torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Well, in theory, they can't do that . I think one of the provisos with the RFU allowing Wasps to relocate was that their academy had to remain in their traditional area.
Question Mark over Academy (14 Viewers)
- Thread starter Thenose
- Start date
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Thanks OSB.
Sounds like it's worth committing to on more than a rolling contract. If it cost that much over 10 years ago it's going to be double that now surely especially if Higgs were gifted the land as that's going to be a huge outlay on it's own.
If the club committed to a longer contract Higgs would have an incentive to replace the pitch. Seems pretty simple to me but knowing the parties involved that will be too much to ask.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
True, but if the pitch isn't for the exclusive use of the Club then others should pay towards it, shouldn't they?
Nick
Administrator
They all would be, within the rent
They do as we've already seen.
It kinda feels like you still have the opinion that higgs are demanding the club pay 80k the article doesn't say anything of the sort, it says it's going to cost 80k to replace the pitch and since the academy won't commit long term they are instead going to look at what else they could do with the space.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Like I said to Nick earlier. That's what negotiations are for. Reading between the lines in what's been reported today Higgs are basically saying if there's no long term commitment from the main client then there's no long term investment from the provider. That's just good business acumen. They have a client that they have a bad history with and at the same time this client is on a rolling contract (presumably 12 months at a time) and are saying every five minutes we are building our own ground and academy facilities. Who in their right mind would make an £80K, 10 year investment on that basis?
And before you start with the "you believe TF when it suits line" I don't believe TF for a moment but that doesn't change the fact that this is what he continues to say and this is something anyone who is dealing with the club at the moment has to consider as a possibility when dealing with them. Whether that be ACL/Wasps over the Ricoh or Higgs over the academy facilities. The boy that cries wolf always comes a cropper.
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
It will be interesting to see where the Wasps academy and training facilities end up - and in what time scale. Not saying it will be at AH Centre. If they set up from nothing by the 2016 season as they said they would that must raise further questions as to what the CCFC owners are doing with our club's future.
I think the expression in the five point plan was "we will future proof the academy to category 1 level" (or words to that effect) - that would be a commitment to fund over £2.5m costs each year. With this news today that seems a million miles away from what is actually achievable
I think the expression in the five point plan was "we will future proof the academy to category 1 level" (or words to that effect) - that would be a commitment to fund over £2.5m costs each year. With this news today that seems a million miles away from what is actually achievable
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Where the land come from is relevant. I have a feeling the land may be subject to a covenant that means it can't be used for much other than as a sports ground with permitted public use.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I thought that the only crossover was PWKH who is chairman of the trustees (got that wrong before) of the Higgs centre. Are we the only people that use this particular bit, plus what is a resurface and how much does it cost? If it's not much then it seems that would be a worthwhile investment in our Academy even if we're not going to be there for long (at the very least it allows a fallback facility in Coventry). If it's a large sum then you would question if it's worth spending the money especially if we're still supposedly moving to a new site. This all assumes that we're going to keep the academy
. Probably best to see what the agreement states about what facilities are provided and whether they are guaranteed or not.Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Yes you are right the rent probably did cover the maintenance for the last 10 years.
I think it probably would do for the next ten years if Higgs knew the academy would be there for the next ten. No doubt they would lay the pitch tomorrow. Instead they have a 12 month rolling contract. If the demand for the pitch is not there without the academy. They would be crazy to spend 80k on something that has a ten year shelf life. Then it is unused if the club move on.
It smacks of another wasps scenario to me. Whilst we threaten to build a new stadium, academy and training facilities. We get a warning that Higgs will have to move on. We ignore the warning and they move on.
Hopefully this time we don't ignore the warning.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Indeed. At the risk of derailing this, I notice that all talk of Wasps setting up a training facility in Coventry seems to have gone fairly quiet. Anyone up for an FOI request?
It's almost as if Wasps were telling the council what they wanted to hear with regard to spending millions of pounds locally, this if they could just have the Ricoh. Of course, everyone other than the council knows that Wasps can't set up an academy in Coventry under current RFU rules - but they could set up a 'training' centre.
All of that aside, it does worry me that Higgs have a facility available at fairly short notice, and have already done a deal with Wasps that knackers CCFC at the Ricoh. Are they manouvering to do something similar with the academy?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Wasn't the original dispute at the Higgs over maintenance? DIdn't the club get sent a bill when they thought it should be covered by rent?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Wasps were told their academy had to stay in London. They would be treading on the toes of Worcester, etc.
Then again, if they don't give a flying F for their fans then that won't bother them.
