Wasps in talks to takeover Ricoh (2 Viewers)

[martcov]

No anything sells at a price. People like you and dongle claimed it was A prime asset - like a mansion on Kenilworth Road.

The fact they had to then sell it for a price akin to a bedsit in Foleshill says one of two things;

They gave it away

Or

It was worth nothing on the open market in its structure at the time.

Which was it?

It was obviously worth something to a professional Sports team. No build costs, no property company costs - a ready made 32000 seater football Stadium in Coventry. A snip. Pity other people couldn't have done a deal..... Still one day SISU may build a 12000 seater in the sticks.... Do you know what happened to the Stadium Announcement in the new year?

 

---

[Grendel]

And as usual you read what isn't written.

Not worth a wow. Just a normal day in the life of a WUM called Grendel.

So acl were making a profit? I thought you said they weren't?

 

[Astute]

So acl were making a profit? I thought you said they weren't?

So PWKH said that ACL would have made money for the 3 to 5 years that SISU got permission from the FL to take our club to Northampton?

 

[Huckerby]

I stopped reading when he went on about fucking renting a house.

Never see it as you pay a fortune to rent a house off somebody, you're only allowed in it 20 odd days a year, though you get stung with the Council Tax for the whole place each year. They then sublet it to other people the rest of the year, making money from them, plus making money from any of your mates that visit by making them eat and drink supplied by them.

You try to get the rent reduced, but they won't initially, and still want to make your mates eat and drink their products and keep all the profits.

Eventually, after not paying rent for a bit, though still paying running costs and letting them sell your mates refreshments, they come up with a better offer, but then apply to make you bankrupt!

You can't afford the big flash place, so have to downgrade and move 35 miles away, much to your landlords disgust at such an act.

Eventually, after a year away, you both realise that you've been hurting each other, so get together and agree to come back at a much reduced rent than was on offer, even offering the possible opportunity to buy the place off them once trust built up mutually again.

A couple of weeks later they've sold the roof from under your head to somebody from 80 miles away for less than you've paid in rent.


House analogies, shit aren't they?

And who fucking agreed to that rent deal? Were they forced into it? No.

The council probably never wanted to get involved in the whole ordeal but had to bail us out after we spunked all the money away for highfield road. Their duty is to protect the taxpayer, they were only going to make a deal that was good for them.

If SISU joined and weren't happy with the rent deal, and openly told everyone it was a terrible deal and unfortunately the council won't negotiate so at the end of the season they are going to stop paying rent and sort out a grounshare while they build a new stadium...that would probably have gone down a lot more in their favour.

But it wasn't the case was it. I honestly cannot work out whether people like you are stupid and deluded, or just in denial because you have some grudge against the council....probably the former. Chin up pal

 

[torchomatic]

At least there's no confusion with your posts. We know where your loyalties lie, don't we?

And who fucking agreed to that rent deal? Were they forced into it? No.

The council probably never wanted to get involved in the whole ordeal but had to bail us out after we spunked all the money away for highfield road. Their duty is to protect the taxpayer, they were only going to make a deal that was good for them.

If SISU joined and weren't happy with the rent deal, and openly told everyone it was a terrible deal and unfortunately the council won't negotiate so at the end of the season they are going to stop paying rent and sort out a grounshare while they build a new stadium...that would probably have gone down a lot more in their favour.

But it wasn't the case was it. I honestly cannot work out whether people like you are stupid and deluded, or just in denial because you have some grudge against the council....probably the former. Chin up pal

 

[skybluetony176]

No anything sells at a price. People like you and dongle claimed it was A prime asset - like a mansion on Kenilworth Road.

The fact they had to then sell it for a price akin to a bedsit in Foleshill says one of two things;

They gave it away

Or

It was worth nothing on the open market in its structure at the time.

Which was it?

Unlike you I've always said it was worth something and I've already said that they got it at a snip.

It was you and others who said it was a worthless white elephant and are now complaining that they got it at a snip.

My position hasn't changed. Yours however has. To suit.

 

[torchomatic]

SISU and the club got fucked off and you were right. Must be like Christmas Day?

Unlike you I've always said it was worth something and I've already said that they got it at a snip.

It was you and others who said it was a worthless white elephant and are now complaining that they got it at a snip.

My position hasn't changed. Yours however has. To suit.

 

[skybluetony176]

SISU and the club got fucked off and you were right. Must be like Christmas Day?

SISU made their bed and are now lying in it. The club did indeed get fucked of and I'm not happy about it. That's why I'm fucked off with SISU for making said bed. Funny how you can separate SISU and the club when suit's and refer to them as the same entity when suits.

 

[torchomatic]

They've always been separate for me. In fact, I was going to apologise for that last post. It was out of order.

