Sepalla interview (17 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

But he has asked questions. Wasps refused to comment and CCC for the most part hid behind confidentiality. I don't see the same cries of derision when Gilbert gives his view on the matter, which to my mind are skewed pretty much in favour of Lucas and her mates.

So what did Les report in this award winning piece that hasn't already been reported in the CT, whether that be by SG or any of their othe staff?

As far as I can see this is a regurgitation of what Les has posted on twitter with a forward by Joy and questions to Wasps, Higgs and CCC with no different answers to what you'll already find in the CT's coverage.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

Forget the "court of law" bollocks. The rent was too high, way too high. CCFC could not afford it; they SHOULD have negotiated, but they didn't, that is a fuck up by SISU, yes. CCC tried to sue NTFC for pinching their club, yet they have done the same thing and given an out-of-town franchise control of the bowl for 250 years, a quarter of a millenia. Yes, the club may get the other half, but PWKH and Higgs would "prefer" it all went to Wasps. That, in my view is a fuck up from the Council, ACL and the charity.

As Duffer said it is time to forget all the finger pointing and jubilant cheers of "but it's all SISU's fault" (I only have to look at your posts for that kind of thing), that is in the past. All that matters is what happens NOW and what the FUTURE holds for Coventry City Football Club. Nothing else matters.

You can write "it's all down to SISU" a million times on a million different threads but it won't change anything.

To say SISU are 100% to blame is nonsense.

I thought it was ACL that threatened NTFC not CCC?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Isn't that what any paper interview does? The CT don't appear to have challenged much of the wasps move - e.g claiming that 28k watched their Heineken cup game at the Ricoh (wrong is was 21k) and they the 28k all spent £214 per person in the local economy for example,

They haven't really explored (Andy turners article aside) what the really impact it will have on us and CRFC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

OK, put it another way. Lucas was interviewed, asked specific questions and answered them. SISU refused to comment and hid behind confidentiality. There aren't many guarantees in life but I betcha there would have been a meltdown from you and quite a few others on here.

As for the "views on what she wanted". That is true regardless of who is being interviewed by a journalist, isn't it?

I think my answer covers both of your points. Whovever is interviewed, and I use the term loosely in respect of local news reporting, should in my view be challenged when the bullshit detector goes off, whether that be Lucas, Seppala, Fisher, Garlick, ACL, etc etc.

 

[torchomatic]

Ah yes, I forgot ACL and CCC are totally separate entities, aren't they? :claping hands:

I thought it was ACL that threatened NTFC not CCC?

 

[torchomatic]

And SG shrugged his shoulders and said "well, none of the Wasps fans seemed to mind too much"*

*Paraphrasing, but that was the clear meaning of his comment on one thread on here.

The CT don't appear to have challenged much of the wasps move - e.g claiming that 28k watched their Heineken cup game at the Ricoh (wrong is was 21k) and they the 28k all spent £214 per person in the local economy for example,

They haven't really explored (Andy turners article aside) what the really impact it will have on us and CRFC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[The Lurker]

To say SISU are 100% to blame is nonsense.

And that comment shows you everything anyone needs to see. Yes they are! How many mistakes have they made over years? Too many to mention. Yet you carry on sticking up and justifying there actions. It's people like you why this club is a mess. You went sixfields which = justifying the move. So don't blame wasp fans who go the Ricoh. Just as bad. And before you come out with the super fan bollocks. For some reason you seem to detest the council like les reid and instead of actually looking at sisu faults you pin the blame on the council.

Cards on the table. What % blame do you put on sisu for this mess?

 

[skybluetony176]

You mean the terms the Judge agreed sisu did not have to pay because they weren't solely to blame and that the deal stopped because all parties lost the appetite to a deal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

My point exactly. Higgs thought they were in a nothing to lose position with a SISU bid once before so Joy's reputation is going to go before her second time around. Could that possibly have anything to do with info not coming back :thinking about:

 

[skybluetony176]

Ah yes, I forgot ACL and CCC are totally separate entities, aren't they? :claping hands:

Finally you've cottoned on to that. Well done.

 

[torchomatic]

They have made LOADS of mistakes. No one is saying they haven't. But to say "it is TOTALLY their fault" is nonsense.

And I don't detest the council, I just hold them to account for our downfall too. They have played their part, though clearly you do not and never will agree. Fair enough.

