ACL £1m profit? (5 Viewers)

[CJparker]

A lock out is effectively closure as fixture fulfilment means closure. This was pointed out to you at which point you declared that I made you feel sick.

Many posters interpreted the comment to mean you would be prepared for the winding up of the club if ACL did not get the "reasonable" £1.2. million rent. You made no attempt to counter this view and in fact went again on the attack the following week demanding ACL wind the club up.

No, the leap of logic is all yours - clearly I never said what you claimed.

Also, I have vigourously and repeatedly further refuted others "interpretations" (thanks for acknowledging that's what they were, not a statement of belief by me) - you may have missed them but clearly I am not going to replay all the time, just as you don't.

Apology accepted.

 

---

[GaryPendrysEyes]

Unfortunately SBT that makes no sense. Sisu are purely a finance Capitalist organisation, who like most other capitalist companies make money from workers. They have no affinity to those workers and to suggest 'backing' is a joke.

At least the whole council (not just new Labour by the way) have some interest in the people of Coventry and the long term interest of the City.

 

[Waldorf]

Quango: a quasi nongovernmental organization; an organization that is financed by the government yet acts independently of the government.

Certainly fits the bill.

Except ACL isn't funded by anyone. It's a company that trades, just like CCFC. The difference is, ACL makes a profit.

 

[Grendel]

No, the leap of logic is all yours - clearly I never said what you claimed.

Also, I have vigourously and repeatedly further refuted others "interpretations" (thanks for acknowledging that's what they were, not a statement of belief by me) - you may have missed them but clearly I am not going to replay all the time, just as you don't.

Apology accepted.

Ah ok so you wanted the club wound up and locked out for not paying the reasonable rent but you don't associate such actions with closure. Ok of course.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Unfortunately SBT that makes no sense. Sisu are purely a finance Capitalist organisation, who like most other capitalist companies make money from workers. They have no affinity to those workers and to suggest 'backing' is a joke.

At least the whole council (not just new Labour by the way) have some interest in the people of Coventry and the long term interest of the City.

Missing the general picture given:

Proletarian football club v bourgeoisie council.

They have back the club this season, hence 20 new players this season.

Both SISU and the CCC have something in common: both exploit workers.

 

[Grendel]

Except ACL isn't funded by anyone. It's a company that trades, just like CCFC. The difference is, ACL makes a profit.

The difference is the money lender is the landlord and it has one main tenant and without council assistance the cash flow issues would have caused untold difficulties.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Except ACL isn't funded by anyone. It's a company that trades, just like CCFC. The difference is, ACL makes a profit.

What about that 14m bailout?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-21033825

 

[Waldorf]

What about that 14m bailout?

It's called "restructuring debt" and all sensible businesses do it. Why would a company that was making a (growing) profit need bailing out?

 

[Grendel]

It's called "restructuring debt" and all sensible businesses do it. Why would a company that was making a (growing) profit need bailing out?

I bet you even posted that with a straight face

 

[Waldorf]

I bet you even posted that with a straight face

So explain to me why it was a nail-out, and why ACL needed it

 

[CJparker]

Ah ok so you wanted the club wound up and locked out for not paying the reasonable rent but you don't associate such actions with closure. Ok of course.

Are you going to find some evidence that I "wanted the club wound up"?? No smoking gun in sight, as yet.

The best you could do was a totally pathetic "others' interpretation...which you failed to refute" - I have never heard anything so lame.

 

[Grendel]

So explain to me why it was a nail-out, and why ACL needed it

They needed it because they could not make payments without affecting cash flow. Remember with a healthy balance short you can still have cash flow issues.

The terms will have been drastically altered now in their favour and the council can do what it likes regarding payment deferral should similar problems occur. So effectively it is a private company using local government funding.

 

[Grendel]

Are you going to find some evidence that I "wanted the club wound up"?? No smoking gun in sight, as yet.

The best you could do was a totally pathetic "others' interpretation...which you failed to refute" - I have never heard anything so lame.

So what did you mean when you said you wanted the winding up order issued and the club forced out - what is your interpretation.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

Missing the general picture given:

Proletarian football club v bourgeoisie council.

They have back the club this season, hence 20 new players this season.

Both SISU and the CCC have something in common: both exploit workers.

