ACL to allow CCFC Ltd to play for free! (2 Viewers)

fleebagfisher · Jun 11, 2013

could be right OSB - but surely sepala will say no. its gone too far. in sisu position they can not afford to lose face at that level. the other problem is after the initial year arent we all going to back at square one? the time to negotiate is over if fisher to be believed, i think they have a plan and it doesnt involve the Ricoh. their plan surely is to sell the other companies to the new buyers. im still expecting sisu and acl to anounce a joint venture! mad? not if you take a good look at our club

fleebagfisher · Jun 11, 2013

or is the offer to sweeten a sale to prospective buyers

Danceswithhorses · Jun 11, 2013

fleebagfisher said:
in sisu position they can not afford to lose face at that level.

Whatever side anyone takes, surely we must all agree that SISU have no face left to save ?

Godiva · Jun 11, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Just a thought nothing more ......

what if TF was planning to have used the feed back from the forums to say

"I have listened to the fans, I have approached ACL to discuss playing at the Ricoh" .......... kind of puts the pressure on ACL to talk to CCFC H even while CCFC Ltd in admin. Fans reaction would certainly support TF doing that wouldnt it? ACL would practically have to give it away on TF's terms.

Instead ACL have got in first ....... said yes you can use it but it has to be arranged through the administrator (who currently controls the rights to use the pitch)............ makes ACL look like the ones trying to keep the team in Coventry, puts TF in a weaker position. If he turns down talks he loses more fans faith. If whilst in office PA refuses to be involved it is him stopping the club playing at the Ricoh not ACL

It also says to the FL that the club are not being forced out by ACL

Isn't the offer only valid while the club is in administration? What then?

What about the current lease? Doesn't ACL want to protect that by keeping limited from being liquidated?

wingy · Jun 11, 2013

Godiva said:
Isn't the offer only valid while the club is in administration? What then?

What about the current lease? Doesn't ACL want to protect that by keeping limited from being liquidated?

These concerns were discussed in great detail at an ACL Board Meeting on 7 June 2013, and we have today notified the Football League and the joint administrators of a proposed solution for the coming season.

I think the clue is in "Solution for the Coming Season."

TheParsonsHose · Jun 11, 2013

magic82ball said:
SISU haven't said yes yet, knowing them they will reject just to try to distress ACL further by missing out on matchday revenues.

SISU will no doubt release a statement saying the offer is totally unacceptable with Tim making the statement to the media.

chiefdave · Jun 11, 2013

Can someone explain to me how, if this offer is only while in admin, it is up to Tim Fisher to accept or reject? Surely it's up to the administrator and once we've out of admin we're back to square 1 if SISU are in charge.

torchomatic · Jun 11, 2013

I agree, DB. SISU definitely take the lions share of blame over this sorry saga. However, I have constantly been labelled a whatever because I still blame ACL to some degree. And I will continue to blame both sides.

Delboycov said:
I blame both parties Torch but I do believe there are different degrees of blame here and although I do think that the latest twist is just another move in this ever annoying game of PR chess I personally believe TF and SISU to be far more to blame for taking us to the place we're currently at.

Jack Griffin · Jun 11, 2013

Well if SISU gain control they'll liquidate CCFC Ltd ASAP.

In my opinion that was their plan all along, but they couldn't sneak the golden share transfer past the FL before ACL got wind & took action.

RogerH · Jun 11, 2013

I think this offer is not so much aimed at SISU but more intended to put pressure on the Administrator's decision . It is hoped to influence Appleton's decision before the Club exits administration. If SISU get Ltd, they are not using the Ricoh anyway, if any of the other bidders are successful, I would imagine discussions have already taken place about the deal to use the Ricoh.

Would look silly to endorse a bid that has no ground to play on as against one that has a ground available for free.

Trigger · Jun 11, 2013

I think everyone is reading in to this too much.