Then again, if they don't give a flying F for their fans then that won't bother them.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Didn't the club concede that it wasn't covered by rent and paid the bill in the end?
duffer
Well-Known Member
There was a bit of that, and also a bit of the old "Sorry, the agreement was with CCFC Ltd not Holdings" etc. stuff going on (I may have got that the wrong way around).
Basically, there's bugger all trust between the two sides - don't expect this to be sorted out in a grown-up manner.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
The deal on the catchment areas expires I think in April 2016 ........ Wasps to open their new training area etc in time for 2016 season. It might not be possible now but then nothing built yet either. Come 2016 it may well be a different story
but that moving the thread away from CCFC academy - whose needs for a properly equipped site (be it AEC or elsewhere) will need to be met sooner rather than later
but that moving the thread away from CCFC academy - whose needs for a properly equipped site (be it AEC or elsewhere) will need to be met sooner rather than later
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Wasn't that at the point at which there was talk of their status being downgraded? You could look at it either way, you could take the opinion the club were held to ransom and had little choice to pay a bill that wasn't really their responsibility or that the club were stalling on paying a bill that was their responsibility all along.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
You think Wasps are bothered about that? I'm sure they said ther intention was to have an academy down here, I don't know if that has changed in the meantime.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Re Wasps: It might be OSB, but there's no guarantee that the RFU will sanction it even in 2016. It's just another grumble from me about how much the council stretched the truth to persuade themselves Wasps was a great idea. Feel free to ignore.
Re: The Academy: Agreed this will need sorting - I wonder if there's another indoor facility they can use in conjunction with the Higgs Centre to maintain the current academy category.
I'm playing at St Augustines later, I'll ask.
Leamington Pete
Well-Known Member
Our Academy isn't at risk, just its Category 2 status in the EPPP for which you must have an indoor training facility on site. There are many clubs without indoor training pitches who continue to run Academies.
Can hardly blame the AHT. We've haven't exactly been reliable tenants over the last couple of years. These days 3G pitches are costing near enough £500,000 for landscaping and laying - and that's outside, so £80,000 to re lay this one seems a bargain.
Can hardly blame the AHT. We've haven't exactly been reliable tenants over the last couple of years. These days 3G pitches are costing near enough £500,000 for landscaping and laying - and that's outside, so £80,000 to re lay this one seems a bargain.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
As I said in another post. No, they won't care. If they can move the team permanently on a whim then I'm sure they can move the Academy whether the RFU like/agree or not. They'll feed them another sob story.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Without Cat 2 do you lose the funding, is the big question I guess?
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
I have, but Mr Waggott and Mr Fisher have been understandably busy with other things this week and last.
Spoke to Mr Fisher about other issues today and I believe there may be some progress on the pitch issue this week.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I think I read somewhere earlier that Cat 2 is worth £500k a year.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Mr Fishers been busy? Does that mean that the location and plan's for the new ground are about to be made available?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
From memory it was maintenance on a specialist piece of equipment used to keep the indoor pitch playable. There was also a question over the commercial insurance wasn't there, something to do with the swapping of which company was paying for and which was using the centre.?
Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
I've looked it up, it was 12k. Couldn't find what it was for, or how it was resolved. All that was announced is that the club would be returning after a new rental deal was agreed on a 12 month rolling contract.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Yes I am sure it was, was it for something like 29k. For machinery etc...
Where Higgs saying that particular type of equipment is only purely there due to the academy. So the academy should maintain it?
We did our usual and threatened to move to Warwick Uni but the FA said you won't have your academy status
(Probably got some of that wrong it's off the top of my head)
This sounds s bit more than maintenance though. It's a junction for Higgs. If the club are off in the future Higgs are thinking forget about spending 80k we can evolve now without wasting that money.
Last edited:
Leamington Pete
Well-Known Member
I think it costs about one million to run a Cat 2 Academy, which is approved if everything required is in place. This is half funded by the club, and half a grant (ie the £500k).
- I might be wrong though. Will all be on the FA websites somewhere!
James Smith
Well-Known Member
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Correct
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
So Callum Wilson alone has financed it for several years to come.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Don't try and be clever!
Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.
It will be about time. I think I read somewhere today that it's been 1 year and 61 days since TF promised us that the plan's for the new stadium were weeks away. If only I could remember where :thinking about:
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I thought (and it is my opinion and not fact) that the Higgs being a charity couldn't build an academy just for us. Therefore to get round this they built a sports centre that was suitable for our academy. It's run by the Coventry Sports Foundation not the Higgs Centre though.
Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.