To Stay or Go (4 Viewers)

[stupot07]

Did the RICOH ever receive Community Asset Status?
What is this meh I see on here occasionally
Too long in the tooth to get it

No it didn't.

Meh is....

exclamation
1.
expressing a lack of interest or enthusiasm.
"meh, I'm not impressed so far"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

---

[wingy]

No it didn't.

Meh is....

exclamation
1.
expressing a lack of interest or enthusiasm.
"meh, I'm not impressed so far"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Cheers Stu

 

[Nick]

When should we expect the headline "City fans want to leave the Ricoh" from the results?

 

[Grendel]

When should we expect the headline "City fans want to leave the Ricoh" from the results?

Good point.

"Nearly 70% of supporters want to leave the wasps arena" would be a good title.

I'm sure Simon and Alan are on the case now.

 

[skybluetony176]

Why is now the best time to it? Any new deal will replace the current one, and with wasps new debt commitments it is very likely rent will be significantly higher than the £100k (plus matchday costs) we currently pay and I'd guess we'd get less access to revenues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Because in just over 1 year they have the option to boot us out. The closer we get to that point and then the end of extended two year period should we get it the weaker our bargaining position becomes.

What it ends up as largely depends on SISU's ability to negotiate.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

We have a deal here. Let's keep all options open, but concentrate on the here and now and the product on the pitch. We get promoted and CCFC will look a much more attractive proposition, should anyone be looking to take us over.

We will be attractive based on what? We will still be in a worse position and less attractive than when we were last taken over, and we weren't an attractive prospect then either as evidenced because we ended up with shit heads like SISU in charge.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Why is now the best time to it? Any new deal will replace the current one, and with wasps new debt commitments it is very likely rent will be significantly higher than the £100k (plus matchday costs) we currently pay and I'd guess we'd get less access to revenues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I don't doubt that any new deal would have a higher rent, but I wouldn't say they have more debt commitments, the bond was mainly consolidating other debts, it's unlikely the commitments under the bond are more expensive than the loans they were paying off.

 

[Grendel]

Because in just over 1 year they have the option to boot us out. The closer we get to that point and then the end of extended two year period should we get it the weaker our bargaining position becomes.

What it ends up as largely depends on SISU's ability to negotiate.

How do you know there aren't discussions taking place?

 

[wingy]

I don't doubt that any new deal would have a higher rent, but I wouldn't say they have more debt commitments, the bond was mainly consolidating other debts, it's unlikely the commitments under the bond are more expensive than the loans they were paying off.

Very similar levels but over a much tighter timescale

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Very similar levels but over a much tighter timescale

Also in a general sense, debts to owners are often looser in the consequences for not paying than when the debt goes outside.

Hell, even our owners don't demand the cash back when it's due(!)

 

[skybluetony176]

How do you know there aren't discussions taking place?

I don't and I never suggested they weren't.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Very similar levels but over a much tighter timescale

Possibly, but seeing as how popular their bond turned out I'd say the likelihood of putting another bond out in 7 years time will be pretty high, I would think most people investing now would do so again, they just have to meet the interest payments, which of course part of the bond funds. So, a good chance of a longer timescale.

Anyway, the point being, I think most agree that it's unlikely rent of £100k will be renewed.

 

[wingy]

Possibly, but seeing as how popular their bond turned out I'd say the likelihood of putting another bond out in 7 years time will be pretty high, I would think most people investing now would do so again, they just have to meet the interest payments, which of course part of the bond funds. So, a good chance of a longer timescale.

Anyway, the point being, I think most agree that it's unlikely rent of £100k will be renewed.

Be cheaper to strike it now than at the
eleventh hour IMO

Edit ;- A good naming rights deal could possibly fund a large chunk of that

However If it's the same Company sponsoring both the team and Stadia they may prefer to channel the majority to the team

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Be cheaper to strike it now than at the eleventh hour IMO

Probably.

There's also at least *some* lip service to doing right by the club (however much it's believed or not!) from the former owners of ACL, so can play on that atm, too.

Might not be that chance later.

 

[wingy]

Probably.

There's also at least *some* lip service to doing right by the club (however much it's believed or not!) from the former owners of ACL, so can play on that atm, too.

Might not be that chance later.

Yeah agree

 

[BackRoomRummermill]

Best question posted on here in a long time.

I say say stay at Ricoh , it's commutable from town and the motorway and is a beautiful stadia.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Yeah agree

Yup, my own personal view is they negotiate a five year deal, say.

They can then turn round and say, 'see, we're committed to Coventry, we're looking at land just outside, but see how we're committed to Coventry. You (in the form of the council) say you're committed to Coventry City. So now we've shown we're committed to the city, can you help us move forward by working with us to find land in the city for our own ground? We've shown our commitment, so now you show yours.'

Would if nothing else turn the question round to other parties.

 

[wingy]

Yup, my own personal view is they negotiate a five year deal, say.

They can then turn round and say, 'see, we're committed to Coventry, we're looking at land just outside, but see how we're committed to Coventry. You (in the form of the council) say you're committed to Coventry City. So now we've shown we're committed to the city, can you help us move forward by working with us to find land in the city for our own ground? We've shown our commitment, so now you show yours.'

Would if nothing else turn the question round to other parties.

Sounds just about plausible to me except for the timescale
Firstly because ten yrs as a minimum to allow some healing and the landscape to change
Secondly to pull the plan, permissions funding etc together
Thirdl,, a ten yr deal/ commitment should bring a reduced rental rate hopefully

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Sounds just about plausible to me except for the timescale
Firstly because ten yrs as a minimum to allow some healing and the landscape to change
Secondly to pull the plan, permissions funding etc together
Thirdl,, a ten yr deal/ commitment should bring a reduced rental rate hopefully

Five years probably the best balance between showing commitment, getting commitment for a ground to actually happen... not giving enough security to the landlords to guarantee their survival, so giving the opportunity to switch to Plan B if the chance presents itself.

And if a ground were actually coming along come year four of a deal, then surely, *surely* public opinion would ensure a deal could be extended rather than rendering us homeless?

 

[stupot07]

Five years probably the best balance between showing commitment, getting commitment for a ground to actually happen... not giving enough security to the landlords to guarantee their survival, so giving the opportunity to switch to Plan B if the chance presents itself.

And if a ground were actually coming along come year four of a deal, then surely, *surely* public opinion would ensure a deal could be extended rather than rendering us homeless?

Agreed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[wingy]

Aren't there stipulations from the FL with regard to length of lease / License to play at a venue
We didn't do very well with our last game of poker
Where would we play the next time should we fail to agree terms? :-(

 

[skybluetony176]

Aren't there stipulations from the FL with regard to length of lease / License to play at a venue
We didn't do very well with our last game of poker
Where would we play the next time should we fail to agree terms? :-(

I think the shortest official length of lease is 10years but the FL have already accepted the Ricoh as our temporary home and have allowed us to take a shorter deal so it's now a non point.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Aren't there stipulations from the FL with regard to length of lease / License to play at a venue
We didn't do very well with our last game of poker
Where would we play the next time should we fail to agree terms? :-(

They were prepared to relax them for us going, they were prepared to relax them for us returning. If the plan is to move somewhere else then they'd be happy.

If a ground were still nothing than a few press statements in five years time, then the least of our worries would be where to play, as chances are we'd be talking about a new CCFC rising from the ashes and struggling to avoid relegation from the Evo-Stick league Midland division!

(And then w'd be looking to play at the Butts surely, rather than handicapping us with a massive stadium early doors?)

 

[stupot07]

Aren't there stipulations from the FL with regard to length of lease / License to play at a venue
We didn't do very well with our last game of poker
Where would we play the next time should we fail to agree terms? :-(

The deal should be a min of 10 years but. The FL have shown they will be flexible if needed.

Your second question is the danger regardless of whether we're negotiating a short term or long term deal. Wasps aren't here to do us any favours, it will be all about making the maximum amount of money from us as they can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[wingy]

The deal should be a min of 10 years but. The FL have shown they will be flexible if needed.

Your second question is the danger regardless of whether we're negotiating a short term or long term deal. Wasps aren't here to do us any favours, it will be all about making the maximum amount of money from us as they can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Yeah Its Commecial business and would likely again get dirty

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The league rules state
13.9 Subject to any dispensations granted by the Board, a Club shall either own its ground or have a legally enforceable agreement with its ground's owner for its use by the Club, expiring not earlier than the end of the current Season.


It's been reported a few times that 10 years is the minimum, so not sure how rule 13.9 comes about.

 

[Sick Boy]

The question should be: Would you be prepared to move if the deal meant CCC and Wasps would do very nicely indeed. The majority on here wouldn't be able to press the YES option quick enough. Sad reading through this thread.

Depressing, isn't it? We also have the Sky Blue Trust cosying up Wasps and CCC as well, still waiting to get their egos stroked and their share of the limelight.

The days of the football club being the priority are long gone. They now seem more interested that the Council and Wasps do well. They also ignore Wasps raising money against the Ricoh. Wasn't this their reason as to why ccfc should not own the Ricoh?

 

[Otis]

We will be attractive based on what? We will still be in a worse position and less attractive than when we were last taken over, and we weren't an attractive prospect then either as evidenced because we ended up with shit heads like SISU in charge.

What, you think we will be just less as attractive as a promoted, winning team as we would be a struggling League One team?

:thinking about:

 

[Limey]

Yep. I'd take a properly designed 18k ground for football

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

What, you think we will be just less as attractive as a promoted, winning team as we would be a struggling League One team?

:thinking about:

I don't think that, I think we still be an unattractive prospect. Just maybe slightly less unattractive than 12 months ago.

And tbh I don't think it will make a massive amount of difference anyway, a promotion or relegation can happen any year.

They will be more interested in the infrastructure and sustainability of the business, a league one team who off the pitch is set up to compete in the championship is a more attractive prospect than a championship team who off the pitch has the set up of a league 1 club.

 

[The Gentleman]

In answer to the OP, no. Reason being that we have no clue what a viable option is because Sisu have no clue what they are doing so how can they show us a viable option.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

If we can't have the Ricoh, and there was a nice shiny alternative in the right location - fine (then we can reap the pie income benefits etc). Who wouldn't want that? But....there isn't at the moment or in the foreseeable future :thinking about:

 

[Como]

I always though the Ricoh was too far out and the ground should be nearer the center so voted Yes.

 

[torchomatic]

Why would be attractive to an investor? We are just a name and a golden share. We don't have anything tangible that would want to make anyone want to pump in a ton of money, have we?

What, you think we will be just less as attractive as a promoted, winning team as we would be a struggling League One team?

:thinking about:

 

[Otis]

If we can't have the Ricoh, and there was a nice shiny alternative in the right location - fine (then we can reap the pie income benefits etc). Who wouldn't want that? But....there isn't at the moment or in the foreseeable future :thinking about:

You kind of get the feeling though that if Sisu left, land would suddenly become available in Coventry.

Might not seem very fair, but then CCC have absolutely zero percent trust in our current owners for sure. Pretty sure they must be thinking that they would renege on any agreement.

That's not saying that the council are much better, but there is too much bad blood there I think. A new owner saying the right things and land might just magically appear.