Since SISU have declared they will not negotiate with ACL and CCFC WILL play elsewhere, they cannot ground share until LTD is out of admin. Which means they have nowhere to play.

ACL, in my opinion, have simply said play your games here, for free, until you are out of admin and then off you go.

I believe they have done this in good faith for the fans, so the team has somewhere to play until we exit admin.

I then imagine we will ground share with another club.

Delboycov · Jun 11, 2013

torchomatic said:
I agree, DB. SISU definitely take the lions share of blame over this sorry saga. However, I have constantly been labelled a whatever because I still blame ACL to some degree. And I will continue to blame both sides.

That hasn't been fair and I have been guilty of that myself in the past...Seeing we shared similar political views and also shared a mutual view of Thatcher and her legacy did make me look at your posts in a different way I must admit!

Mucca Mad Boys · Jun 11, 2013

I'm glad that this effectively guarantees that Coventry City will play at the RICOH next season, although it was never likely we were going to leave the RICOH, I for one was convinced we were going to remain at the RICOH.

Fair play to ACL, they've done the right thing for everyone involved, CCFC and fans, the City of Coventry and finally, ACL. I thought the side who was going to crack would be SISU as I, or anyone, could not see how they could've coped with the financial repercussions of leaving the RICOH. However, I don't think this act was wholly down to generosity, there was an element of self-interest, the surrounding area would be hit on match-days, and as others have mentioned, the contracts ACL have with other companies (e.g. Compass) may be reconsidered if there was to be no football club playing at the RICOH. I personally think this act of both generosity and desperation goes someway to refute the claim that 'ACL don't need CCFC', but before I get bashed, kudos to ACL, they've acted in everyone's best interest.

Stafford_SkBlue · Jun 11, 2013

Its of no use to sisu as if they gain control we will be out of admin before the month end.
It be of use to other bidders as we would remain in admin for a longer as they would have to go to court to gain control over actual aserts to start from nothing
Acl playing politics i'm afraid.

oakey · Jun 11, 2013

Still searching the statement for the "only" with reference to the offer being made whilst CCFC is in administration.
I interpret it as a no strings offer, if you take it at face value.

shropshirecov · Jun 11, 2013

ACL must be desparate for the car parking money!!

I wonder if Compass have been on the phone about the fact they paid them 4 million quid and there might be no football club to cream off.

This 'offer' doesn't cost ACL anything does it? Without a tennant they are fooked all ends up.

lordsummerisle · Jun 11, 2013

honestken said:
they could have owned the Stadium in 2005 when they first took over but Onye ripped up the contract and said sisu didnt need to buy it until were in the premier league!!

Wasn't it Ranson who said that?

Also, didn't Sisu come in late 2007?

RoboCCFC90 · Jun 11, 2013

oakey said:
Still searching the statement for the "only" with reference to the offer being made whilst CCFC is in administration.
I interpret it as a no strings offer, if you take it at face value.

Les Reid's Twitter..

sw88 · Jun 11, 2013

Apologies in advance if this has already been muttered, but I haven't read all 20 pages, but I have a question on this.

ACL are offering rent free until CCFC Ltd are brought out of admin. This could be weeks, maybe months. So the new 'owner' will, have to agree new terms. When are these going to be written up? If they're not pre-prepared, then I would think any new owner could potentially drag out contract talks over new terms. If for example SISU buy us out of admin. We've seen this time round how long it's seen for talks to go on. If rent starts to be charged on the day we exit admin (as technically we'll no longer be in admin from that day) aren't we just going to increase rent debt / new owner build up a rent debt during talks?!?

rupert_bear · Jun 11, 2013

lordsummerisle said:
Wasn't it Ranson who said that?

Also, didn't Sisu come in late 2007?

It was and sisu did come in in late 2007. Listening to Fisher last night explaining Onye's decision not to buy he more or less shrugged his shoulders and wondered why he made that decision.

rupert_bear · Jun 11, 2013

sw88 said:
Apologies in advance if this has already been muttered, but I haven't read all 20 pages, but I have a question on this.

