A Deal, what do you think? (1 Viewer)

Seems a sensible idea, but not sure that SISU and ACL would even consider talking to each other at the moment

Sorry but I want SISU gone.

The club must stay in Coventry, not warwickshire...that's not acceptable.

If that happened they might as well rename them Warwickshire United!

It's SISU gone for me, gone and not coming back.

I'm fed up of Fisher, seppella and all those unknown investors!

Transparancy is the key!

As said before, I would do it for cost if that's less than £400k.

No excuses, no way out, what more can be argued about. Nobody loses then, and nobody can waste time arguing the technicalities.

Nobody has given in either, as this is a deal dependent on a new stadium actually happening, so there is no room for a quiet extension of the deal in 3 years time.

Steve.B50 said:

Agreed we all want the same but this way we all win and it proves who is walking the walk or talking the talk.

Click to expand...

A stadium built in Warwickshire would mean that the fans who support the club largely because of their proud Coventry identity will certainly not have won....

Steve.B50 said:

I used the 400k as a starter and that's less than the what Walsall pay a year.

Click to expand...

I find the arguments on who pays what (both for and against the ACL position!) counterproductive.

Once it gets into an argument about numbers, then nobody wins. It's why I'd suggest cost as nobody loses then either. I don't want to bankrupt ACL, but I do want the best chance of my team playing in Coventry.

Steve.B50 said:

Some want SISU out full stop, others blame ACL.
No one wants to play home games away.

I think 'the some' should be 'a lot' if not 'most' agree with the 'home games away'

If we look at both sides and want to find out who is telling the truth then do a deal.

ACL let SISU play at the Ricoh for the next three years for £400k plus a little extra for each cup game.
This is good business sense from both sides.- Not sure it is good for the arena, assisting SISU to move the club away from Coventry? Yeh they get 3 years out of them but they then move away.

Interspersed with some of my thoughts:-

ACL get the revenue for three years while they also look for other usages forth stadium.
Would also prove they want the football club.
Why cut of your nose to spite your face?
If they are genuine in there belief the move will not be permanent then do the deal.

SISU would be keeping the fans happy - There is now only one way they will ever make me happy, well 2 the second is to buy Villa and that won't happen.
Build a new stadium in Warwickshire. -??
Save a great deal of money - to line their pockets with ?
Keep everyone employed including match day staff. - This is a good point
If they are genuine in building a stadium and commitment to the fans they will do the deal. - They have absolutely no commitment to me. Contacted them a few times and not 1 reply.

My thoughts?

Steve

Click to expand...

Interserpsed with some of my thoughts.

Deleted member 5849 said:

As said before, I would do it for cost if that's less than £400k.

No excuses, no way out, what more can be argued about. Nobody loses then, and nobody can waste time arguing the technicalities.

Nobody has given in either, as this is a deal dependent on a new stadium actually happening, so there is no room for a quiet extension of the deal in 3 years time.

Click to expand...

ACL lose hugely, they are making no profit and tieing up the stadium on over a third of the weekends of the year pretty much guaranteeing they can't meet their mortgage payments. At the end of it they have no tenent. SISU wins greatly and it's of course a much much preferable situation for the Coventry fans and the club than what SISU are currently planning, but it's really unreasonable to the ricoh and acl. You say no one is giving in but acl absolutly would be, sisu already offered them a better deal than you are suggesting and they turned it down at the time that acl offered sisu a deal 100times better for them than they are currently planning.

Deleted member 5849 said:

I find the arguments on who pays what (both for and against the ACL position!) counterproductive.

Once it gets into an argument about numbers, then nobody wins. It's why I'd suggest cost as nobody loses then either. I don't want to bankrupt ACL, but I do want the best chance of my team playing in Coventry.

Click to expand...

cost is bankrupting acl because they don't have the rent coming in to pay the mortgage and don't have the ability to bring in money from more concerts etc because the stadium is still tied up. It's likely this situation you suggest is worse for acl than having no ccfc at all. not straight away but certainly in years 2 and 3 of your deal.

Delboycov said:

A stadium built in Warwickshire would mean that the fans who support the club largely because of their proud Coventry identity will certainly not have won....

Click to expand...

There was a thread on here a while ago where people were claiming that Coventry is in Warwickshire?

Noggin said:

ACL lose hugely, they are making no profit and tieing up the stadium on over a third of the weekends of the year pretty much guaranteeing they can't meet their mortgage payments. At the end of it they have no tenent. SISU wins greatly and it's of course a much much preferable situation for the Coventry fans and the club than what SISU are currently planning, but it's really unreasonable to the ricoh and acl. You say no one is giving in but acl absolutly would be, sisu already offered them a better deal than you are suggesting and they turned it down at the time that acl offered sisu a deal 100times better for them than they are currently planning.

Click to expand...

Why are you so concerned about how much profit ACL would make?

Noggin said:

ACL lose hugely, they are making no profit and tieing up the stadium on over a third of the weekends of the year pretty much guaranteeing they can't meet their mortgage payments.

Click to expand...

That's why they do it at cost, so they can meet their mortgage payments.

That's also better than an empty stadium, they pay down their mortgage and have time to find a new use for it. Also, as owned by a council and charity, they have more room to move on providing a service than a pure business. I'm not asking them to run the stadium at a loss for those three years, I'm not asking them to subsidise the club.

At the end of it they have no tenent.

Click to expand...

Three years is plenty of time to find a new one. Let's be generous and give SISU a year to actually firm up new stadium proposals, then two years is plenty of time also.

SISU wins greatly and it's of course a much much preferable situation for the Coventry fans and the club than what SISU are currently planning, but it's really unreasonable to the ricoh and acl.

Click to expand...

I don;t see how it is unreasonable. What's far less reasonable is ending up with no team there in a month, and a facility slowly decays to nothing so even if the club wanted to move back, it'd need plenty of investment to get back up to scratch.

You say no one is giving in but acl absolutly would be

Click to expand...

They wouldn't, much as letting the club play the last three games wasn't giving in. What it is showing is that ACL really do have the interests of the club at heart first and foremost, it's not losing them money, and as mentioned it gives SISU a chance to allow their exit strategy to play out.

But the club would be in Coventry as it plays out.

Noggin said:

cost is bankrupting acl because they don't have the rent coming in to pay the mortgage and don't have the ability to bring in money from more concerts etc because the stadium is still tied up. It's likely this situation you suggest is worse for acl than having no ccfc at all. not straight away but certainly in years 2 and 3 of your deal.

Click to expand...

But I'm not suggesting they offer a deal that costs them money to open it!

That won't bankrupt them.

Sorry OP but If you havnt recognised there are certain posters who show traits of vested interests on the boards and youve just posted someone elses strategy

This board gets more like the xfiles everyday!

wingy said:

Sorry OP but If you havnt recognised there are certain posters who show traits of vested interests on the boards and youve just posted someone elses strategy

Click to expand...

What exactly do you mean by that?!?

Sick Boy said:

Why are you so concerned about how much profit ACL would make?

Click to expand...

Took the words out of my mouth

Deleted member 5849 said:

That's why they do it at cost, so they can meet their mortgage payments.

That's also better than an empty stadium, they pay down their mortgage and have time to find a new use for it. Also, as owned by a council and charity, they have more room to move on providing a service than a pure business. I'm not asking them to run the stadium at a loss for those three years, I'm not asking them to subsidise the club.



Three years is plenty of time to find a new one. Let's be generous and give SISU a year to actually firm up new stadium proposals, then two years is plenty of time also.



I don;t see how it is unreasonable. What's far less reasonable is ending up with no team there in a month, and a facility slowly decays to nothing so even if the club wanted to move back, it'd need plenty of investment to get back up to scratch.



They wouldn't, much as letting the club play the last three games wasn't giving in. What it is showing is that ACL really do have the interests of the club at heart first and foremost, it's not losing them money, and as mentioned it gives SISU a chance to allow their exit strategy to play out.

But the club would be in Coventry as it plays out.

Click to expand...

I assumed you meant cost as in the running the costs. If by cost you mean the amount that ACL need to break even that is of course much better for ACL than I assumed you meant but it quite possibly might be as high or higher than the 400k, its also extremely difficult to do, if you make this deal than acl are in a situation where there is no benefit to them to arrange anything at all, sisu are going to make sure they break even and as they bring in more money the amount sisu pays drops, so acl will have to bring in over 400k of new business before it gives them any benefit at all, so why bother? they can also bring in less than they normally do and it does them no harm.

There is probably a way to do this deal fairly but it's really complex.

what happens if it takes 4 years instead of 3 too? acl would need to be booking other people in for the 4th year

Sick Boy said:

Why are you so concerned about how much profit ACL would make?

Click to expand...

I don't care about ACL anymore than I care about any other business, but if you want them to agree a deal it has to be reasonable.

The club needs revenue for FFP, otherwise we can't compete on the pitch.

The best way I can see is for PH4 to buy 50% of the Ricoh, and try to get things restructured financially to get as much revenue going through the club as possible.

Noggin said:

I assumed you meant cost as in the running the costs. If by cost you mean the amount that ACL need to break even that is of course much better for ACL than I assumed you meant but it quite possibly might be as high or higher than the 400k, its also extremely difficult to do, if you make this deal than acl are in a situation where there is no benefit to them to arrange anything at all, sisu are going to make sure they break even and as they bring in more money the amount sisu pays drops, so acl will have to bring in over 400k of new business before it gives them any benefit at all, so why bother? they can also bring in less than they normally do and it does them no harm.

There is probably a way to do this deal fairly but it's really complex.

Click to expand...

No I definitely mean break even on opening the stadium, I never have wanted ACL to run at a loss as that defeats the purpose also.

But yes, now you explain it I understand your point about breaking even on the site as a whole! I was hoping for a happy medium where nobody can argue about numbers and they can just do a deal, but this does indeed seem hard work!

what happens if it takes 4 years instead of 3 too? acl would need to be booking other people in for the 4th year

Click to expand...

I think it's safe to say if no bricks and mortar are going up, then it's not going to happen and SISU will be on their way.

If fans could see the shell of a ground up, many would probably accept moving somewhere else until it was actually opened. That's a whole different argument to the present, where all we have at the moment is a bloke saying he's building a ground, which carries as much weight as if I say I'm doing the same!

Why would ACL agree to let the scum bags back when SISU have lost control of the club so ACL will be dealing with new owners very soon.

Nonsense, we can't compromise with SISU. They have to go, that is the only way forward.

SISU have already asked ACL for a run off deal of 3 years and this was rejected.
The only way CCFC will return to the Ricoh is under new ownership.
As for TF being replaced, JS is calling the shots, so replacing him with ANO will not solve the problem

I don't think people recognise where we're at.

Steve.B50 said:

Some want SISU out full stop, others blame ACL.
No one wants to play home games away.

If we look at both sides and want to find out who is telling the truth then do a deal.

ACL let SISU play at the Ricoh for the next three years for £400k plus a little extra for each cup game.
This is good business sense from both sides.

ACL get the revenue for three years while they also look for other usages forth stadium.
Would also prove they want the football club.
Why cut of your nose to spite your face?
If they are genuine in there belief the move will not be permanent then do the deal.

SISU would be keeping the fans happy
Build a new stadium in Warwickshire
Save a great deal of money
Keep everyone employed including match day staff.
If they are genuine in building a stadium and commitment to the fans they will do the deal.

My thoughts?

Steve

Click to expand...

Still trying to pretend sitting on the fence is a viable premise I see. This is a ridiculous plan based on a ridiculous premise. At BEST. all it does is get the fans of the backs off sisu and gives them precious breathing space to either get another sight signed off, or worse 3 years down the line sisu coming back and whinging how this rent is far too high for a blue square team!

When will you face the fact that you CANNOT compromise with someone who is NOT prepared to compromise!

It's all very well sitting around the table from TF, and I'm sure it gives you a massive ego massage, but it is POINTLESS if you are not taken seriously by these people. You have in the past asked a not unreasonable request to turn down the tannoy.

Now surely this would cost Nothing for sisu, and would make the match day experience better for everyone, but sisu wouldn't even do that. Did they say to you they would do it? Did they even say they would consider it?

If they will not even listen to you on such a trivial matter, that could have helped relations between the fans and the owners, what makes you think they are going to consider your opinion on the day to day running of the club?

How can you NOT see they are playing you for mugs. It allows them the ability to say they are listening to the fans. You have been played by sisu - HOW can you NOT see this?

And when you add to that however good intentioned your idea MIGHT be, it at the very least smacks of siding with the people for what is abundantly clear a significant proportion of the fans consider the enemy. Sure you are entitled to your own opinion, but as a member of the board, you run the risk of people mistaking YOUR personal view for that of your organisation.

There simply can be no more compromise with sisu. We give they take. Have sisu budged even one inch since this all came out? If anything they have become even MORE intransigent - which in itself is an achievement!

A hedge fund can only be hurt in the wallet. Sisu are riding rough shod over the fans. Is there ANY evidence from day one they have taken the fans views into consideration?

I'm sorry but it is a ridiculous proposition. If sisu were prepared to compromise then MAYBE it would have credence, but all it would do is prolong this whole sorry story!

Actions need to be done and done NOW! NO delays! SHouldn't need a poll every time you have to make a decision. as an ELECTED board you supposedly have a mandate to make decisions for your group.

Certainly the longer you delay the more you expose yourselves to criticism.

But that's up to you ultimately.

Well said that man.

Im sure its the same old threads in here. Im sick of all this now i really am. Its so depressing!!