And that comment shows you everything anyone needs to see. Yes they are! How many mistakes have they made over years? Too many to mention. Yet you carry on sticking up and justifying there actions. It's people like you why this club is a mess. You went sixfields which = justifying the move. So don't blame wasp fans who go the Ricoh. Just as bad. And before you come out with the super fan bollocks. For some reason you seem to detest the council like les reid and instead of actually looking at sisu faults you pin the blame on the council.

Cards on the table. What % blame do you put on sisu for this mess?

 

[torchomatic]

They are like Sooty and Sweep. Just look underneath the table.

Finally you've cottoned on to that. Well done.

 

[The Lurker]

They have made LOADS of mistakes. No one is saying they haven't. But to say "it is TOTALLY their fault" is nonsense.

And I don't detest the council, I just hold them to account for our downfall too. They have played their part, though clearly you do not and never will agree. Fair enough.

Nice swerve to the question. So come on, what % are sisu to blame? They've messed the fans around too many times and messed the council around. Do you blame anyone for not trusting sisu anymore?

 

[Nick]

And that comment shows you everything anyone needs to see. Yes they are! How many mistakes have they made over years? Too many to mention. Yet you carry on sticking up and justifying there actions. It's people like you why this club is a mess. You went sixfields which = justifying the move. So don't blame wasp fans who go the Ricoh. Just as bad. And before you come out with the super fan bollocks. For some reason you seem to detest the council like les reid and instead of actually looking at sisu faults you pin the blame on the council.

Cards on the table. What % blame do you put on sisu for this mess?

Nobody has said anything about wasps fans going?

The old demanding a mathematical equation because you think more than one party can be to blame for something.

 

[The Lurker]

Nobody has said anything about wasps fans going?

The old demanding a mathematical equation because you think more than one party can be to blame for something.

Just intrigued to know as he blames both council and sisu. What the % is. What's so bad about that?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Not going to get in to who is biased to who, or who is in whose pocket. We all have our own opinions on that I am sure. Seppala seems to make these statements when forced to but at least she has said something.

Secondly what has to kept in mind at all times is that the lawyers will have been all over the dealings so far. AEHC/Wasps/CCC will be doing everything under advice from lawyers, they will be sticking to their legal requirement and the letter of any agreements. So when looking at, for instance making information available, you must first determine who actually has legal title to that information and whose permission is necessary to release that information.

The article itself
- The offer is to be conditional. So that tells us they will make an offer but conditional on what?
- stating that the intention is still to build another stadium in four or so years actually devalues the conditional offer. One thing CCC/Charity have always looked for is a plan in to the future at the Ricoh a close involvement in the project. If you are moving out in 4 years then that commitment just is not there is it. Immediately the long term offer from Wasps would seem in that sense more attractive.
- what investigation in to the prospect of owning 100% of ACL? How does that comment make any sense 50% is already in the hands of Wasps long term. Wasps are not here for a couple of years until something better comes along. They are making a long term commitment to the Arena/ACL. I would have thought 100% ownership for CCFC has all but gone.
- will legal action follow? Perhaps but there has to be a proper basis to it, and you would think that Wasps/CCC/AEHC will have taken every step possible to minimise that. This situation didn't happen overnight, it has been planned against a known risk of SISU litigation
- Does due diligence happen before a conditional bid or after? Isnt the purpose of due diligence to make the bid unconditional or to withdraw? JS says they have done due diligence before at ACL so must have a detailed knowledge of agreements dated prior to July 2012.

- The club isn't making the bid though is it CCFC LTD is. The club is Otium Ent Group trading as CCFC - which doesn't own any rights under the option agreement. So it is the Liquidator making the bid and he could be doing that on the back of interest from SISU, Byng or a third party. How he does that without any funds or assets needs to be made clear
- Wasps & CCC have made clear their deal is done so why think Martin Reeves would have the power to release information? It is not a claim the deal is done it has been confirmed by both parties. The deal is still covered by NDA's so how exactly do the CCC legally release any details of it without leaving CCC and individual councillors at risk?
- 30 days from the date of notification 8th October is midnight 7th November
- Are the full terms of the option still in force or is it just the part that CCFC are entitled to make a bid if AEHC receive a bid from a third party it wants to accept?
- Does where the veto sits actually matter? If you accept that CCC are anti SISU (not saying they are) then the CCC (if they still have it)veto result is known, Wasps who clearly want 100% are unlikely not to veto surely. That of course presupposes that AEHC can do a deal with the liquidator in the first place that meets the AEHC expectations. It could well not get that far.

- quite correct the fans are as always in the dark and this statement by Seppala does not change that
- the option is a two sided thing that both parties have the documents to...... how else did SISU value the option in audited accounts at £1m if they didn't know its details? Why does PWKH need to confirm details when Seppala must already have those details. The original JV agreement was done in 2003 surely therefore covered by SISU due diligence in 2012
- There is no point asking AEHC for details of the ACL loan, the charity has no legal title to those documents.
- Previous due diligence of ACL was started after a proper offer was received and with the agreement of both stakeholders. Those stakeholders have now changed and no proper offer has yet been made
- not unreasonable to request the information certainly but (a) from the right party (b) it can be refused if ACL/AEHC/Wasps are legally entitled to do so. I refer to my second paragraph. Because of previous litigation and the risk of more the bare minimum to comply with laws, contracts etc will be done. Reap what you sow perhaps?

- little early to get in to how a CCFC/Wasps joint venture would work - that can be thrashed if both sides are prepared to be reasonable and to compromise
- Whilst the recent financials of Wasps are not great by any stretch its a bit rich talking of a Wasps insolvency when CCFC have just experienced one, carry massive debt that must be serviced and are not profitable
- Compass. Well if it works for Wasps surely there is a good chance it would for CCFC? These details be subject to due diligence after a bid from CCFC Ltd accepted not before surely..... that's why it would be a conditional offer isn't it?
- Why would either AEHC ACL or Wasps fall over themselves for a deal with SISU when Seppala basically calls it a stop gap measure that she wants to cream off until they get their own stadium? Yes we as fans want the club to get the income but reality is ..............

- what do they mean cashflow positive? From where I am standing that seems to rely on the windfall incomes from Wilson/Christie, cup games, and the fact that season tickets had to paid upfront in full. That's not going to keep happening and gates would seem to be well below the perceived break even of 11000 at the Ricoh (ie we are running at a loss). How long before we are cashflow negative?
- Do they not have a contract at the Ricoh for 4 or 5 years? why the need to spend millions to obtain a share in something they do not actually want past 5 years? Ransom shares perhaps?
- Wasps might want CCFC there but do they need them there? time will tell I guess....... if gates for Wasps matches are significant then that need argument weakens
- the fans wanted the club to own 100% not 50% ...... that was the intention from the 1990's ...... CCFC have not shown great interest in what the fans want in that time

- I assume Seppala would accept her responsibility in the "tragedy" would be interested to get the details of what she thinks she got wrong
- now its 2 sites in July it was 3 .......... time to put up or shut up to be honest. Detail the progress properly, detail the problems, if it isn't in CCC jurisdiction tell us where because there is in reality little CCC can do to stop the purchase
- the questions posed in the article were to be honest guaranteed the answers they got. What about questions to Seppala though detailing how a bid might be financed, why the need to move even if got 50%, etc ........... rather than allowing bland statements that actually tell us nothing new?

It may yet still end up in court, nothing in the article says to me any commitment to anything (Ricoh or new stadium), Just seems to be setting up reasons for a failure...... "it wasn't us we tried but all those others put so many obstacles in the way"

Finally isn't the talking best done in private, with a desire to get a deal rather than in the Coventry observer. They have enough information to make a bid. This is not an auction it is a matter of matching and committing to at least the same terms as Wasps - and they have one shot at it. I am not confident of CCFC ever owning anything at the Ricoh, even less confident as to their ability to build a much smaller ground, financed on much less income

 

[James Smith]

[MODERATOR] Unless you have actual proof that someone is in the pay of somebody else then please keep your thoughts and suspicions to yourself and please don't post anything here. I would like to remind everyone about the post Reminder-about-Libel-etc http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/28890-Reminder-about-Libel-etc\ Thank you. [/MODERATOR]

 

[Astute]

[MODERATOR] Unless you have actual proof that someone is in the pay of sombody else then please keep your thoughts and suspicions to yourself and please don't post anything here. I would like to remind everyone about the post Reminder-about-Libel-etc http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/28890-Reminder-about-Libel-etc\ Thank you. [/MODERATOR]

Nobody has said such a thing. Duffer tried to get someone to say it though.

