ACL and the City Council announcement (2 Viewers)

BurbageSkyBlues

New Member
I feel the need to swear vociferously at some of the stupidity I am reading on here.
Thank God OldSkyBlue and a couple of others talk sense instead of the utter tripe regurgitated by the blind and blinkered idiots who can only think of football, and even then not with any real sense or intelligence.

When are the idiots going to realise that SISU are the bad boys here, not the council - who, let me remind you, voted UNANIMOUSLY on this measure, and that should tell anyone with an iota of intelligence how significant this measure is.



Some of the blinkered idiots on here remind me of people who get involved with online PONZI schemes. They blindly follow the cult-like company line, and against all logic refuse to see the truth, and then - should they realise that any money they get out of such schemes is being stolen from people dragged into the scheme further down the line - they justify themselves in all manner of ways but never admit the truth of what they know they are doing. They disgust me quite frankly when they say they don't care what nasty, nefarious or even illegal activity SISU and the club get up to as long as the club survives.

Has our poor club been mis-managed for so long that illegal activities are now acceptable to the average CCFC supporter? And yes - a court has determined that non-payment of the rent was illegal and issued an order to pay, which SISU have also ignored - a further act of illegality.

As I and others have said before, administration should have happened years ago. SISU did not "save" us, they merely deferred the inevitable in the hope that they could make a killing off the back of the demise of our club - in which, by the way, they have evinced zero real interest.
So what if we now go into admin? So we get deducted 10 points. The likelihood that we will make the playoffs are very small after the last two losses, but we should have enough points and good enough players to avoid relegation. We can then start next season hopefully with a clean slate and if we get very lucky with new owners who we like and who have the club at heart and who will keep MR and the better players at the club until we come out of administration.

As others have also stated, the blinkered idiots also need to realise that the council and ACL have done this with some serious planning, and I doubt they would have done this to secure the demise of the football club. It might even be that SISU have been involved in negotiations and know what is happening, or if this is not the case, I would be very surprised if CCC and ACL do not have a back-up plan should SISU decide to turn nasty.
But even if there is no backup plan, there is no excuse for SISU and their actions and their illegalities, and there is no excuse for some of you blindly supporting their nasty, nefarious and illegal activities.
Get a life.

Rant not over but suspended for a short time.

(note; through super-human restraint I have avoided swearing in the above post, although I can't swear that I won't if I have to respond to the usual crap some of the effin wankers on here are likely to post;))


Don't worry, Swiss, you are not alone in your sentiment.

IMO, most people can't be bothered to respond to some of the perpetual rubbish posted by a certain handful of some regulars on here. Trust in the silent majority!

The unanimous decision by the council shows that it is a consensus of all people's representatives that there is a need to protect both the city of Coventry AND Coventry City FC.from unhealthy manipulation and exploitation from uncaring forces from outside the region.

This is a decision that has been taken to protect the long term strategic development and prosperity of the club and the city of Coventry.
 

Flying Fokker

Well-Known Member
pgrs-sm.gif

clear1x1.gif
clear1x1.gif







pointless post.
 
Last edited:

DazzleTommyDazzle

Well-Known Member
No, obviously not. I was being flippant. There are no other options for a football stadium. Today;s action has shown that we are the stadium's cash cow.

You were flippant when your "well that proves ACL can't survive without CCFC" was challenged. I was being flippant in response to that......

I happen to disagree with your unproven assertion. As for a tenant that pays no rent being described as a "cash cow"...

(Don't worry, I'm only being flippant :) )
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Which ever way you try and spin, it's the same difference. ACL need the club as much as the club need the stadium.

but for ACL after today not as much as they did do :thinking about: and for ccfc, torch, that must be a worry
 
Last edited:

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Nah, don't believe that. The Ricoh without Coventry City is unthinkable. Both sides know that.

but for ACL after today not as much as they did do :thinking about: and for ccfc torch must be a worry
 

Bennets Afro

Well-Known Member
So what would people be thinking if the news today was that sisu had bought the mortgage from Yorkshire bank?
We would presume they would call it in and get the stadium on the cheap.
The council got in there first I think to protect the Ricoh and not being sold to the highest bidder and ccfc still being a tennant to someone who really doesn't care for the club.
Council surely now would have a say who if anyone the stadium would/ could be sold too
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
They've done pretty well for the last eight years of "good will" though, haven't they? Kerchhiinnnggg.

CCFC is currently still in business due to the good will of the Higgs Trust & the Council.
 

coundonskyblue

New Member
Nah, don't believe that. The Ricoh without Coventry City is unthinkable. Both sides know that.

I agree with you on this, which is why a deal needs to be done which is beneficial for both sides. However Sisu only seem interested in doing a deal thats beneficial for Sisu.
 

skybluegnome

Well-Known Member
"Coventry Council] have unanimously taken this decisionbecause they see a threat to the future of the Ricoh caused by theunprofessional and downright illegal actions of Sisu. They have decided to clearlysupport ACL/Higgs Trust."

