bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
By fundamentalists do you mean people that hate sisu?
Surely we are all fundamentalists in that case as everyone says they hate them.
8,700....really ? (23 Viewers)
- Thread starter Alan Dugdales Moustache
- Start date
By fundamentalists do you mean people that hate sisu?
Surely we are all fundamentalists in that case as everyone says they hate them.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I mean the ones who believe that if you believe or say something then you automatically love sisu.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
That's a complete myth. They saved us from administration at that time, that's all. You can't even say that they saved us from administration anymore because they happily took us through that as part of the failed operation Ricoh.
All they saved us from is finding out what other parties might have come in if we'd gone into administration before they bought us. I suspect that if we'd have had gone into administration SISU wouldn't have touched us with a bargepole at the time. They needed to take us over while there was debt in the club for them to control and the administration process would have relinquished that debt.
It's probably safer to say that SISU taking over has actually set us on the course of extinction. The best I fear we can hope for now is to be the next Portsmouth. If there was a multi billionaire CCFC fan out there willing to pay over the odds for the club (I can't see SISU selling under any other circumstances) who was then willing to bankroll the club and any success that comes it's way we would have seen them long ago.
Yes but it doesn't stop people trotting it out
Samo
Well-Known Member
Which is what?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
there were others, Tony. The Manhattan group for one. Ironically though SISU were CCCs preferred bidders.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Can't say I remember the Manhattan group. I'm guessing another hedge fund?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Can't remember myself to be honest. They did come over from the States to discuss a takeover. Not sure why it failed. Don't suppose it matters now.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It failed because they looked at the books... and actually I think the stadium ownership problems may have been an issue (but may be imposing this memory!)
There were other options too, but point of order, the SISU bid wasn't welcomed by CCC.
In fact, none of the bids were! Including one from Shapiro who wanted a longer lease on the ground.
Never be anything other than Sky Blue, not interested in any other football teams but really struggle to spend money at the club until there is clarity as to where it is going. If we started again next season with new, open and honest owners I'd be back to renew my season ticket but if I find in the summer a continuation of court cases, debt dumping, cost cutting, bill paying avoidance etc and more talk of stadium la la land then I'll do other stuff again.
As for the football yesterday, it was another reminder of a squad put together on a shoestring, kids and short term loanees showing all the inexperience and lack of fighting qualities that that policy brings at this level. If Mowbray was to stay I'd imagine he'd want to completely rebuild !
The attendance reflected all the uncertainty and distrust that prevails at the moment with our owners ! I note that Blackpool fans are drifting away now from a club being torn up by another unscrupulous character.
As for the football yesterday, it was another reminder of a squad put together on a shoestring, kids and short term loanees showing all the inexperience and lack of fighting qualities that that policy brings at this level. If Mowbray was to stay I'd imagine he'd want to completely rebuild !
The attendance reflected all the uncertainty and distrust that prevails at the moment with our owners ! I note that Blackpool fans are drifting away now from a club being torn up by another unscrupulous character.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
There were two other parties who were very interested. The Manhattan group were one, if you recall they met with the council and promptly got on a plane and went back to the states saying it would be impossible to work with them. The other group, who's name escapes me at the moment, wanted to develop the area around the Ricoh (not just the actual site itself) and wanted the councils insistence on that. CCC refused and were quite scathing about them saying development of the area was not the job of the football club.
SISU were of course, as touch says, CCC's preferred option and they did everything they could to make it difficult for other interested parties.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
They were based in New York, hence the name, and specialised in ownership of sports 'franchises'. They were looking to get involved in Europe and saw us as a good prospect.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
There was also Alki David, who ran far far far away once he looked at the books, and realised they were a bit of a mess...
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Ken Taylors comments make you wonder if it's only ever been about the Ricoh for any interested party, certainly the administration process that we did go through would suggest this given the bids received.
Which begs the question with all prospect of the Ricoh gone does that mean our next owners will only be here for the club.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
His comments also betray a certain issue with councils, that they are stubborn when it comes to money, and caught between a rock and a hard place - they don't like to see other entities benefitting financially from things they feel the council could benefit from... but are vastly risk averse themselves.
So it all becomes a little inflexible and not open to discussion, which tends to stymie any attempts to move forward.
One could point out that the long lease was never on offer for CCFC... and there's the evidence for it.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
SISU and the Council agreed on a 125 year lease.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Interesting if so.