SISU made their bed and are now lying in it. The club did indeed get fucked of and I'm not happy about it. That's why I'm fucked off with SISU for making said bed. Funny how you can separate SISU and the club when suit's and refer to them as the same entity when suits.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

At least there's no confusion with your posts. We know where your loyalties lie, don't we?

And here lies your perennial confusion, Torchy. Because your loyalty lies with the football club - I get that - but you think that anyone who acts against the owners of the football club is 'out' to destroy the club, or has an agenda against it. They don't. They act in the face of acts of aggression or duplicity on the part of the football club's owners. In that interaction, the football club gets harmed.

Does the blame lie with the club's owners, who's cavalier attitude imperil the football club; of those who are reactive to their agenda?

Now I know Swansea only pay a 'peppercorn' rent - but they too don't have access to all of the 365-revenues we have been told are so vital to prosperity, do they? At the time SISU arrived at the club, Swansea and City were only separated by a handful of points in The Championship. Indeed, looking at fan-bases, their record crowd for the 08/09 season just squeezed over 18K - and that was Cardiff at home, not surprisingly - whereas we averaged over 17.4K throughout all the season. Look at the difference now.

They got things right on the pitch and lived within the revenues they had available to themselves without these 365-revenues/conferences/etc. (The Liberty has a sub-contract catering arrangement, just as the Ricoh has: http://www.liberty-stadium.com/events_venue_conferencing.php )

So, what's most critical? All these revenues; or good ownership?

 

[torchomatic]

Absolutely. But also the cavalier attitude of the Council. They did NOT have to sell to Wasps. SISU will not be here for ever, they could have waited and reunited the stadium for the club it was built for. That will do more damage long term, IMHO.

Does the blame lie with the club's owners, who's cavalier attitude imperil the football club; of those who are reactive to their agenda?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Absolutely. But also the cavalier attitude of the Council. They did NOT have to sell to Wasps. SISU will not be here for ever, they could have waited and reunited the stadium for the club it was built for. That will do more damage long term, IMHO.

But they couldn't; could they? The rent strike had damaged ACL; clearly so. SISU were still talking in terms of building new. I know the 'building bridges from the Coventry councillor was wrong - I've said so many time before, and I'll confirm it here again - but equally, I bring your attention to The Guardian, dated 4th September 2014, in which they were talking to Fisher in the context of the Ricoh return:

'Tim Fisher, the Sisu-appointed club chairman, declined to respond to the MPs’ criticisms, telling the Guardian he wants to look ahead to the Ricoh return. However he maintains Sisu “have to own our own ground”. and that it is continuing with plans to build a new one'

Now; against that backdrop - the CEO still asserting the club is on it's way - and in light of an offer from Wasps, and gvien you're a councillor with a remit of protecting the financial interests of the totality of your electorate, what do you do? Honesty...

 

[torchomatic]

Honestly? I would say Fisher would not be here for ever and neither will SISU. I would not have agreed to letting a team from 80 miles away have the Arena. The "Coventry" asset. Especially after Lucas and her "no team should be ripped from its community" crap.

The "building bridges" statement was equally as bad as any of Fisher's comments. SISUs decision to go to Northampton and the Council decision to sell to Wasps will be the undoing of this football club, I doubt we will ever recover.

Now; against that backdrop - the CEO still asserting the club is on it's way - and in light of an offer from Wasps, and gvien you're a councillor with a remit of protecting the financial interests of the totality of your electorate, what do you do? Honesty...

 

[shy_tall_knight]

Honestly? I would say Fisher would not be here for ever and neither will SISU. I would not have agreed to letting a team from 80 miles away have the Arena. The "Coventry" asset. Especially after Lucas and her "no team should be ripped from its community" crap.

But politically CCC made the correct decision to sell to WASPS, seen not to give in to bullies, got £5m plus "guarantees on the loan", avoided the political embarrassment of the white elephant stadium and the home town club playing in Northampton, hardly any opposition to the Sky Blues losing the Ricoh as most Cov public think they didn't want it anyway, CCC don't have to deal with SISU anymore, a result all round except for us.

 

[Grendel]

Swansea were given the stadium to play in and a free share in the management company. There is even a suggestion that the profit from a subsequent sale of some of the land was given to the club.

The council also paid for ground replenishment wiping loans given to the management company.

If we could have done a council swap then we'd be a lot better off now.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Swansea were given the stadium to play in and a free share in the management company. There is even a suggestion that the profit from a subsequent sale of some of the land was given to the club.

The council also paid for ground replenishment wiping loans given to the management company.

If we could have done a council swap then we'd be a lot better off now.

I addressed the peppercorn rent point above. the rest is, to an extent, noise. They don't have access to 365 revenues, do they?