Top post OSB. I agree with just about all of it. But of course worded much better than I could hope to do

 

[duffer]

Nice swerve to the question. So come on, what % are sisu to blame? They've messed the fans around too many times and messed the council around. Do you blame anyone for not trusting sisu anymore?

I'm happy to answer this.

I blame SISU 100% for the hugely stupid new stadium stuff, especially and most damagingly offered just after the return to the Ricoh.

I blame Coventry City Council (and the Higgs Trust) 100% for selling ACL to an out of town franchise - especially when it was done just after saying that time was needed to rebuild trust.

I don't hold SISU to a very high standard - by any measure they are appalling owners, and it's clear that where we are right now in terms of owning a share of our stadium and our league position has to fall on their shoulders.

I do however, hold the Council to a higher standard. I expect them to make decisions based on a moral as well as a financial basis, and to me they've failed on both fronts here.

In terms of 'moral' failures, I'd quote this: They've brought in a franchise. They lied about the profitability of ACL. They lied about giving time to build trust. They lied about consulting Coventry RFC prior to the Wasps decision. They completely made stuff up about 28,000 fans and £6m per game into the local economy, it simply never happened!

In terms of financial failures I'll offer this: The council have taken a million off the mortgage already. They've already stepped away from their "tens of thousands of rugby fans" justification. In the future, if the CCFC fall further at the Ricoh, or move away from the City - either of which is now more likely, then that will cost the city more money and prestige than Wasps could possibly bring.

Plenty of blame for both sides here I'd say. I can entirely understand why people would be unwilling to trust SISU, but I'm surprised that anyone would take the Council as honest brokers in all this either, clearly they're not.

If you want a way forward, here's mine: SISU buy the 50% and drop the continued farce of the stadium that no one other than Tim and Joy want. Wasps are actively boycotted by anyone who sees franchising as wrong, but especially by fans of CCFC, and hopefully they either die or move back south. At that point the club try to get the rest of ACL.

If you want a prediction though, it's this: CCFC will not be allowed to buy into ACL. They won't have enough money to build a new stadium, ever. They will stay, at best, a League 1 club with a possible odd foray into the lower reaches of the Championship. At worse, more relegations and another administration beckon. Wasps, other than occasional local derbies and the odd European games, will end up playing in front of crowds no bigger than CCFC in L1, and mostly smaller. They'll bring little to the local economy. If the TV money dries up, or there's an opportunity in London, they'll either go pop or leave overnight. They may just go bust anyway, Wasps isn't exactly a thriving business, and their owner is a chancer just like SISU as far as I can see.

Who will be to blame? See above.

 

[torchomatic]

I'll play along with him. In my experience ignoring the shouty types never works as they just shout "I am right" louder and louder.

Nobody has said anything about wasps fans going?

The old demanding a mathematical equation because you think more than one party can be to blame for something.

 

[Astute]

I'm happy to answer this.

I blame SISU 100% for the hugely stupid new stadium stuff, especially and most damagingly offered just after the return to the Ricoh.

I blame Coventry City Council (and the Higgs Trust) 100% for selling ACL to an out of town franchise - especially when it was done just after saying that time was needed to rebuild trust.

I don't hold SISU to a very high standard - by any measure they are appalling owners, and it's clear that where we are right now in terms of owning a share of our stadium and our league position has to fall on their shoulders.

I do however, hold the Council to a higher standard. I expect them to make decisions based on a moral as well as a financial basis, and to me they've failed on both fronts here.

In terms of 'moral' failures, I'd quote this: They've brought in a franchise. They lied about the profitability of ACL. They lied about giving time to build trust. They lied about consulting Coventry RFC prior to the Wasps decision. They completely made stuff up about 28,000 fans and £6m per game into the local economy, it simply never happened!

In terms of financial failures I'll offer this: The council have taken a million off the mortgage already. They've already stepped away from their "tens of thousands of rugby fans" justification. In the future, if the CCFC fall further at the Ricoh, or move away from the City - either of which is now more likely, then that will cost the city more money and prestige than Wasps could possibly bring.

Plenty of blame for both sides here I'd say. I can entirely understand why people would be unwilling to trust SISU, but I'm surprised that anyone would take the Council as honest brokers in all this either, clearly they're not.

If you want a way forward, here's mine: SISU buy the 50% and drop the continued farce of the stadium that no one other than Tim and Joy want. Wasps are actively boycotted by anyone who sees franchising as wrong, but especially by fans of CCFC, and hopefully they either die or move back south. At that point the club try to get the rest of ACL.

If you want a prediction though, it's this: CCFC will not be allowed to buy into ACL. They won't have enough money to build a new stadium, ever. They will stay, at best, a League 1 club with a possible odd foray into the lower reaches of the Championship. At worse, more relegations and another administration beckon. Wasps, other than occasional local derbies and the odd European games, will end up playing in front of crowds no bigger than CCFC in L1, and mostly smaller. They'll bring little to the local economy. If the TV money dries up, or there's an opportunity in London, they'll either go pop or leave overnight. They may just go bust anyway, Wasps isn't exactly a thriving business, and their owner is a chancer just like SISU as far as I can see.

Who will be to blame? See above.

Good post Duffer.

 

[torchomatic]

Does it matter what percentage? Will it change anything in the past or the future? OK, just for you. The majority of the blame is at SISUs door. I don't think anyone apart from RFC would disagree. As for a percentage. Who knows 70/30? 80/20? 90/10? It matters not, certainly not 100/0 as you would try and make out. But as I said earlier, I'm more interested in what the future holds now for CCFC and where we will end up and for adding more uncertainly to our already precarious outlook then I personally think the majority of the blame should be placed at the Council's door for bringing Wasps without consultation with CCFC or the RFC.

EDIT: JUst seen Duffer's post. Perfectly put.

Just intrigued to know as he blames both council and sisu. What the % is. What's so bad about that?

 

[duffer]

Nobody has said such a thing. Duffer tried to get someone to say it though.

Top post OSB. I agree with just about all of it. But of course worded much better than I could hope to do

I'm not trying to get anyone to say it, but it seems that there's a lot of people inferring it because he had the audacity to offer a different opinion. That's unworthy in my book.

Accusing a journalist of being bent or biased is some special kind of insult. The same goes for anyone accusing Simon Gilbert of being pro-council, it's rubbish. If you're not sure about SG's opinion on the council's decision making process here, ask him, or look back through his postings.

My point here remains, if anyone has got an issue with what Les Reid (or Simon Gilbert) is saying, then challenge it on its merits rather than chucking out lazy, personal insults or insinuations.

 

[torchomatic]

As for the CT and SG. I think their coverage of the Wasps thing has probably been lazy rather than biased. Maybe "skewed"! Only the Andy Turner thing was straight down the middle.

 

[duffer]

And with apologies to those I've insulted, which is probably pretty much everyone - I'll leave it there I think.

I don't think, for all of the press stuff, there's any more mileage in this for me as a fan. The decision is done. The 50% won't come to CCFC, the new stadium won't be built.

I'll quietly hope that for all kinds of different reasons, Wasps go under, or better, move back south.

Also I'll hang on to the thought that we're getting closer to the "bottom of the cycle" every day, and that eventually we'll have new owners. I certainly can't see us going anywhere other than further down with the ones we've got.

I've got to say though, that for all of the enormous harm that SISU have done to the club, for me it's the council that have put the final nail in the coffin. Until they sold to Wasps there was always some hope of a way back - I can't see one now.

 

[italiahorse]

And with apologies to those I've insulted, which is probably pretty much everyone - I'll leave it there I think.

I don't think, for all of the press stuff, there's any more mileage in this for me as a fan. The decision is done. The 50% won't come to CCFC, the new stadium won't be built.

I'll quietly hope that for all kinds of different reasons, Wasps go under, or better, move back south.

Also I'll hang on to the thought that we're getting closer to the "bottom of the cycle" every day, and that eventually we'll have new owners. I certainly can't see us going anywhere other than further down with the ones we've got.

I've got to say though, that for all of the enormous harm that SISU have done to the club, for me it's the council that have put the final nail in the coffin. Until they sold to Wasps there was always some hope of a way back - I can't see one now.

You have to keep it simple.

CCFC will always rent from someone.
Whether it's to CCC, ACL, SISU or Wasps we will always rent from someone.
Blame bad management at HR for that but it's not the end.

It's in everybodies interest to negotiate a good detail on the back of a shared stadium.
However, if Sisu continue with this bravado even that chance will go.

 

[duffer]

You have to keep it simple.

CCFC will always rent from someone.
Whether it's to CCC, ACL, SISU or Wasps we will always rent from someone.
Blame bad management at HR for that but it's not the end.