I risk sounding like Nick now
but I would genuinely be interested in that if you can point me to where it was actually agreed (as opposed to HoT or anything).Ta!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Possibly but it also raises the prospect that nobody will be interested in the club without a stadium.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Interesting if so.
I risk sounding like Nick now
Ta!
It was signed up to in the HOT, so clearly it never got to the point of being enacted. You were making the point the Council would never agree to such a thing due to their inflexibility, and their unwillingness to have discussion, but clearly that isn't correct.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You're a sane chap as they go on this forum
so can you remind me, I'd thought the issue was CCC stopped any deal with Higgs initially?(More than happy to rephrase btw, and a bit unbfortunate this has to go on amidst the bear baiting as it looks like I'm chal;lenging whereas I actually would like to be reminded
)
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
You're a sane chap as they go on this forum
(More than happy to rephrase btw, and a bit unbfortunate this has to go on amidst the bear baiting as it looks like I'm chal;lenging whereas I actually would like to be reminded
I can't immediately remember anything about CCC stopping Higgs doing a deal, obviously it was in the power of both CCC and Higgs to stop the transfer of the others 50%, but it didn't actually get to that (well there's no evidence for it).
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I'll have a look at some stage... once I've finished applying for my own job, anyway(!)
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
SISU are still interested for some reason, and of course we didn't have a stadium when they came in originally. With a lot of debt in the club I can't see anyone else coming in, we just need to wait until SISU's investors call it a day. When that happens I can imagine someone will think it's worth a go.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yeah someone will always think a football club worth a go.
The problem is however, if the foundations aren't in place, you risk the people being interested being the likes of SISU, who play fast and loose with high risk gambles.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
That is indeed the flipside.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I can certainly see what attracted them in the first place. They thought they could put a relatively small amount in, get promotion and cash out with a huge return. Now I suspect they are still here as they can't find a viable exit strategy.
When SISU took over we were a Championship team regularly getting crowds of over 20K. Most of us would have said a handful of key signings and we'd be pushing for promotion. We also had the right to purchase 50% of ACL.
Now we're a L1 team struggling to get 10K. We've in a relegation fight at the wrong end of L1. No option for ground ownership and no prospect of a new stadium.
It's a terrible situation, I struggle to think of another club that has recovered from a position as bad as ours. I can only think of Brighton who relied on a benefactor coming in and building a new ground with no exception of a return on his investment. Without someone coming in an being prepared to put in £50m - £100m and writing it off I can't see things getting better. Sure we should be able to get into the Championship but at best we'd be battling relegation back to L1 on a regular basis.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I guess they were interested then because there was something to buy. There's nothing now for any potential new owner.
Last edited:
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
The idea that SISU thought they could chuck a couple of a million and get a quick promotion to the premier league was extremely naive to begin with.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Not really naive.
Throw a spot of cash with the potential of a high return, and it's worth a spin on the wheel in the grand scheme of things.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Other than the £50m to £100m I'd agree with you, I don't think it would have to be that much. I've got to the point where I've given up any hope in getting even to the upper reaches of the Championship, I just want to see a few wins at home with plenty of effort being put in.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Certainly explains why they came in, but there seems little point in them still being here now.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
In the grand scheme of things again, it's probably worth a gamble here and there to try and get something back.
The concern, as ever, is what happens once they do decide enough is enough.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I think the bigger problem was no plan B. That was fine as the high risk part of the investment but there was no plan on what they would do if promotion wasn't achieved relatively quickly.
That's not a scientific figure to be honest but you're looking at someone having to pay SISU whatever % of the debt they will accept to leave and then fund a new ground. Then of course fund losses for however many years it would take to turn things around.
I'd love to think that just getting rid of SISU would see things improving but I think the sale of the Ricoh to Wasps was the killer blow, it might take a while to have it's full impact but it's the blow I can't see the club ever recovering from.
If you take out the debt interest charges, management fees and excessive staff charges, the club if dumped without actual debt must be running close to break even now. Costs have been cut to such an extent that a new owner could take over easy as long as not lumbered with SISU's debt legacy. The club would still have a restricted budget due to revenue streams being depleted but with a surge of optimism and increased crowds CCFC should be able to compete at least at this level. New owners might also engage positively with the landlords to investigate the possibility of negotiating access to other revenue activities. Improved marketing and the departure of SISU would also bring back much more local corporate sponsorship opportunities from companies who have seemingly shunned the Mayfair mob.