New Coventry City FC stadium plan seems 'crazy', says football finance expert (13 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sub
- Start date
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
He'll be getting sued
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Really? It seems crazy? Well that's news to me
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
Depends who the bloke is and what the sentences are.
Managed to get several out of Tim Fisher, Mark Labovitch and Steve Waggott over the stadium topic during the past 18+ months.
Nick
Administrator
Just asked the bloke at the car wash, he used to be a brick layer. He has said it would mean thousands of bricks.
Something for Monday?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Your headline could have been:
"Football expert says that CCFC not attractive to buyers unless it owns it's own ground".
While this is all bloody obvious to us, I'm thankful that we are seeing a bit more of this from the telegraph, we all know this and I suspect many people here know more than this "expert" on the financials and viability of a new stadium for ccfc but we are a small subset of the people of Coventry and in my experience there is a huge amount of misinformed people who have gotten much of their information from reading ccfc produced spin articles in the telegraph, this sort of thing is very informative to those people.
I honestly think its a disgrace that sisu have managed to put out so much spin about the new stadium with only a tiny amount of challenge from the media, lets not criticise when they do challenge.
I honestly think its a disgrace that sisu have managed to put out so much spin about the new stadium with only a tiny amount of challenge from the media, lets not criticise when they do challenge.
Nick
Administrator
Yes, they could have made an agreement like the council allegedly did to not print certain things.
It's all crap, then spun again up by the cet for attention.
Bennets Afro
Well-Known Member
I just find the telegraph are always finding a stick to beat the club with. Like lordsummerisle said "Football expert says that CCFC not attractive to buyers unless it owns it's own ground". it could of been portrayed completely different, but i suppose they have to keep on kicking the club while we are down
Astute
Well-Known Member
Do you mean like our club is attractive to buyers unless we have our own stadium?
The truth isn't good. Most things happening to do with our club are not good. Does this mean that the CET shouldn't report anything truthful that doesn't look good?
Astute
Well-Known Member
And what would you say if they reported it the day after our last game? 'The fookers couldn't wait and had to put a downer on our win'
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
But the owners say the club is not for sale.
However, they do say they are planning to build a new stadium.
Nick
Administrator
I'd say if that was when the news was broken and that is when the interview was done then fair enough. Rather than splitting it up into two articles and then waiting a few days.
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
Non time-sensitive content is regularly held by news outlets for days after interviews have taken place. It's a way of ensuring we have content everyday, especially when people are away from work - like I am today.
Weekly newspapers make a living out of holding content.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Mr Wilson did say that owning a stadium would make the club more attractive to potential buyers - although Sisu has repeatedly insisted the club is not for sale.
He said: “The owners won’t sell for less than they consider the club to be worth.
“I wouldn’t say people are queuing up, but there are investors out there, particularly down the league pyramid for a club that owns their own ground.
“The problems with the ground don’t make CCFC attractive. Foreign owners want deals to be relatively clean.
“They want to have a deal that includes a training ground, a stadium and this many players - but Coventry is much more complicated in that regard.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
I think you mean how many "clicks"?
Yep. We're in the business of attracting readers. That means getting as many interesting stories as possible out of any given opportunity. It's not a secret.
Nick
Administrator
Like when councils allegedly don't want things to be printed?
Why not put out a "get behind the sky blues" type story to get a bit of hype about the club to get people down there supporting the team? Doesn't have to be "support sisu" it should be "support your football team".
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Must just be a coincidence that there's a rare feeling of optimism and positivity around because of the last two results.
What makes a story 'interesting' is the angle it's presented with.
Why didn't you ask the 'expert' if he had seen a business plan for the new stadium?
Did you ask him if FFP/SMCP was part of his analysis?
Did you ask him if 'our' style of football was helped by a surface shared with a rugby club?
Did you ask him if he was sure the low rent would continue if we got promoted or when the contract was up for renewal?
Or did you only ask questions to which you would get the desired answers?
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
This isn't the only CCFC story we've written this week, and it won't be the last. The press conference is happening now, I'm sure something positive will come out of that.
But should we not print things that are perceived to be negative?
It sounds like what you're implying we should do is also what you're accusing us of doing in relation to the council... which is nonsense by the way, it's certainly never happened since I've been at the paper.
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
How could I possibly have known what the answer was going to be before I asked the question?
Do you honestly think we wouldn't have run the story if he was in favour of the idea? Of course we would!
Nick
Administrator
Has nobody at the CET picked up on Tony Mowbray's dig at the pitch after the game the other night? Was quite blatant wasn't it? The playing surface has been a biggish talking point at the Ricoh.
I think it should be the news, as it is, as it happens. Whether it is negative or positive it should be here is the news, these are the facts without any spin or bias. Rather than holding onto it for a few days and then "dropping it in".
The "news" about the stadium was held onto for a few days until the day before a game while we are on a decent run? Will that put people off going? I couldn't give a shit if you catch Tim Fisher and Waggot coming out of a brothel with "talc" all over their faces in terms of news,but this sort of thing could put people going and feeling good about the "club" (not SISU) couldn't it?
There was one the other day about Ricketts going to be Mowbray's first signing, completely forgetting his actual first signing.
It is not personal to you or how you work, more likely papers as a whole.
olderskyblue
Well-Known Member
NICK talks Nonsense shocker..!!!!
Come on Simon, stop peddling old news. We've known for ages Nick talks nonsense.
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
I think I know what you are tying to say. But there will always be room for interpretation in anything we write and when we publish it.
I would hope you have read enough of my stuff by now to realise I do try and present the information objectively and aim to provide as full a picture as possible by providing as much information as I can.
I'm not saying I, or the paper, is perfect and doesn't make mistakes or errors of judgment. We do.
Nick
Administrator
NICK talks Nonsense shocker..!!!!
Come on Simon, stop peddling old news. We've known for ages Nick talks nonsense.
ha what like the times we were playing at Sixfields months ago and I said Pressley didn't really have a clue when he needed to make changes, or the time I pointed out Thorn was dog shit? It was taken as nonsense then too.