An open letter to Joy by PSB Group (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter skybluebeduff
- Start date
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
It'll be a fine thread to reference well into the future...
hill83
Well-Known Member
Don't do it though because even though it takes 5 seconds to find an old post on here you'll be laughed at for doing it.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If someone is using words like "maybe" and "think" they are clearly speculating on what might have happened, when someone says categorically "no he didn't mean that" they are trying to pass their opinion as fact. Either that or it is a fact and they are indeed a mind reader.
I'm surprised you didn't work that out for yourself chap.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I think maybe a couple have been drinking on a school night.
hill83
Well-Known Member
You invented a scenario yourself about what Robins did. Started off all nicely with "Don't you think" but quickly followed two posts later with an absolute "The intelligence he has clearly demonstrated"
So you are one of the mind readers I was talking about. Chap. I'm not surprised you didn't work that out yourself though. No self awareness whatsoever 'it seems'.
Last edited:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You wouldn't want to burn bridges.......
.....it's like when we came back to the Ricoh, the opportunity to rebuild bridges with ACL and their former owners.
And back to your point, why would Robins bother saying anything? He was moving to a club in a higher league, for more money and a better wage bill.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
How did that work out for him? You've sort of proved my point really. Especially when you consider that the job he did take next at least on the surface would have been a less attractive prospect than us at the time he took that job. But if he'd left slagging of SISU the door would have been closed.
Last edited:
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
JD or Southern Comfort?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
But why say anything about the council? Like I said he didn't have to say anything about them at all, all he had to do was not slag off sisu or the club.
And yes, it didn't work out for him, but then again we all know that the average tenure of a football league manager is about 14-15 months, so his tenure at Huddlesfield was pretty much par.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Nick
Administrator
Why would he want to come back if he left because SISU were so bad and couldn't wait to leave?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The full quote is above. If you're going to quote me do it in full. Quoting in part is a cheap trick. I clearly stated it as opinion not fact by saying I think. You seem to be struggling with that chap.
hill83
Well-Known Member
That has made no difference to what I was saying at all chap. I even said you said "don't you think" in the part I quoted. And regardless, "quite clearly demonstrated" suggests it's now a fact that Nick is not getting. When in fact as stated before, you made the scenario up.
Last edited:
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
A league one football managers job or join the real world? Which would you prefer? There's plenty of ex players and manager's do real jobs as they have no other choice.
Like i said. I don't think you want to credit him with the intelligence he probably deserves. Maybe it doesn't fit in with your mantra.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I don't mind. As long as it's not a scotch I don't mind.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Thank Christ Tolstoy never had a view then.
Nick
Administrator
So according to some he couldn't wait to get out, he slagged off the council but didn't say anything that bad against SISU as he didn't want to burn bridges so he could have the door open to come back?
My Mantra? Im not the one making up imaginary scenarios to try and suit.
I am sure he is an intelligent man, maybe you shouldn't be so quick to sidestep his council comments then? Or was he being thick then?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
TBH, I don't think he would ever want or need to do that.. once burned twice shy..
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I can't go to many if any games in a season because I work at the weekends and don't have static days off in the week. I probably don't fit into one of those categories you came up with. I would love to see us play and I knew that when I accepted the job I now have that I'd be giving up most of the matches that I would be able to attend. To continue my support of the club financially I was buying presents from the shop for Christmas/birthdays which was stopped when we moved to Sixfields. I was very happy to restart this present buying when we came back to Coventry.
Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.
Joy has no limits when we look to the sky.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Astute
Well-Known Member
But CCC should help CCFC doesn't mean CCC should help SISU. And with SISU refusing to talk to CCC unless in a court room it ended up being a hard task.
SO you say that CCC should have helped CCFC more. How much more taxpayers help do you think should have been used? Fisher was still saying that they were not interested in the Ricoh because of the outstanding loan. We can go back to when CCC/Higgs tried doing a deal with SISU. They went back on each deal until it came down to unencumbered. To me that was wanting the arena without the loan to be paid. So should the taxpayer taken the hit so a hedge fund could benefit? Is anyone trying to say that MR thought that CCC should bail out SISU? Things carried on getting worse between CCC/SISU after he left. Would he have continued to have wanted more from CCC?
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Great post Astute. All parties are at fault to varying degrees, but why should the Coventry tax payer be held to ransom because a dodgy hedge fund want everything their way? Their way of thinking is...What's yours, is mine, and what's mine, is my own.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
This is obviously subjective but I think they could have done more. Not least the ACL sale process, that should have been open and transparent with any interested party being able to bid on the same basis, ie: the 250 year lease.
If you go back further you can look at certain events and say there were better routes that could have been taken by the council at the time. For example you can look at the whole Arena project and speculate what would have happened if, instead of taking over the project and grabbing the freehold along with 50% of ACL, CCC had provisioned a loan to CCFC to cover the shortfall. If you look at the funding report the actual amount put in by CCC is relatively low with the rest coming from other sources so a loan to CCFC over say 50 years would have been affordable.
Then of course you have the rent. PWKH was keen to keep telling us it was set at a similar rate to that at HR when we left but always seemed to forget to mention that included a large penalty for us delay our move meaning a delay for the developers. Had we moved to the Ricoh on a rent of say £100K a year with all revenues generated by the club going to the club we may well be in a much better position than we are now.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Which dodgy hedge fund are you talking about here, the one that owns CCFC or the one CCC sold ACL to?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Think he was saying that Mark Robins said that CCC should have helped CCFC more.
Though only becuase they held a gun against his head, kidnapped his family and promised to give him a job in the future, possibly.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I think he means the one that wasn't willing to pay (except in lawyer bills) for ACL not the one that was willing to sit down and negotiate ownership of ACL. Hope that helps.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ chiefdave.....Hohohoho..Hahahaha....Your wit knows no bounds. In all seriousness though...Which "Dodgy Hedge Fund" has had numerous opportunities to buy into the Ricoh Arena over the last 7 years, and at one point "Shook hands" on a "Heads of Terms" then immediately reneged?...Now carry on with your "Witty Japes" My sides are hurting whilst rolfl. Hahahahaha!
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The court actually found that BOTH sides immediately reneged
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Not exactly the case, but carry on.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I thought the court said that when Higgs asked to see proof of funds when SISU asked to pay on the never never they then valued the Higgs share at zero pounds but recognising that they're a charity offered £2M at which point both sides lost their appetite to continue. So not immediately, later.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
That's the indicative terms sheet not the heads of terms. The council weren't party to the former as such.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Both sides were shown not to want to complete the deal. SISU didn't want to pay and then take over 50% of the loan. CCC didn't want to pay off the loan and Higgs were not prepared to write off all of what they handed over to our club. So in reality all three sides didn't want to complete a deal.
