ACL must not give in (1 Viewer)

ashbyjan · Sep 20, 2012

Kingharvest - thats the whole point. There is nothing illegal in what they did to the players otherwise the PFA would have been in like a ferret up a drainpipe but its the whole way they go about things. Rewarding failure is stupid yet it was SISU that ratified those same contracts only a year or so earlier. Obviously withholding money under the rental agreement is a breach of contract but apparently that legitimate negotiating tactic for some on here and even after an offer of halving the renty . Its the way SISU go about things that makes them dangerous bed fellows - what benefit is there for the council and the citizens of Coventry for these people to get half the Arena? Do they have a track record in leisure development? For the club it would make sense to own the stadium and more importantly the revenue streams but its the transparency and attitude of SISU that must be examined thoroughly and in depth by any responsible council before agreeing to any deal. It is their legal responsibility not to take risks with tax payers assets and money and getting into bed with SISU would appear to be one hell of a risk.

kingharvest · Sep 20, 2012

SBS said:
I think the real shame is that people behind the scenes at the club are being made redundant, whereas as some players appear to be throwing toys out the pram over this situation.

This is a critical point and one which the board were concious of. There were a lot of low paid staff who were made redundant - yet there were some players refusing to help the club balance the books in the wake of their own underachievement.

I appreciate that players signed contracts and feel they should be honoured. But its also the employers right to ask those players to renegotiate contracts.

If you were in one of those meetings with a player, you make the situation clear, they understand that people are losing jobs and that you want to restructure the contract to reward success and that player says "nah, i'm not budging, you agreed to it so thats it" wouldn't you be pi**ed off with them? I know i would. That's not an attitude i'd want in my company.

Footballers have consistently been allowed to get away with being rewarded no matter what. If they aren't big enough to recognise when they've failed - and make no mistake, backed by SISU or not, alot of those players last season failed this club - then i wouldn't want them around the place.

kingharvest · Sep 20, 2012

ashbyjan said:
Kingharvest - thats the whole point. There is nothing illegal in what they did to the players otherwise the PFA would have been in like a ferret up a drainpipe but its the whole way they go about things. Rewarding failure is stupid yet it was SISU that ratified those same contracts only a year or so earlier. Obviously withholding money under the rental agreement is a breach of contract but apparently that legitimate negotiating tactic for some on here and even after an offer of halving the renty . Its the way SISU go about things that makes them dangerous bed fellows - what benefit is there for the council and the citizens of Coventry for these people to get half the Arena? Do they have a track record in leisure development? For the club it would make sense to own the stadium and more importantly the revenue streams but its the transparency and attitude of SISU that must be examined thoroughly and in depth by any responsible council before agreeing to any deal. It is their legal responsibility not to take risks with tax payers assets and money and getting into bed with SISU would appear to be one hell of a risk.

Ah - but there's a subtle difference in saying any deal should be examined thoroughly to SISU should never be allowed to get their hands on the stadium.

I appreciate SISU have developed a reputation amongst fans of smoke and mirrors and perhaps being unethical in their dealings around the club, but I'm not saying the council should hand it over without due diligence. I'm saying its beneficial for the club if it has access to the revenue generated by the stadium.

GaryPendrysEyes · Sep 20, 2012

covcity4life said:
if we get the stadium finances improve

sisu are the only ones doing anything for this club wether you like them or not,i hope the club gets it asap.

'be very careful with the 'we' my friend.
'Doing anything' includes-30 years of damage in 5 years and still going strong . Can't say that's an impressive record to trust a key City asset to....

GaryPendrysEyes · Sep 20, 2012

kingharvest said:
Ah - but there's a subtle difference in saying any deal should be examined thoroughly to SISU should never be allowed to get their hands on the stadium.

I appreciate SISU have developed a reputation amongst fans of smoke and mirrors and perhaps being unethical in their dealings around the club, but I'm not saying the council should hand it over without due diligence. I'm saying its beneficial for the club if it has access to the revenue generated by the stadium.