The last sentence in that quote amused me....ACL is the Council....they would support themselves surely....:confused:
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
They've been paying the mortgage off quite easily with the £9M they've taken off us so far though, haven't they?

Neither of them have taken any money out of ACL.

If ACL was owned by a private company CCFC would have been thrown out months ago.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
They've done pretty well for the last eight years of "good will" though, haven't they? Kerchhiinnnggg.

Guess we shouldn't have sold out all those years ago then. If the club had been run at all competently none of this debacle would have happened. Of a lot more interest is what SISU do next, as was discussed earlier.
 

BurbageSkyBlues

New Member
Does it ? ...... or does it say that ACL is vulnerable to a football club and its owners that pay nothing at all since March 2012

Seems to me these events have had the effect of forcing ACL and its stakeholders into considering their structure and how ACL operates. Forced them to take action to insulate themselves from the football club entirely - is that such a good thing for CCFC and its future? Somehow doubt CCFC will be able to play these cards again.

It will save CCFC rent but somehow I think the club has lost other things by this dispute
Absolutely!
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Nah, don't believe that. The Ricoh without Coventry City is unthinkable. Both sides know that.

Pretty certain no one wants to see the Ricoh without CCFC but financially this whole dispute will have eroded the importance of CCFC to ACL. They do not trust CCFC's owners and that will impact on both the future of ACL and CCFC.

ACL have to insulate themselves from the risk to their finances that CCFC poses. That reduces CCFC from potential partner to just tenant ...... that pushes the prospect of obtaining some sort of ownership for the club further away, which in turn restricts the clubs finances.

My guess is a rent deal will be done but short to medium term this will have damaged CCFC much more than ACL in terms of the stadium
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Amazing isn't it, Lord? If I was one of those made redundant then I would be pretty pissed off tonight. Same goes for all those services axed.

Always shows that the Council can find the money when they want it. Like WCC turning off street lights to save £500K a year. They had to spend three times that to put timers on all the street lights. :facepalm:
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Well, ACL haven't insulated themselves at all, have they? The Council have done that on their behalf. Lucky them.

Pretty certain no one wants to see the Ricoh without CCFC but financially this whole dispute will have eroded the importance of CCFC to ACL. They do not trust CCFC's owners and that will impact on both the future of ACL and CCFC.

ACL have to insulate themselves from the risk to their finances that CCFC poses. That reduces CCFC from potential partner to just tenant ...... that pushes the prospect of obtaining some sort of ownership for the club further away, which in turn restricts the clubs finances.

My guess is a rent deal will be done but short to medium term this will have damaged CCFC much more than ACL in terms of the stadium
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
Amazing isn't it, Lord? If I was one of those made redundant then I would be pretty pissed off tonight. Same goes for all those services axed.

Always shows that the Council can find the money when they want it. Like WCC turning off street lights to save £500K a year. They had to spend three times that to put timers on all the street lights. :facepalm:

It seems that those that are celebrating the £14million that the council has put into ACL are the same ones who were worried that the rent not being paid by CCFC was impoverishing the poor council tax payers of Coventry.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Exactly! There were countless posts stating that SISU were ripping off the poor council and a charadee. It seems they weren't so poor, after all. :confused:

It seems that those that are celebrating the £14million that the council has put into ACL are the same ones who were worried that the rent not being paid by CCFC was impoverishing the poor council tax payers of Coventry.
 

coundonskyblue

New Member
It seems that those that are celebrating the £14million that the council has put into ACL are the same ones who were worried that the rent not being paid by CCFC was impoverishing the poor council tax payers of Coventry.

Thats because its a LOAN.

I suppose you think the Council & Charity should hand over a £113m asset for free?
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
Thats because its a LOAN.

I suppose you think the Council & Charity should hand over a £113m asset for free?

It's a loan made because ACL couldn't afford to pay Yorkshire Bank, hardly a loan based on sound business decisions.

Of course a £113 million asset shouldn't be handed over for free. Though a very small fraction of that alleged value was paid by either the council/ACL to build it.

An asset is only an asset whilst it's making money and has people willing to use it, if it loses money then it's the opposite of an asset.
 

BurbageSkyBlues

New Member

The 'funding gap' is operating loss, ie spending more than they earn for the year. This is different from the investment made in an equitable asset of a mortgage on the Ricoh, which is a one off cost/ expenditure, which will also generate an income for the council.

If you are suggesting that the £14.4M should have been used , instead, to bridge the funding gap next year, then ask what would be done the following year? You then have the same gap , and also £14.4M less in your reserves........

If you run your family budget like that, you would be massively in debt after a couple of years.......

As fans of CCFC, we need to see the bigger picture.......the council are protecting the city and the club from exploitation from SISU, in the long run....
 

ICHAN

Well-Known Member
Tried reading all this on and off over a few hours.

The way I see this is this?