It's in everybodies interest to negotiate a good detail on the back of a shared stadium.
However, if Sisu continue with this bravado even that chance will go.

A lot of that is fair enough mate - but it's really not in Wasps interest that CCFC do much more than pay the rent.

Wasps and SISU are now in effect in competition for the revenue from ACL - they both say they need 365/24/7 income and not just matchday streams.

However Wasps will have 100% of this, having bought it. Why would they share?

The only reason they'll want the club to thrive is to bring more money into ACL - money that the club say they need too. There's no happy ending here that suits everyone, imho.

 

[Astute]

I'm not trying to get anyone to say it, but it seems that there's a lot of people inferring it because he had the audacity to offer a different opinion. That's unworthy in my book.

Accusing a journalist of being bent or biased is some special kind of insult. The same goes for anyone accusing Simon Gilbert of being pro-council, it's rubbish. If you're not sure about SG's opinion on the council's decision making process here, ask him, or look back through his postings.

My point here remains, if anyone has got an issue with what Les Reid (or Simon Gilbert) is saying, then challenge it on its merits rather than chucking out lazy, personal insults or insinuations.

I mentioned my reasons for saying that I see Reid as biased. Not one person said anything against any of these points. And there are more I could add. And it all started after he met Joy for the first time.

So to me he knows something that we don't and isn't allowed to say or he has fallen for some bullshit. And I don't have a clue which one it is.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Of course why would Wasps want anything but success for CCFC the higher they get the more rent they can charge, and the more money CCFC make in the process so win win as Martin Conn said if you get promoted to the Prem you get a minimum of £125 Million million surely that has to be the aim for sisu could get rid of the club like a shot and made a bag full at the same time.
The problem is that they don't have the mentality or don't want to do it?

A lot of that is fair enough mate - but it's really not in Wasps interest that CCFC do much more than pay the rent.

Wasps and SISU are now in effect in competition for the revenue from ACL - they both say they need 365/24/7 income and not just matchday streams.

However Wasps will have 100% of this, having bought it. Why would they share?

The only reason they'll want the club to thrive is to bring more money into ACL - money that the club say they need too. There's no happy ending here that suits everyone, imho.

 

[duffer]

Of course why would Wasps want anything but success for CCFC the higher they get the more rent they can charge, and the more money CCFC make in the process so win win as Martin Conn said if you get promoted to the Prem you get a minimum of £125 Million million surely that has to be the aim for sisu could get rid of the club like a shot and made a bag full at the same time.
The problem is that they don't have the mentality or don't want to do it?

And how much money do you think Wasps will give CCFC to achieve that dream?

Do you think they'll be offering a rent discount? A share of the profits from ACL?

Like the council, it's easy to say that Wasps will want to see a successful CCFC - but also like CCC, I'm not sure (politely) that you've thought this through.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Not sure why Wasps or anyone else would offer CCFC a good deal on rent or matchday incomes if the intention is that in 4 or 5 years CCFC will no longer be at the Ricoh.

Seppala Fisher, Waggott all repeat the mantra that they must own their own stadium and are pressing ahead with building it with a view to being in it 4 or 5 years from now.

There is no sense of partnership being developed here, even in the latest interview Seppala casts doubt on the viability of Wasps and stadium. Even says she doesn't see how two unknowns can work together, that Wasps create a risk to CCFC etc

To stay at the Ricoh and to get a better deal there requires commitment to it, which simply doesn't seem to be there.

Yes its a chicken or egg situation but if they (SISU) want in at some point they will need to be seen to compromise, to work in partnership not as adversaries - not something Seppala seems happy to do

 

[duffer]

I mentioned my reasons for saying that I see Reid as biased. Not one person said anything against any of these points. And there are more I could add. And it all started after he met Joy for the first time.

So to me he knows something that we don't and isn't allowed to say or he has fallen for some bullshit. And I don't have a clue which one it is.

Were your reasons for accusing him of being biased based on him reporting on what Sepalla has said? It's just that I don't seen much commentary from him, just direct quotes.

Would you rather we didn't hear what she had to say?

Les certainly offered an opinion at the telegraph that maybe the smart thing for the council was to do a deal with SISU, and let ACL or the Ricoh go to them. The theory, I think, was that otherwise the risk was that the Ricoh would end up without CCFC there, and without the club the city would be worse off too. (I argued strongly against some of this with him, btw).

I think on the back of that piece, which ran contrary to a lot of opinions here and elsewhere, people suddenly saw him as biased towards SISU rather than offering what he'd say was a realistic, alternative appraisal of the circumstances.

That's a bit of a jump to my mind, but now everything that he writes seems tainted by you and others with bias. Or worse they'd say that he's acting as SISU's PR machine. Neither of those statements seems particularly fair or accurate to me. He's let Sepalla offer her opinion, he hasn't spun it into anything, the quotes are there to read. If they annoy you, fair enough - they piss me off too, but it's not biased to print the interview as is, imho.

 

[duffer]

Not sure why Wasps or anyone else would offer CCFC a good deal on rent or matchday incomes if the intention is that in 4 or 5 years CCFC will no longer be at the Ricoh.

Seppala Fisher, Waggott all repeat the mantra that they must own their own stadium and are pressing ahead with building it with a view to being in it 4 or 5 years from now.

There is no sense of partnership being developed here, even in the latest interview Seppala casts doubt on the viability of Wasps and stadium. Even says she doesn't see how two unknowns can work together, that Wasps create a risk to CCFC etc

To stay at the Ricoh and to get a better deal there requires commitment to it, which simply doesn't seem to be there.

Yes its a chicken or egg situation but if they (SISU) want in at some point they will need to be seen to compromise, to work in partnership not as adversaries - not something Seppala seems happy to do

Entirely fair points OSB, but again as much as Wasps might want a successful CCFC, I think we agree in that they only want it in so far as it makes more money for them. Reverse the question, and tell me what they're likely to offer for that.

Rental discounts, a share of the profits from ACL, or what? Honestly, do you see them making that kind of an offer having just bought all of it - it's certainly not something that's been mentioned in the grand plan that I've seen. The only commitment is to honour the existing rental deal, which being held with ACL they are obliged to do anyway.

From what I've picked up even the idea of improving the pitch so that it can stand up to both teams playing on it seems to have been made conditional on some sort of further commitment from SISU. At moment neither side seems to be talking about any kind of partnership.

 

[oldskyblue58]

That is certainly one way to look at it duffer and you may well be right or we may never know

There are deals that are possible, including deals where both sides make more. Would Wasps do that, well they haven't said they wouldn't but it will require a partnership not an adversarial or litigious relationship. It may also require some sort of investment - nothing comes for free and why should it. If they (SISU/CCFC) do not buy the 50% and I don't think they will you have to ask who is making the biggest commitment and investment at the Ricoh so why should it be an equal split?

For instance in terms of possibilities the thing that could under pin any deal is a proper lease for CCFC that has value. if Wasps have 250 years could they offer a 100 years lease to CCFC within that?. There is no and never has been a restriction on CCFC putting their own events on at the Ricoh. They could become part of a partnership to develop the leisure land there. There are all sorts of possibilities if minds are open to them.........

I always thought CCFC would end up owning the Ricoh. I hate the thought that they will not. I can not see how a prepacked small stadium brings in the revenues that make a difference or how it covers the financial cost of the build & interest whilst allowing the team investment required. As much as you can argue that CCC put in the final nail against that there was a barrel load of nails before hammered in by the owners of CCFC. The custodians first and foremost of the club are its owners and frankly they have sold the fans well short on protecting & prospering the club

 

[oldskyblue58]

You know what really irritates me about the whole saga and our club in particular is

That there is always a reason why not never a reason why.
Always someone else's fault, never an honest taking of responsibility.
Always a fight or reason for time in court, never a partnership and compromise.
Always a downside, never a striving for or emphasis on positives.
Always a working against, never a working with
And above all always lip service but never a real thought followed through for the fans

 

[fernandopartridge]

Nice swerve to the question. So come on, what % are sisu to blame? They've messed the fans around too many times and messed the council around. Do you blame anyone for not trusting sisu anymore?

The usual binary crap. The council are 100% to blame that an out of town Rugby team has bought part of the Arena company.

 

[torchomatic]

OK enough about ACL/CCC. What about SISU?

You know what really irritates me about the whole saga and our club in particular is

That there is always a reason why not never a reason why.
Always someone else's fault, never an honest taking of responsibility.
Always a fight or reason for time in court, never a partnership and compromise.
Always a downside, never a striving for or emphasis on positives.
Always a working against, never a working with
And above all always lip service but never a real thought followed through for the fans