No. It is not a 'Proletarian football club' it is a Capitalist hedge fund who acquired a football club as an investment opportunity- revenue is generated from (mainly) working class 'consumers'. They dont 'back' anything culturally or socially- they invest for their aims (which they have failed miserably on). You choose to spend a lot of time defending what many would describe as one of the most 'unacceptable faces' of capitalism a hedge fund.

ACL/Higgs and the (whole) Council at least have some social democratic basis in representing the interests of the people of Coventry.

 

[CJparker]

So what did you mean when you said you wanted the winding up order issued and the club forced out - what is your interpretation.

My interpretation is I have explained many times - but nobody seems to notice/remember. Such an action would force SISU to realise they cannot get more out of the council, and that therefore their ownership of CCFC is financially unviable - it will force SISU to leave and allow a new owner to come in. But unless ACL forces the issue, it won't happen and SISU will stay.

I do not share your view that our survival as club depends on SISU's continued ownership - but we won't know either way until they leave. The council have an opportunity to force SISU out, so I am keen that they do it, for the benefit of everyone. I don't give a fuck about ACL or their finances per se, but I have followed the whole saga with the mindset of a neutral, not a CCFC fan, to help me judge objectively what is going on. Clearly, to anyone other than die hards, SISU do not have a leg to stand on in their claims that the council are being unreasonable.

SISU are not owed a free ground, they have no contributed to the Ricoh so have no automatic right to revenue streams etc, and yet they talk as if the world owes them a living, as if the simple fact we are CCFC makes us a special case. Not on planet Earth, darling. Other councils have chosen to be generous by handing out grounds for free and on feeble rents - as a taxpayer first and a fan second, I am pleased CCC did not do so.

The "league one average rent" argument is like someone living in a mansion on a street of bungalows demanding why his council tax / rent is so much higher - it's called sticking your head up your own arse.

Can you please find some evidence that I want the club wound up? I am getting tired of asking. You never admit you are wrong and just sit their spitting poison without offering anything positive.

 

[Grendel]

My interpretation is I have explained many times - but nobody seems to notice/remember. Such an action would force SISU to realise they cannot get more out of the council, and that therefore their ownership of CCFC is financially unviable - it will force SISU to leave and allow a new owner to come in. But unless ACL forces the issue, it won't happen and SISU will stay.

I do not share your view that our survival as club depends on SISU's continued ownership - but we won't know either way until they leave. The council have an opportunity to force SISU out, so I am keen that they do it, for the benefit of everyone. I don't give a feck about ACL or their finances per se, but I have followed the whole saga with the mindset of a neutral, not a CCFC fan, to help me judge objectively what is going on. Clearly, to anyone other than die hards, SISU do not have a leg to stand on in their claims that the council are being unreasonable.

SISU are not owed a free ground, they have no contributed to the Ricoh so have no automatic right to revenue streams etc, and yet they talk as if the world owes them a living, as if the simple fact we are CCFC makes us a special case. Not on planet Earth, darling. Other councils have chosen to be generous by handing out grounds for free and on feeble rents - as a taxpayer first and a fan second, I am pleased CCC did not do so.

The "league one average rent" argument is like someone living in a mansion on a street of bungalows demanding why his council tax / rent is so much higher - it's called sticking your head up your own arse.

Can you please find some evidence that I want the club wound up? I am getting tired of asking. You never admit you are wrong and just sit their spitting poison without offering anything positive.

You said many times you wanted a winding up order served. I cannot see anyone else say that and this is over the initial rent which most conclude was morally disgusting, so if sisu refused after a winding up order served what then? The club is wound up.

As for spotting poison you should look at your comments to the likes of myself, torch, SBT etc all of whom clearly have the best interests of the club at heart.

 

[CJparker]

You said many times you wanted a winding up order served. I cannot see anyone else say that and this is over the initial rent which most conclude was morally disgusting, so if sisu refused after a winding up order served what then? The club is wound up.

As for spotting poison you should look at your comments to the likes of myself, torch, SBT etc all of whom clearly have the best interests of the club at heart.

So, to conclude, not my comments at all. Your interpretation of them. Totally ignoring my repeated clarifications.

The vast and growing majority of fans know that SISU's continued ownership is not in the best interests of the club. Therefore, getting rid of them is a priority. I fail to see why this is not obvious to you.

There is a difference between "wanting the best for the club" and supporting SISU's immoral actions just because they are carried out in the name of CCFC. You have never convincingly argued why, when any private sector institution would have never accepted a return of much below £1m per year on an investment of up to £30m, why a council should do so. In fact, every time I and others demolish you, you just pop up again sniping at some minor point, without addressing the big issues.

You seem to now be pathologically defending SISU from any attack, real or imaging, presumably because you don't want to lose face and admit you were wrong. You need to accept that I and others also love CCFC but our view of what is best is genuine, regardless of whether you agree with it.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You didn't explicitly want the club bust but you did explicitly want winding up orders to be issued and the club to be chucked out the Ricoh. Either of those things would carry real chances of busting the club and that is what makes such views hard to fathom.

 

[CJparker]

You didn't explicitly want the club bust but you did explicitly want winding up orders to be issued and the club to be chucked out the Ricoh. Either of those things would carry real chances of busting the club and that is what makes such views hard to fathom.

But you accept I didn't say that I want the club to go under?

The rest is your interpretation, not my statement.

How's the search going?

 

[hill83]

People calling this bullying the other day. He's asking for it. :facepalm:

 

[coundonskyblue]

Missing the general picture given:

Proletarian football club v bourgeoisie council.

They have back the club this season, hence 20 new players this season.

Both SISU and the CCC have something in common: both exploit workers.

Sisu exploit their workers?

If giving David Bell a 4 year contract (being paid thousands of pounds a week), for playing a couple of games of football a season is exploitation, then I am more than willing to be exploited!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Sisu exploit their workers?

If giving David Bell a 4 year contract (being paid thousands of pounds a week), for playing a couple of games of football a season is exploitation, then I am more than willing to be exploited!

Do you know how wrong that sounds!

 

[CJparker]

People calling this bullying the other day. He's asking for it. :facepalm:

Care to expand?

All I am trying to do is explode the mindset of some of our fans that we are entitled to a cushy deal. I am trying to inject a dose of cold reality into the collective bloodstream. I shouldn't bother, as instead of listen to reason people just accuse me of disloyalty and worse, and question my motives as a City fan.

In fact don't bother to reply, can't be bothered to spend another 3 hours painstakingly refuting the same tired old arguments and forcing people to admit they have made up quotes by me.

 

[hill83]

Care to expand?

All I am trying to do is explode the mindset of some of our fans that we are entitled to a cushy deal. I am trying to inject a dose of cold reality into the collective bloodstream. I shouldn't bother, as instead of listen to reason people just accuse me of disloyalty and worse, and question my motives as a City fan.

In fact don't bother to reply, can't be bothered to spend another 3 hours painstakingly refuting the same tired old arguments and forcing people to admit they have made up quotes by me.

Some of us got called out for finding quotes of yours, and it was called bullying.
You were specifically asking for people to find these quotes.
That is all.

And they are not made up. They are there in black and white. Maybe they are open to interpretation, but the quotes are not made up.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

But you accept I didn't say that I want the club to go under?

The rest is your interpretation, not my statement.

How's the search going?

I accept that you may not have explicitly said that you want the club to go under. The rest is what any logical person would be led to believe-come on, do you think the club would be able to survive from being thrown out of the stadium? Let's say that happened and we went down the Nene Park route-given that the capacity of that ground is smaller than the number of City ST holders, we would have to exclude lots of fans from going to home games and lose even more money.

Has it occurred to you that there are plenty of fans outwith this forum who don't care about ACL or SISU and just want to watch their club play football? Nobody else on here so fervently wants their club to suffer-it's just plain baffling. You also have said on this thread that SISU's departure 'may or may not lead to the club going out of business-the only way to find out for sure is for them to leave'. No fan would want to take a risk on losing their club simply to eject the current owners. I want them gone but only if there is fresh investment in the wings to take over-which there just isn't at this moment in time.

 

[CJparker]

Some of us got called out for finding quotes of yours, and it was called bullying.
You were specifically asking for people to find these quotes.
That is all.

And they are not made up. They are there in black and white. Maybe they are open to interpretation, but the quotes are not made up.

OK I see.

Actually, people were insisting on here that I had stated my preference for the club to be wound up / fold. That is not true and I challenged them to prove otherwise - they failed.

Yes, I have stated I wanted a tough line on SISU from ACL, but that is a million miles from wanting us to fold. The opposite, if anything.

 

[CJparker]

I accept that you may not have explicitly said that you want the club to go under. The rest is what any logical person would be led to believe-come on, do you think the club would be able to survive from being thrown out of the stadium? Let's say that happened and we went down the Nene Park route-given that the capacity of that ground is smaller than the number of City ST holders, we would have to exclude lots of fans from going to home games and lose even more money.

Has it occurred to you that there are plenty of fans outwith this forum who don't care about ACL or SISU and just want to watch their club play football? Nobody else on here so fervently wants their club to suffer-it's just plain baffling. You also have said on this thread that SISU's departure 'may or may not lead to the club going out of business-the only way to find out for sure is for them to leave'. No fan would want to take a risk on losing their club simply to eject the current owners. I want them gone but only if there is fresh investment in the wings to take over-which there just isn't at this moment in time.

I half agree with a lot of this, and thank you for being decent in acknowledging that you mis-understood me - fair enough.

Maybe I am guilty of wishful thinking, but I consider myself fairly logical and I doubt that we will ever fold, it just doesn't happen to clubs like us - call it complacent if you like but the record is there - no FL clubs gone bust in 19 years.

I am am heartily sick of the whole farcical thing - I support CCFC to enjoy football, not to debate the tax-efficency of debentures in the Cayman Islands. But ACL getting tough is the only way to bring matters to a head and get it over and done with - otherwise it will just drag on forever.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

Can we get back to Sisu Apologist #3 (SBT) defending Mayfair Hedge Fund SISU in the name of socialism.... it is a new first in Sisu apologism after allimp:

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I half agree with a lot of this, and thank you for being decent in acknowledging that you mis-understood me - fair enough.

Maybe I am guilty of wishful thinking, but I consider myself fairly logical and I doubt that we will ever fold, it just doesn't happen to clubs like us - call it complacent if you like but the record is there - no FL clubs gone bust in 19 years.

I am am heartily sick of the whole farcical thing - I support CCFC to enjoy football, not to debate the tax-efficency of debentures in the Cayman Islands. But ACL getting tough is the only way to bring matters to a head and get it over and done with - otherwise it will just drag on forever.

Just because something is without precedent doesn't prevent it from happening though CJ, since every case is unique. I'm confident that the club would continue to exist in one entity or another, but I don't want it dragged through the mud and have winding up orders served on it, or ground eviction measures either. You have called quite strongly for both and I just find that at odds with what any supporter would want for their club. Ground eviction would make going to 'home' games impractical for some regular fans or, as in the Nene Park scenario, physically impossible for others. This is one aspect of your wish that I don't think you've thought through.

I think we would survive a winding up petition if it came to one, but again it runs an unacceptable risk of the club folding and I'll never see why you want the chance taken. Answer me this:

Would you rather have CCFC exist with SISU at the helm, or not at all?

 

[Grendel]

Can we get back to Sisu Apologist #3 (SBT) defending Mayfair Hedge Fund SISU in the name of socialism.... it is a new first in Sisu apologism after allimp:

Am I 1 or 2?

 

[CJparker]

Just because something is without precedent doesn't prevent it from happening though CJ, since every case is unique. I'm confident that the club would continue to exist in one entity or another, but I don't want it dragged through the mud and have winding up orders served on it, or ground eviction measures either. You have called quite strongly for both and I just find that at odds with what any supporter would want for their club. Ground eviction would make going to 'home' games impractical for some regular fans or, as in the Nene Park scenario, physically impossible for others. This is one aspect of your wish that I don't think you've thought through.

I think we would survive a winding up petition if it came to one, but again it runs an unacceptable risk of the club folding and I'll never see why you want the chance taken. Answer me this:

Would you rather have CCFC exist with SISU at the helm, or not at all?

I would rather have CCFC without SISU - you pose a false choice. I support it as an unpalatable means to a fantastic end - no SISU

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

Wot your mental age?imp:

 

[torchomatic]

I think you'd be number one, top of the pops.

Am I 1 or 2?

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

I think you'd be number one, top of the pops.

Top of the cocks maybe

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I would rather have CCFC without SISU - you pose a false choice. I support it as an unpalatable means to a fantastic end - no SISU

Not what I asked-at the moment there is nobody else waiting with tens of millions of pounds ready to swoop and take the club off SISU. Their departure would lead to the club folding and needing to reform at a much, much lower level. This is not 'palatable' to me and I'm sure many other fans here.