It's not just about ethics it's about competence and long term stewardship of a key city asset... Looking at sisu they have hardly shown competence or professionalism, or the ability to grow or make a business succeed, and as a hedge fund don't really have a long term perspective... Next

ashbyjan · Sep 20, 2012

KH - I have never said SISU must never own the stadium / ACL but I disagree with those criticising council for being very wary of these people. Is the risk worth it for the council? Do they ned SISU to develop the site? Or are SISU being true to there standard confrontational negotiating stance and threatening the existence of the club unless they get the stadium? Is this why Cov fan Mutton appears to have suddenly changed his stance whilst less emotionally involved others are more cautious? No evidence this is the case just speculating as to why Mutton has maybe changed tack.

Godiva · Sep 20, 2012

ashbyjan said:
KH - I have never said SISU must never own the stadium / ACL but I disagree with those criticising council for being very wary of these people. Is the risk worth it for the council? Do they ned SISU to develop the site? Or are SISU being true to there standard confrontational negotiating stance and threatening the existence of the club unless they get the stadium? Is this why Cov fan Mutton appears to have suddenly changed his stance whilst less emotionally involved others are more cautious? No evidence this is the case just speculating as to why Mutton has maybe changed tack.

Or Maybe Mutton got face to face with sisu. Meeting people can change your mind.

ashbyjan · Sep 20, 2012

Its not meeting that changes your mind its what is said or promised or threatened during that meeting that does it. Sure that Mutton has met with SISU, would be very surprised as it would be negligent on his part if he hadn't, but what was said to change Muttons stance is down to speculation. You may wish to believe that SISU have suddenly become a benevolent and open organisation with nothing but the good of Coventry City and the City of Coventry at heart, I would rather be much more reserved and advocate treating them with suspicion and question their motives and promises.

skyblueman · Sep 20, 2012

Godiva said:
Sisu will never get to own the stadium directly - the club will.
When sisu eventually sell up the club will still own the stadium - or whatever part is accuired.

If this club owns the stadium (or at least a part of it) and is generating a positive cash flow, then it's much more likely potential new owners comes knocking at the door.
So if you want sisu out you should support every move to acquire the stadium.

Er... hang on a minute - if SISU own the club and the stadium they can do whatever they like with the ownership of the stadium surely - what's to stop them having their own ACL company which owns the stadium and charging rent to the club at whatever level it feels like?

Godiva · Sep 20, 2012

skyblueman said:
Er... hang on a minute - if SISU own the club and the stadium they can do whatever they like with the ownership of the stadium surely - what's to stop them having their own ACL company which owns the stadium and charging rent to the club at whatever level it feels like?

They would never know if they suddenly decide to stop paying rent

Seriously - The council will never let the stadium be owned by anyone else than the club. It will be a paragraph in the contract. Maybe ACL retains a part of the stadium and state that change of ownership can only happen if they agree.
There are thousands of ways to ensure the stadium will never be owned by sisu - or any sisu like entities.

Bottom line is - the club needs to own the Ricoh (or part of) and have access to match day income.
Everything else we can leave to the lawyers, accountants and professionel advisors ... on both sides.

covcity4life · Sep 20, 2012

GaryPendrysEyes said:
'be very careful with the 'we' my friend.
'Doing anything' includes-30 years of damage in 5 years and still going strong . Can't say that's an impressive record to trust a key City asset to....

its better than liquadation

yet to see anyone come out and say they were interested in us on admin day

i understand peoples sisu hate but they seem to have changed their stance on cov so lets see how they go and support them if we can

valiant15 · Sep 20, 2012

Jeez,some people are easily bought,look at our position and league we're in. It's like a wife beater that keeps asking for another chance,he'll eventually twat her one again. Sisu are untrustworthy liar's,do you people never learn?

covcity4life · Sep 20, 2012

will you ever listen????

noone is saying its perfect scenario,but it comes down to being beat up by a wife beater and living or being just being hit by a bus and dying instantly

did i just type that.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Sep 20, 2012

covcity4life said:
its better than liquadation

yet to see anyone come out and say they were interested in us on admin day

i understand peoples sisu hate but they seem to have changed their stance on cov so lets see how they go and support them if we can

Name a club thats ever been liquidated

valiant15 · Sep 20, 2012

So your saying its sisu forever then? If they were willing to write off the money they've put in of course other parties would be interested,we would be debt free wouldn't we?

Godiva · Sep 20, 2012

valiant15 said:
So your saying its sisu forever then? If they were willing to write off the money they've put in of course other parties would be interested,we would be debt free wouldn't we?

Well according to Fischer all debts to sisu have been changed to equity - so in effect we should be debt free. Of course that remains to be verified by OSB, but I have no doubt he is pursuing this.

So let's say it's been done. Then the shares in the club suddenly comes into play. Because now they actually holds a value of at least the net assets (which has now improved vastly with the debts gone) plus some intangible assets which contains the brand and any money spend on developing the club, the acadamy and what have you.
If the club has a positive cash flow or turn a profit this will also add to the value of the shares.

It's not sisu forever - it's sisu till someone turns up and buys the majority of the shares.

valiant15 · Sep 20, 2012

Fair point godiva.

lordsummerisle · Sep 20, 2012

ashbyjan said:
Its not meeting that changes your mind its what is said or promised or threatened during that meeting that does it. Sure that Mutton has met with SISU, would be very surprised as it would be negligent on his part if he hadn't, but what was said to change Muttons stance is down to speculation. You may wish to believe that SISU have suddenly become a benevolent and open organisation with nothing but the good of Coventry City and the City of Coventry at heart, I would rather be much more reserved and advocate treating them with suspicion and question their motives and promises.

All for openness in everything myself.

I understand from the Fans Forum last week that you've had at least one meeting with Fisher, in the spirit of openness could you let us know exactly what was discussed at the meeting(s)?

You may have already done so, and I may have missed it, if this is the case could you point me towards it?

Godiva · Sep 20, 2012

valiant15 said:
Fair point godiva.

Thank you.

Are we friends now?
Could we go steady .... Prins Valiant and Lady Godiva.

valiant15 · Sep 20, 2012

Hey no probs,we both want what's best for our club. My views just come out in one big rant! Take ccfc out of my life and im quite placid.

GaryPendrysEyes · Sep 20, 2012

covcity4life said:
will you ever listen????

noone is saying its perfect scenario,but it comes down to being beat up by a wife beater and living or being just being hit by a bus and dying instantly

did i just type that.

No its like your sister being married to a ^%&** and having a few kids with them. at least she's married and has a bit of money right? I personally prefer they get rid and take a chance on someone better coming along.

valiant15 · Sep 20, 2012

And im already married lol.

Official Away Travel · Sep 20, 2012

kingharvest said:
The club MUST get access to revenue streams to survive.

I also think that the club is a much more attractive option to investers/buyers if the club own at least half the ground or at the very least, has access to matchday revenue streams.

To be honest, whoever negotiated the deal with ACL which meant we didn't have access to those revenue streams yet still paid £1.2m a year should never be allowed near the club again. Horrific decision to make.

Paul fletcher is your man!!

Jack Griffin · Sep 21, 2012

The title of this thread is 'ACL must not give in'

However it is Coventry Council who has the golden share & the Higgs charity want out of the agreement to free up their funds. Also the ACL Chief executive, Daniel Gidney quit yesterday.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...try-city-deal-for-ricoh-arena-92746-31874309/

In summary, it rather looks some sort of deal is being done & the only stumbling block is that Mutton is having trouble keeping it out of the public arena, hence the refusal of the Tory leader to play ball.. lets face it if it goes tits up he gets to use that as a political weapon versus Labour.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...ver-ricoh-arena-gagging-order-92746-31866264/

Black6Osprey · Sep 21, 2012

Can someone please clear up a few facts for me

1. When we sold the land to develop the ground and shopping centre, as the club never saw a penny did the council get the cash in exchange for helping finance the ground?
2. Why are people so afraid for the club to gain control of the ground? As it stands we get nothing out of it but a bloody big bill every month so what exactly have we got to lose? If we as club get nothing out of it I couldn't give a shit if they knocked it down. Why are we all so precious about it?
3. Call me the devils advocate or just the devil if you like. SISU have stumped £40M plus and got nowhere with it. What exactly do you expect them to do, just keep chucking their money away?

Its a sad fact but a ridiculous rent (not agreed by SISU), low crowds and overpaid players mean we as a club can't afford to do what we all want. SISU have made mistakes for sure but I'd like to see anyone of you throw £40M down to drain and then enjoy getting ripped to shit for doing it.

sky blue zam · Sep 21, 2012

looks like someones gave in

ACL must not give in (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency