need to establish the facts about the differences between freehold & leasehold ownership and rental tenancy. I think this is something that confuses a lot of people.

E.g. if you buy a flat most people would consider you the owner but you'd normally be a leaseholder.

'We need to own our own stadium' can mean all-out freehold ownership or 'long-lease' (say 125-year).

 

[Evo1883]

I would prefer the football club to own the stadium , i do not wish to see a long term rent agreement at all if it can be avoided , obviously its not that simple is it.
if its our only way of playing football in coventry with the current regime , then sadly thats how its got to be

 

[Ian1779]

I think that the club needs to 'control' everything that goes on at the Ricoh complex. To me it would seem the best way to do this is to purchase ACL.

 

[limoncello]

I can only speak for myself but my objection isn't really to the terms. It's to whom the terms are being offered.

 

[MichaelCCFC]

To be honest Michael, I don't think it matters what the fans think unfortunately - a bit defeatest there I know, just a bit tired of it all though. A few weeks off to enjoy to footy would have been cool before it all cranked up again.

I know exactly what you mean. One of the reasons I've been so mad about this was I had a really good time at Scunny (result apart) and for the first time in what feels like a very long time talked only about football, formations, the team, the game and it was brilliant - then within 48 hours it's all about acl-sisu's games again.

But no need to be defeatist. It will of course depend on whether people are up for a fight or not. If they are, then it will be a lot easier to apply political pressure in this situation which would be the first step. And there are comments being made that all those people who wanted to set up picket lines at sixfields, throw tennis balls, invade the pitch etc etc can have a great time on the basis that if a deal is done they can decide wasps won't kick off unopposed and rugby doesn't have banning orders!

 

[Rob S]

To be honest Michael, I don't think it matters what the fans think unfortunately - a bit defeatest there I know, just a bit tired of it all though. A few weeks off to enjoy to footy would have been cool before it all cranked up again.

From some of the conversations I've had – and I totally agree too about being allowed to have a few weeks off – this episode might be cut short if Wasps get cold feet following another fans outcry. Nipping this in the bud now could be the quickest route to a return to a quiet life.

When Michael's rental deal was being put forward, one of the key points was that we should get back to playing at the Ricoh so that relationships could be repaired and we could start establishing trust & negotiate in the future. Chase off Wasps and we might get a shot at that as well as sticking up for their fans & Cov RFC fans.

 

[skybluetony176]

It seems pretty obvious to me that what the club needs is to own the leasehold or at least the majority of it.

What SISU and it's investors need is the freehold and at the lowest possible price.

So straight away we have a conflict of interest. From what Rob has posted today and if he's source is correct it's more than possible to purchase a 90% share of ACL so long as you're coming at it from the right direction. This has now become cleat that this has been the problem all along, again if Rob's sources are accurate.

I guess when Fisher spouts the line "that The Ricoh isn't for sale" what he really means is the freehold although I wouldn't be expecting clarification from him on this anytime soon. If nothing else all the latest news has clarified that leasehold or at least the controlling share is for sale if you have the appetite to do the deal. I don't think a charitable donation is going to cut it.

 

[duffer]

To me personally, as soon as you get into talking about freehold and/or extending leasehold, then things get complicated. To me, what we want is a relatively simple deal to start off with, CCFC buying into ACL and starting to have an interest in that business.

The proportion, to start off with at least, isn't actually that critical, and I think could actually increase incrementally depending on how negotiations and the club's fortunes go. Regardless, even at (say) a 10% holding, once we get to the point where CCFC want ACL to prosper because it's in their interest, things will start to get better.

The two things stopping this happening are that SISU haven't shown any interest in talking about this to ACL, and probably as a result ACL seem to more interested in talking to investors other than SISU.

It's massively frustrating this, because I think it's clear to almost everyone outside of SISU and ACL that it's a ridiculous state of affairs. They need each other, and all of this dicking around is going to cost them both money. Lots and lots of money. How much cash do ACL (or the new owners of ACL) think they're going to make out of 5,000 disenchanted Wasps fans every couple of weeks, and the odd 'big-ticket' European game with 20,000 fans. How much do SISU think it will cost to borrow £10m - £15m towards a new smaller stadium.

The personalities involved in perpetuating this disaster either need to grow up and start talking to each other, or get the hell out of the way so that others can carry it forward to the only logical conclusion.

 

[shmmeee]

 

[Samo]

You might need to establish the facts about the differences between freehold & leasehold ownership and rental tenancy. I think this is something that confuses a lot of people.

E.g. if you buy a flat most people would consider you the owner but you'd normally be a leaseholder.

'We need to own our own stadium' can mean all-out freehold ownership or 'long-lease' (say 125-year).

This is what I would like to see. Long-Lease. All the benefits of ownership including sell-on but with the restrictions of leasehold.

 

[Nick]

This is what I would like to see. Long-Lease. All the benefits of ownership including sell-on but with the restrictions of leasehold.

Yeah I love a long lease too

 

[Samo]

Yeah I love a long lease too

No... Don't get that.

 

[martcov]

This is what I would like to see. Long-Lease. All the benefits of ownership including sell-on but with the restrictions of leasehold.

Yes, that is the only way out. The lease can have safeguards written into it and in the end the freehold remains in the hands of the council - who can't sell it and do a runner. The council can afford to give CCFC a good deal - so long as they get the mortgage repaid and the area benefits from the business the stadium brings. Hopefully we get the prestige of a good football club with the city's name on it at some time...... ( dreaming now ).....

 

[Otis]

Most people (on here and elsewhere) seem to be opposed to the wasps/consortium idea (based on current info) and it's very difficult to see how it wouldn't harm ccfc and cov rfc. sisu's interest is their own financial gain not the team and fans, and I wouldn't trust them with even part ownership of the Ricoh.

So is acl-sisu agreeing a long-term lease to give us a bit of stability, what people would prefer?

If as fans we can at the very least express a view (and I would argue sixfields proved we can create pressure for change) is the long-term lease option what people would want or are other options preferred?

Fook me! First it was Wasps and now it is Sale. Who next, Leicester Tigers?

 

[italiahorse]

The only other option is Sisu own the stadium and rent it to CCFC.

Sisu, need to buy into ACL and a long term lease agreed.

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Fook me! First it was Wasps and now it is Sale. Who next, Leicester Tigers?

Lease-ter Tigers?

 

[Tank Top]

From some of the conversations I've had – and I totally agree too about being allowed to have a few weeks off – this episode might be cut short if Wasps get cold feet following another fans outcry. Nipping this in the bud now could be the quickest route to a return to a quiet life.

When Michael's rental deal was being put forward, one of the key points was that we should get back to playing at the Ricoh so that relationships could be repaired and we could start establishing trust & negotiate in the future. Chase off Wasps and we might get a shot at that as well as sticking up for their fans & Cov RFC fans.

If not Wasps, There might be others who may sting us.

 

[Monners]

From some of the conversations I've had – and I totally agree too about being allowed to have a few weeks off – this episode might be cut short if Wasps get cold feet following another fans outcry. Nipping this in the bud now could be the quickest route to a return to a quiet life.

When Michael's rental deal was being put forward, one of the key points was that we should get back to playing at the Ricoh so that relationships could be repaired and we could start establishing trust & negotiate in the future. Chase off Wasps and we might get a shot at that as well as sticking up for their fans & Cov RFC fans.

Agreed - looking forward to taking the kids up to games (lads never been before) - and hoped that the return, although only a start, would allow all "sides" and the fans to take stock - allow the football, be it good, bad or indifferent to be the main topic of conversation. The timing of this alledged Wasps deal (and in fact the deal itself) is almost bordering on crass to be honest.

 

[lewys33]

What if this consortium buying ACL was a percentage sisu and a percentage "the guy who owns wasps"? Would people care about little ol'CRFC then if CCFC was to benefit massively?

 

[duffer]

What if this consortium buying ACL was a percentage sisu and a percentage "the guy who owns wasps"? Would people care about little ol'CRFC then if CCFC was to benefit massively?

Don't forget about the Wasps fans either. I would hope that after all of the grief that we've suffered, that CCFC fans wouldn't want to be involved in either franchising another club to our area, or damaging an historic local team, regardless of any potential benefits.

In truth though, I think it's clear that SISU aren't part of this proposal - it's the owners of Wasps, not a consortium with CCFC as partners.

 

[Otis]

Don't forget about the Wasps fans either. I would hope that after all of the grief that we've suffered, that CCFC fans wouldn't want to be involved in either franchising another club to our area, or damaging an historic local team, regardless of any potential benefits.

In truth though, I think it's clear that SISU aren't part of this proposal - it's the owners of Wasps, not a consortium with CCFC as partners.

I would hope all CCFC fans wouldn't want for our city to be involved in any franchising plans.

 

[torchomatic]

Who cares as long as the fans are happy, eh? :thinking about:

Fook me! First it was Wasps and now it is Sale. Who next, Leicester Tigers?