ACL are offering rent free until CCFC Ltd are brought out of admin. This could be weeks, maybe months. So the new 'owner' will, have to agree new terms. When are these going to be written up? If they're not pre-prepared, then I would think any new owner could potentially drag out contract talks over new terms. If for example SISU buy us out of admin. We've seen this time round how long it's seen for talks to go on. If rent starts to be charged on the day we exit admin (as technically we'll no longer be in admin from that day) aren't we just going to increase rent debt / new owner build up a rent debt during talks?!?

But if someone comes in other than sisu rent might not come into it as i believe any new owner will own the Ricoh outright and any adjacent land. I can;t see anybody buying just the football club can you ?

sw88 · Jun 11, 2013

rupert_bear said:
But if someone comes in other than sisu rent might not come into it as i believe any new owner will own the Ricoh outright and any adjacent land. I can;t see anybody buying just the football club can you ?

This might come with time. But short term, I can only see them buying the football side of things out of admin. I imagine the council will want them to prove they can run things better than SISU have managed before they sign away the Ricoh.

blend · Jun 11, 2013

Outrageous charging us rent for playing at the Ricoh. Why don't we go build a new stadium. Why don't they give something back to the club. Oh hang on a minute :facepalm:

Johnnythespider · Jun 11, 2013

magic82ball said:
If I go in to the shop and the man wants to charge me £1 for a Mars Bar, I can either pay it, or get out - I certainly wouldn't pay it, eat it, then haggle for a discount.

You should have said a man sold you a Twix for £1.2m, you left the shop and ate the first bar then feeling full went back in and asked for an £0.8m refund and half the profits from future Twix sales

torchomatic · Jun 11, 2013

Broken Hearted Sky Blue said:
Of course the other the other 50,60 or whatever the latest figure is is down to them as well fucking grow up you stupid c**t

Well it isnt down to your beloved CCC either.

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

Astute · Jun 11, 2013

torchomatic said:
Oh, FFS. A mars bar for £1 or paid rent for six years of £1.2M? I'm all for analogies but at least make them relevant.

I wouldn't stand in a shop eating 1.2m mars bars @ £1 whilst arguing over the cost :wave:

So SISU would get to pay rent of nothing next season? They will still want it for less. How much will they want off ACL to play there?

Sky Blue Harry H · Jun 11, 2013

Johnnythespider said:
You should have said a man sold you a Twix for £1.2m, you left the shop and ate the first bar then feeling full went back in and asked for an £0.8m refund and half the profits from future Twix sales

A Twix and a Mars bar does not a selection box make

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jun 11, 2013

torchomatic said:
Well it isnt down to your beloved CCC either.

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

Didnt mean to swear at you.
I dont love CCC I agree that the Club should have the revenues.Just not the club under its present owners.Why?
Club 70 million in debt (their figures not mine) add that to revenues during their tenure say a grand total of 100 million minus rent 6 million = 94 million so the rent paid is 6% of the debt plus monies that we the fans have put in.
Now lets take it (again their figures) that they have invested 45Million plus our contribution
making a total of 75 million minus rent 6 million =69 million rent is 9%
Now tell me how by even giving the Ricoh for free to these idiots is going to make any difference. Do you honestly think that any revenues that they get will be put into the team? I dont
The ricoh and the club need to be one just not with Sisu

Sky Blue Harry H · Jun 11, 2013

Broken Hearted Sky Blue said:
Didnt mean to swear at you.
I dont love CCC I agree that the Club should have the revenues.Just not the club under its present owners.Why?
Club 70 million in debt (their figures not mine) add that to revenues during their tenure say a grand total of 100 million minus rent 6 million = 94 million so the rent paid is 6% of the debt plus monies that we the fans have put in.
Now lets take it (again their figures) that they have invested 45Million plus our contribution
making a total of 75 million minus rent 6 million =69 million rent is 9%
Now tell me how by even giving the Ricoh for free to these idiots is going to make any difference. Do you honestly think that any revenues that they get will be put into the team? I dont
The ricoh and the club need to be one just not with Sisu

I'd agree with the above sentiments - just hope CCC will hand over to 'decent' owners and not stunt club's potential future growth

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jun 11, 2013

Sky Blue Harry H said:
I'd agree with the above sentiments - just hope CCC will hand over to 'decent' owners and not stunt club's potential future growth

If it is new owners then safeguards must be put in that makes sure this does not happen again not sur how though :facepalm:

Jack Griffin · Jun 11, 2013

Needs a clean slate & a new start.

I don't think anyone realised that the debt GR wiped off was still on the books for some time after the takeover, they found it impossible to get accounts in on time since 07, they're supposed to be filed no more than 9 months after year end.

For CCFC Ltd, should be in by end Feb each year for year end the last day of May on previous year..
25/06/2012 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/11
02/06/2011 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/10
07/04/2010 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/09
02/04/2009 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/08
29/02/2008 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/07
29/02/2008 FULL ACCOUNTS MADE UP TO 31/05/06

chiefdave · Jun 11, 2013

sw88 said:
ACL are offering rent free until CCFC Ltd are brought out of admin. This could be weeks, maybe months. So the new 'owner' will, have to agree new terms. When are these going to be written up? If they're not pre-prepared, then I would think any new owner could potentially drag out contract talks over new terms. If for example SISU buy us out of admin. We've seen this time round how long it's seen for talks to go on. If rent starts to be charged on the day we exit admin (as technically we'll no longer be in admin from that day) aren't we just going to increase rent debt / new owner build up a rent debt during talks?!?

what happens if we come out of admin and an agreement isn't reached by the time we get to our next home game? thats why for me ACL need to be more aggressive, issue a statement that once out of admin the rest of the season can be played on the same terms as the last 3 games that season whilst a new agreement is thrashed out no matter who is in charge. at the moment it's easy for SISU to dismiss this offer as really it has nothing to do with them.

lordsummerisle · Jun 11, 2013

Astute said:
I wouldn't stand in a shop eating 1.2m mars bars @ £1 whilst arguing over the cost :wave:

So SISU would get to pay rent of nothing next season? They will still want it for less. How much will they want off ACL to play there?

£50,000 per 9000 people through the doors is the going rate for the LTA.

Anyway, what would we do with 1.2m Mars bars now that Thorn has gone?

letsallsingtogether · Jun 11, 2013

I agree with most of this bar the first line :facepalm:

Broken Hearted Sky Blue said:
Didnt mean to swear at you.
I dont love CCC I agree that the Club should have the revenues.Just not the club under its present owners.Why?
Club 70 million in debt (their figures not mine) add that to revenues during their tenure say a grand total of 100 million minus rent 6 million = 94 million so the rent paid is 6% of the debt plus monies that we the fans have put in.
Now lets take it (again their figures) that they have invested 45Million plus our contribution
making a total of 75 million minus rent 6 million =69 million rent is 9%
Now tell me how by even giving the Ricoh for free to these idiots is going to make any difference. Do you honestly think that any revenues that they get will be put into the team? I dont
The ricoh and the club need to be one just not with Sisu

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Jun 11, 2013

magic82ball said:
If I go in to the shop and the man wants to charge me £1 for a Mars Bar, I can either pay it, or get out - I certainly wouldn't pay it, eat it, then haggle for a discount.

Difference is we had no other choice than to play at the Ricoh, where as you have a choice weather to buy the Mars bar or not.

A better analogy would be if a shopkeeper was holding a gun to your head and told you, you had to pay £1 for the Mars bar otherwise he would shoot you and then when he is no longer armed you ask for your £1 back.

ACL to allow CCFC Ltd to play for free! (2 Viewers)

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Chief Commentator!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Chief Commentator!

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency