letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Come off it Tony it has nothing to do with Sisu they Knew what they were doing????
Actually they achieved all they set out to do!
just waiting for the next round wonder how that will pan out.
Council admits Ricoh Arena was not sustainable without CCFC (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
Come off it Tony it has nothing to do with Sisu they Knew what they were doing????
Actually they achieved all they set out to do!
just waiting for the next round wonder how that will pan out.
It is idiots like you that have legitimised the farce of NOPM as a way of pretending to protest. No wonder there is apathy, it is apparently the thing to do to demonstrate you hate SISU.
Nick
Administrator
Could be worse though, we could have got our leading fans group to spend plenty of time and tax payers money doing FOI requests just to prove somebody was lying when it was quite obvious to everybody what the outcome would be anyway, but they just wanted a stick to beat them with?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Couldn't agree more. "I disagree with the move to Northampton so much that I'm going to go anyway and watch it for free. That'll show 'em!"
To be honest, I never had a problem with the Hillers. Until now. The holier than thou attitude is galling.
To be honest, I never had a problem with the Hillers. Until now. The holier than thou attitude is galling.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
So you're happy that CCC have been caught out but don't want to run the risk of the same happening to SISU.
I wonder if SISU have made any enquiries about the site in Coventry that Nick Eastwood suggested could be a site for the new ground while also confirming that they can't turn a planning request just because SISU's name is on the application.
Nick
Administrator
Surely the fact that most people (probably 98%) could have predicted the outcome of the FOI's it says something doesn't it? Sometimes SISU are caught out the moment they put out a press release or statement so it wouldn't be anything new would it?
Nick Eastwood hasn't said anything about a site has he?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
You reckon ? Wheres the evidence ?
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
There is a difference nick.
I believe that City fans are no different to any other fans in the Country that have put up with this sort of shit for such a long time.
So yes they want good football they want reasonable prices, they want owners who care they only turn up on big occasions,
There are Club supporters and there are Club supporters some go through thick and thin and others pick and choose always been the way.
The thing is the fight was knocked out of us and then when things were put into motion to protest etc all they got was abuse off the same posters on here every time.
I wasn't having a go at you when I mentioned the wasps one I was replying to some one else who also never bothered to go to any of the protests but then questions where were the protests?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Yes of course its okay for negotiations but it will piss off the fans until we know that's the plan.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
And funny if they hadn't have put in those requests the same posters would have wanted to know why so damned if you do damned if you don't.
Nick
Administrator
Honest question, do you think that instead of the hate filled protests the fans should be getting together to show love and passion for CCFC the football team? Think of it like all of the abuse at Sixfields, anti sisu, anti ccc, pro this, pro that. Somebody being a plant loving so and so.
Now, if I was stood next to people throwing me abuse at for example the Peterborough game for the 3rd goal, none of the abuse or shit mattered did it? It was about the football and us coming from 2-0 to win 3-2.
My point being, if we want SISU out and new owners in, surely it is a better statement to new potential owners to show them how much the fans love the club, rather than how much the fans could potentially turn on them?
With all of the protests I disagree with the straight up silly abuse "shit protest mate", "silly pricks" but I don't see anything wrong when people make constructive criticism, surely if they are taking the time to be constructive rather than just stupid comments it shows they care also about the end game and want it to work but just might not agree on the methods?
Nick
Administrator
To be honest, I think most could have judged the outcome so wouldn't have been that fussed if there was no FOI stuff would they?
duffer
Well-Known Member
If this doesn't damage your faith in the ability of Ann Lucas and Coventry City Council to run the city and do business in an open and honest way, then you are far more trusting than me.
When the council stepped in to bail-out ACL to the tune of £14.4 million, the Council were absolutely clear that ACL was profitable, and that there was no risk to taxpayers' money. In fact the claim was that overall city taxpayers would benefit from the deal. I remember this quite clearly, because I supported the bail-out loud and long on here. I based that support on what was quite clearly a lie.
Similarly, when the club came back, and the council said that time was needed to rebuild trust before talking about the sale of the stadium, that too was a lie.
Anyone who thinks the council has played this well, is presumably basing that opinion at least in part on what the council have said about the deal not harming CCFC or CRFC, and being beneficial to the city overall. As we've seen though taking anything that the council say on trust, is a mug's game.
There was a time that I would have argued that the steps that the council took with regard to ACL (the administration of CCFC Ltd, the bail-out etc.) were primarily made with good intent towards the club (if not the owners). What we've seen now though, is that when it became politically expedient the council were more than content to lie through their teeth and ultimately sell the club down the river to get out the mess they'd made for themselves.
It's unsupportable this - if CCC were going to sell ACL on the cheap, and with a 250-year lease, then why not at least try to make that deal with the club first rather than the rugby franchise. (For all of Fisher's new-stadium bluster, it's worth noting that they did at least try to buy 50% on these terms when Higgs was legally obliged to allow the club to make an offer.)
And regardless of your opinion on all of this, I'll make this point again - the council have quite clearly lied significantly on at least on two occasions, and probably more besides that. I used to have some modicum of faith in them, but how are we supposed to trust people like this regarding anything they say now?
When the council stepped in to bail-out ACL to the tune of £14.4 million, the Council were absolutely clear that ACL was profitable, and that there was no risk to taxpayers' money. In fact the claim was that overall city taxpayers would benefit from the deal. I remember this quite clearly, because I supported the bail-out loud and long on here. I based that support on what was quite clearly a lie.
Similarly, when the club came back, and the council said that time was needed to rebuild trust before talking about the sale of the stadium, that too was a lie.
Anyone who thinks the council has played this well, is presumably basing that opinion at least in part on what the council have said about the deal not harming CCFC or CRFC, and being beneficial to the city overall. As we've seen though taking anything that the council say on trust, is a mug's game.
There was a time that I would have argued that the steps that the council took with regard to ACL (the administration of CCFC Ltd, the bail-out etc.) were primarily made with good intent towards the club (if not the owners). What we've seen now though, is that when it became politically expedient the council were more than content to lie through their teeth and ultimately sell the club down the river to get out the mess they'd made for themselves.
It's unsupportable this - if CCC were going to sell ACL on the cheap, and with a 250-year lease, then why not at least try to make that deal with the club first rather than the rugby franchise. (For all of Fisher's new-stadium bluster, it's worth noting that they did at least try to buy 50% on these terms when Higgs was legally obliged to allow the club to make an offer.)
And regardless of your opinion on all of this, I'll make this point again - the council have quite clearly lied significantly on at least on two occasions, and probably more besides that. I used to have some modicum of faith in them, but how are we supposed to trust people like this regarding anything they say now?
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If you were SISU you'd be having your lawyers look very closely at everything that was said by ACL, Higgs and CCC as part of the court case and any other evidence they submitted. I would imagine if they have slipped up and made the same claims they made to us as part of the court case they could be in trouble. You would think they would be careful not to do that but when you're trying to conceal a lie its easy to get yourself in a tangle.
Not sure whats the best outcome to be honest. If SISU do find something then are we looking at months or years of more court cases?
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
So what has this got to do with the Hillers?
Oh and I never had a problem with supporters who went to sixfields except those that used their kids as an excuse for going.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
great post duffer
post of the year 2015!
post of the year 2015!
M&B Stand
Well-Known Member
So far we've had, she won with a bad hand or it was a genuine business miscalculation.
Take your pick!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Says something, proves nothing.
So unless you do something like the FOI's how else are you supposed to prove otherwise?
Unless you don't want SISU calling on their continued front of "we've moved on and are building our own stadium" what's the problem?
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Spot on duffer. I supported the council in all those actions based on what was being said, took stick from some on here for being a council plant, now it turns out the council have repeatedly lied and some are happy to just accept it.
I understand that people in politics aren't always the most truthful but I can't believe what has happened here, this isn't bending the truth a bit, this is outright lying over and over again to the people of Coventry. And on the basis of those lies they have sold out CCFC and CRFC, potentially doing serious long term damage to both, while welcoming Wasps with open arms. Tim Fisher was ridiculed for claiming ACL were reliant on CCFC and possibly in financial trouble when in reality he was spot on. I never thought I'd see the day when I'd be saying Tim Fisher was right!
I find it unbelievable that there is even a single poster on here who will defend CCC and their role in this mess. I also remain unconvinced that if all this was known while the JR was taking place the result would have been the same.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I think that must be based on the valuation of £ 0.00 that JS's PA stood up in a court of law and gave in front of a judge.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
There's no problem with calling SISU out but Fisher claiming they're building a new stadium and everyone laughing at him is a million miles away from what CCC have done.
duffer
Well-Known Member
It's generally counter-productive to lie in negotiations I'd say, unless you're happy to take the risk that the other side will walk away completely if you're found out. You can negotiate pretty strongly without the need to lie, if you think about it. And as far as I'm aware, you can't just lie about how profitable your company is if you're trying to sell or refinance it either.
Regardless, the lies that Lucas told here regarding the profitability of ACL were to the electorate and possibly to the elected members, and at least in part in order to get their support for the bail-out. That to me, as a citizen of Coventry, is not acceptable in any way.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Lucas added: “It’s a very profitable enterprise. We wouldn’t have bought the loan if we thought it would be money at risk.”
Hugh Jarse
Well-Known Member
And to think this mindless stupid bitch made real life decisions that affected people in Coventry.................absolute madness!
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
What's the story?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Morning glory?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Is it? Is it really? How?
You can be as angry as you like about this but at least she's got grace enough to put her hands up when she's been caught out. That's more than you can say about SISU. They just keep going with the same line. In my eyes that's even worse. They think we're stupid enough to keep buying that line otherwise why would they keep regurgitating it?
Nick
Administrator
Because they probably saw people fall for the lines from the council and thought they would have to try it?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Quite possibly the stupidest justification for SISU's actions you've ever come up with and there's been a few. If you ever get called a SISU apologists again you've lost all right to reply with that one. Well done.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
A bit like "unencumbered freehold" or "ACL is very profitable without Coventry City"? I'm sure those lines have never been regurgitated on here.
Nick
Administrator
Ah yeah, because I said "That makes it perfectly ok for SISU to it". It was quite clearly taking the piss wasn't it? Christ.
Did you really think it was serious?