Fans want Sisu to pay the rent what ACL/Council want them to pay, and so hold Sisu to ransom or look bad in front of the fans, now that's OK for them to do?

However Sisu wanted the rent lowered so they could keep CCFC going as a football club and their wrong?

Surely now not entirely they are trying to do what's best for the club, obviously they also want it as low as possible to make money, that's what businesses do.
Fans moan we have a team that needs invested in and we want promotion, but this costs money and so Sisu are trying to get money maybe to turn the future of the club around but are wrong for doing so, by trying to save money from paying to much rent.

We can all say in the past they haven't done this that or the other before they don't care about CCFC well maybe they don't but they are not that naive to think that if we don't get promoted and get a team people want o go and watch then they are never going to make there money back.

As fans of the club we can't have it both ways, expect Sisu to pay the rent others want them to pay on one hand and then on the other want/demand they buy players like DMcG and get us out of this league.

It's time to make decisions on what side your on.

Personally I'm on SISU's side not because I like them but because I love this club and if they do just walk away then sadly that's goodbye to promotion at the very least and a lot worse may follow
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Couldn't agree more. If it wasn't for that thieving bastard Bryan Richardson then we would be nice and snug in our own, wholly-owned stadium.

Guess we shouldn't have sold out all those years ago then. If the club had been run at all competently none of this debacle would have happened. Of a lot more interest is what SISU do next, as was discussed earlier.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
The council have the Ricoh itself and the land as its security.
SISU have a risk as do CCFC.
The council and the 14 million is a secured debt.

don't have the documents to hand but wasn't the value of the land in the original project only around £2m? If you assume that a default on the loan means a failing business that's not a whole lot of security. If this was such a great way to do business and a benefit to ACL and the taxpayers of Coventry why was the bank involved in the first place?

A finance expert has raised some concerns on CWR about the ethics of this.

any idea roughly what time that was, would like to look for it on inlayer.
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
The 'funding gap' is operating loss, ie spending more than they earn for the year. This is different from the investment made in an equitable asset of a mortgage on the Ricoh, which is a one off cost/ expenditure, which will also generate an income for the council.

If you are suggesting that the £14.4M should have been used , instead, to bridge the funding gap next year, then ask what would be done the following year? You then have the same gap , and also £14.4M less in your reserves........

If you run your family budget like that, you would be massively in debt after a couple of years.......

As fans of CCFC, we need to see the bigger picture.......the council are protecting the city and the club from exploitation from SISU, in the long run....

Suppose it's a good investment opportunity and they know what they're doing.

Hopefully safer than an Icelandic Bank.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Yes, that must be comforting to those who have lost their jobs and seen services suffer. I work for a local authority and I know how these things work.

The 'funding gap' is operating loss, ie spending more than they earn for the year. This is different from the investment made in an equitable asset of a mortgage on the Ricoh, which is a one off cost/ expenditure, which will also generate an income for the council.

If you are suggesting that the £14.4M should have been used , instead, to bridge the funding gap next year, then ask what would be done the following year? You then have the same gap , and also £14.4M less in your reserves........

If you run your family budget like that, you would be massively in debt after a couple of years.......

As fans of CCFC, we need to see the bigger picture.......the council are protecting the city and the club from exploitation from SISU, in the long run....
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
The 'funding gap' is operating loss, ie spending more than they earn for the year. This is different from the investment made in an equitable asset of a mortgage on the Ricoh, which is a one off cost/ expenditure, which will also generate an income for the council.

If you are suggesting that the £14.4M should have been used , instead, to bridge the funding gap next year, then ask what would be done the following year? You then have the same gap , and also £14.4M less in your reserves........

If you run your family budget like that, you would be massively in debt after a couple of years.......

As fans of CCFC, we need to see the bigger picture.......the council are protecting the city and the club from exploitation from SISU, in the long run....

Think I'll sort out my family budget with a one/off expenditure on black at the Casino.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Yes they are, the interest payments go to them rather than to the Yorkshire, so they will be up on the deal.

Are the council going to be making money out of this?
 

cloughie

Well-Known Member
Torchy you and grendel are loosing all credibility on this issue. Clutching at straws springs to mind.

Only 3 options left

1/ A new rent agreement is agreed and sisu continue to try and balance the books, hoping the team continues on the up, thus giving a more attractive proposition for someone to buy the club. ......a better return on their inevitable losses

2/ACL wind up the club and someone comes in and reinvents a new Coventry city..sisu only get ryton and a lawnmower

3/Sisu put us into admin and someone buy CCFC from the administrator for 1p in the pound....sisu only get secured assest ,ie Ryton

With new owners The Higgs and council would ok a sale of the Higgs share of the arena with owners of CCFC who have an genuine interest in the football club
 
Last edited:

coundonskyblue

New Member
Can't help but think that many of the Council/Higgs trust haters live outside the City.

Its easy to turn a blind eye to a London based hedge fund raping a City when you don't live there I suppose.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top