And still you can only concentrate on the council? I'd say wed be better off with an owner swap; especially the partial ownership of the Supporters Trust, and the seat on the board

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Honestly? I would say Fisher would not be here for ever and neither will SISU. I would not have agreed to letting a team from 80 miles away have the Arena. The "Coventry" asset. Especially after Lucas and her "no team should be ripped from its community" crap.

The "building bridges" statement was equally as bad as any of Fisher's comments. SISUs decision to go to Northampton and the Council decision to sell to Wasps (after the football club said they didn't want the stadium any more and were building a new one) will be the undoing of this football club, I doubt we will ever recover.

Sorry; I don't believe you. You're a councillor. You have a stadium sitting empty and a management company in decline. The CEO of the tenant is saying they'll return on a short term deal whilst they build anew; so you're facing the prospect of a great white elephant; and you tell me you'd sit tight and not sell when another sporting institution hands you a gilt-edged Get Out Of Jail card?

Helped your accuracy with an 'edit' too...

 

[Grendel]

Sorry; I don't believe you. You're a councillor. You have a stadium sitting empty and a management company in decline. The CEO of the tenant is saying they'll return on a short term deal whilst they build anew; so you're facing the prospect of a great white elephant; and you tell me you'd sit tight and not sell when another sporting institution hands you a gilt-edged Get Out Of Jail card?

Helped your accuracy with an 'edit' too...

Wonder what Swanseas council would have done? Build another stadium?

 

[torchomatic]

I don't care if you believe me or not. And your editing confirms what I already knew.

Decline? ACL was healthy, they had a bright future, didn't they? That's what we were told. And in turn that's what people like you quoted as gospel on here. The football club were back, paying rent for FOUR years at least. There was talk of ownership and bridge building. And a lot can happen in four years. New owners could come in. Club and stadium reunited. Everybody's happy. But no.

Sorry; I don't believe you. You're a councillor. You have a stadium sitting empty and a management company in decline. The CEO of the tenant is saying they'll return on a short term deal whilst they build anew; so you're facing the prospect of a great white elephant; and you tell me you'd sit tight and not sell when another sporting institution hands you a gilt-edged Get Out Of Jail card?

Helped your accuracy with an 'edit' too...

 

[chiefdave]

And who fucking agreed to that rent deal? Were they forced into it? No.

Depends on your definition of forced, we had no other option than to agree to whatever deal was offered. If we didn't we had nowhere to play. We were already paying huge penalties at HR for being late moving out and delaying the development. We couldn't afford to exercise the buy back clause, if we could we wouldn't have needed CC or Higgs involved in the Ricoh. While technically you could say they weren't forced there was very little option. And of course not much chance of getting a better deal when you've got MM in charge.

If SISU joined and weren't happy with the rent deal, and openly told everyone it was a terrible deal and unfortunately the council won't negotiate so at the end of the season they are going to stop paying rent and sort out a grounshare while they build a new stadium...that would probably have gone down a lot more in their favour.

Ransons plan didn't seem to involve stadium ownership so it wouldn't have bothered him. His plan hinged on getting into the PL in the first few years and cashing in. If we were on the PL bandwagon to a certain extent the high rent and lack of non-matchday revenues becomes irrelevant or at least its impact is minimised.

When Fisher got here he did exactly what you suggest. Pointed out that the rent was too high and unaffordable, that ACL would struggle without CCFC and that the club was essentially propping them up. He was ridiculed and called an idiot. CCC and Higgs took every opportunity they could find to tell us he was wrong and that CCFC were a tiny part of ACL's income and they'd be just fine without us. Turned out, much to my surprise, that Fisher was right and CCC and Higgs were outright lying.

 

[Astute]

Depends on your definition of forced, we had no other option than to agree to whatever deal was offered. If we didn't we had nowhere to play. We were already paying huge penalties at HR for being late moving out and delaying the development. We couldn't afford to exercise the buy back clause, if we could we wouldn't have needed CC or Higgs involved in the Ricoh. While technically you could say they weren't forced there was very little option. And of course not much chance of getting a better deal when you've got MM in charge.



Ransons plan didn't seem to involve stadium ownership so it wouldn't have bothered him. His plan hinged on getting into the PL in the first few years and cashing in. If we were on the PL bandwagon to a certain extent the high rent and lack of non-matchday revenues becomes irrelevant or at least its impact is minimised.

When Fisher got here he did exactly what you suggest. Pointed out that the rent was too high and unaffordable, that ACL would struggle without CCFC and that the club was essentially propping them up. He was ridiculed and called an idiot. CCC and Higgs took every opportunity they could find to tell us he was wrong and that CCFC were a tiny part of ACL's income and they'd be just fine without us. Turned out, much to my surprise, that Fisher was right and CCC and Higgs were outright lying.

If it was about the rent why didn't Fisher accept the low rent offers.....or even the free rent offer?

Fisher is Joys mouth piece. Remember when it looked like he was going to accept an offer but to be overruled by Joy?


Next you will be telling us that ACL should have said to Fisher and Joy that their plan to distress ACL was working although they couldn't let them have the arena unencumbered which is what they were after.

 

[Nick]

Which free rent offer was there? Didn't the low rent offers go back up after a set time?

 

[torchomatic]

Lucas should have patented the word "unencumbered". She'd have been minted.

 

[torchomatic]

Remember Michael's offer of the rent being paid. We never found out too much about that, did we?

Which free rent offer was there? Didn't the low rent offers go back up after a set time?

 

[Astute]

Which free rent offer was there? Didn't the low rent offers go back up after a set time?

It was still less than they were paying Northampton IIRC. But they said it was a bad deal as they would have to pay more as more police were needed for higher gates they would have got at the Ricoh.

 

[Astute]

Lucas should have patented the word "unencumbered". She'd have been minted.

It was a SISU word. You can't blame CCC for that one

 

[Grendel]

If it was about the rent why didn't Fisher accept the low rent offers.....or even the free rent offer?

Fisher is Joys mouth piece. Remember when it looked like he was going to accept an offer but to be overruled by Joy?


Next you will be telling us that ACL should have said to Fisher and Joy that their plan to distress ACL was working although they couldn't let them have the arena unencumbered which is what they were after.

Those offers reverted back to £1.3 million the following season.

The "unencumbered" claim has never been substantiated has it?

 

[Nick]

Didn't it go back up to silly money after so long?

 

[torchomatic]

My mistake. I thought it was Saint Ann who'd said it.

It was a SISU word. You can't blame CCC for that one

 

[torchomatic]

yes, it did, which was the problem.

Didn't it go back up to silly money after so long?

 

[Astute]

My mistake. I thought it was Saint Ann who'd said it.

No it was god fearing Joy

 

[torchomatic]

Actually I can:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-25728542

You can't blame CCC for that one

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Those offers reverted back to £1.3 million the following season.

The "unencumbered" claim has never been substantiated has it?

In his much (self) trumpeted interview with Joy Sepalla in September 2013; the Award Winning Journalist was told: “The club needs 100 per cent ownership of the freehold of the Ricoh. If you look back at the history of the club, you can see why this is important.”

She said she had made her position clear at a meeting with ACL directors on July 25, adding: “I had thought we were going to talk about a deal involving stadium ownership.”


Asked if it was an extreme bargaining position in public from which there may be room for private negotiation, she said: “I don’t posture. I always tell people what it is I need. I don’t go for wasting time in negotiations. There is no way we would go back to a rental deal. As I have said to the Football League when they asked recently if we would do a temporary arrangement, it would be irrational to return on an interim basis where I have any exposure to Coventry City Council whatsoever"

And: "Realistically, this council don’t think they can work with me. I know I cannot work with them. It doesn’t mean I can’t negotiate a deal. But I am not going to risk my investors’ money by exposing us to the potential of having a repeat of what happened over the last year"

 

[Grendel]

In his much (self) trumpeted interview with Joy Sepalla in September 2013; the Award Winning Journalist was told: “The club needs 100 per cent ownership of the freehold of the Ricoh. If you look back at the history of the club, you can see why this is important.”

She said she had made her position clear at a meeting with ACL directors on July 25, adding: “I had thought we were going to talk about a deal involving stadium ownership.”


Asked if it was an extreme bargaining position in public from which there may be room for private negotiation, she said: “I don’t posture. I always tell people what it is I need. I don’t go for wasting time in negotiations. There is no way we would go back to a rental deal. As I have said to the Football League when they asked recently if we would do a temporary arrangement, it would be irrational to return on an interim basis where I have any exposure to Coventry City Council whatsoever"

And: "Realistically, this council don’t think they can work with me. I know I cannot work with them. It doesn’t mean I can’t negotiate a deal. But I am not going to risk my investors’ money by exposing us to the potential of having a repeat of what happened over the last year"

Can't see the U word - where is it?

 

[chiefdave]

In his much (self) trumpeted interview with Joy Sepalla in September 2013; the Award Winning Journalist was told: “The club needs 100 per cent ownership of the freehold of the Ricoh. If you look back at the history of the club, you can see why this is important.”

She said she had made her position clear at a meeting with ACL directors on July 25, adding: “I had thought we were going to talk about a deal involving stadium ownership.”

At the time ACL had a relatively short lease, something like 45 years left to run. So the pertinent question would be at the meeting mentioned did Lucas make any mention of a 250 year lease being available? A 250 year lease is, to all intents and purposes, the same as freehold.