Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
At least be honest if Waps had moved to Nottingham or anywhere else you wouldn't have cared and if asked about it you'd have said its rugby nothing to do with us.
CCFC were never, ever in danger of being a franchise.. yet you led protests against the club being removed from it's home city - and rightly so.
Yet when Wasps do the same you seem to ignore that they have done exactly the same to their original fanbase... but now you fully support it.
Assuming you cite the financial case for Wasps moving to Coventry - then your opposition against us going to Sixfields was misplaced, as we now have a better deal at the Ricoh deal than we had before we went.
Of course it is a franchise, they had a choice too.
When a prem team get shipped in it would be ok too?
Nothing we could do about sixfields but look at what happened to people who went to watch there...
Why is it always about minority and majority? Can't people think for themselves?
What is going to happen when coventry move to Nuneaton to survive, will you be backing that too? Of course not, because rugby is different...
Yes and people love ccfc... They watched them at sixfields and got called selfish, spineless etc...What do you want me to do?
I like Rugby
Do not gave a shit what a few of you think.
At least be honest if Waps had moved to Nottingham or anywhere else you wouldn't have cared and if asked about it you'd have said its rugby nothing to do with us.
Yes and people love ccfc... They watched them at sixfields and got called selfish, spineless etc...
I got called a lot worse.
one of the reasons I stayed on hill every week was due to the few who gave me hassle.
Yes I did feel a lack of compassion for those who went in at first but that changed when I was able to talk and discuss the situation with some of them.
what annoyed me was those who swore they would never enter the place, yet they used to scurry past us with heads bowed.
I remember one lady who gave me so much stick and shouted at us that we were not real fans and that we were scum, just made me more determined to be there.
If I were not on the Trust Board would it make any difference?
my time ends in the Summer then some other mug can take the crap, till then I am going to carry on going to any Rugby games I want,that includes Cov RFC and Wasps.
however, the City still comes first.
You are all welcome to stand at the board elections, because I know I will not be doing so.
But you can't see why people strange that you have this attitude now after sixfields?Lots of little things annoy me.
like swearing, or those on these forums who hide there identities.
we all have to live with things we do not like or cannot do anything about.
What in gods name are you bumbling on about now.Your'e right hes on the board of a football club trust not rugby,ice hockey,bowls,curling or any other sport. Now if you're that bothered then start a Wasps Trust.
Just thinking aloud on a Sunday afternoon really but as there seems near universal agreement that we won't progress under sisu but that just saying 'sisu out' won't bring about change here are some thoughts on an outline idea as to how to bring about a change of ownership - certainly not a detailed action plan - and I'll live in hope of other people filling in the gaps and some reasoned debate!
1. Set up a Community Interest Company called something like 'Coventry City Interim' (CCI) whose aim would be to secure ownership of CCFC from sisu and transition to a new ownership model to benefit the community. 2. Tell sisu if they hand over CCFC debt free to CCI they will get a lump sum payment when we get promoted to the Championship and a further lump sum when we get promoted to the Premier League, the combined total far exceeding what they are able to take out of CCFC at the moment [rough figures are easy to work out but someone might want to work it out in more detail - might even be able to chuck in a small immediate sweetener].
3. If sisu refuse the offer, it is left on the table but a full scale sisu out campaign is launched (the sixfields campaign was a huge success, sisu's weak spots are well known so the tactics aren't rocket science - and they don't require pitch invasions)
4. sisu finally see sense and accept the offer so ownership of CCFC passes to the interim company.
5. The interim financing of the club would be down to fans ie with sisu gone nopm-ers would be under pressure to return and buy season tickets. A simple approach would be to have pledges and even deposits in place against which a short-term loan would be available from sympathetic parties.
6. CCI then calls for bids for CCFC knowing that a supporters' share scheme would raise as much as somewhere like Portsmouth and that there are a fair few local business people who would be willing to invest sums of around half a million each.
7. The new ownership model takes over CCFC.
8. With new momentum behind CCFC and strong popular support, negotiations with Wasps about securing income streams for CCFC and profits to be made from the Ricoh would begin from a position of strength (and having forced the Ricoh return and sisu out, Wasps would be wise at that point to listen very carefully!)
Also, why an interim stage? Surely that costs money and any deal can be made direct with SISU, rather than this interim buffer?
Only reason for the buffer would be, surely, if the ultimate owners included people SISU refuse to work with. In which case, that needs being up front with at the start so it could be dealt with in whatever way appropriate.
1. Set up a Community Interest Company called something like 'Coventry City Interim' (CCI) whose aim would be to secure ownership of CCFC from sisu and transition to a new ownership model to benefit the community.
2. Tell sisu if they hand over CCFC debt free to CCI they will get a lump sum payment when we get promoted to the Championship and a further lump sum when we get promoted to the Premier League, the combined total far exceeding what they are able to take out of CCFC at the moment [rough figures are easy to work out but someone might want to work it out in more detail - might even be able to chuck in a small immediate sweetener].
3. If sisu refuse the offer, it is left on the table but a full scale sisu out campaign is launched (the sixfields campaign was a huge success, sisu's weak spots are well known so the tactics aren't rocket science - and they don't require pitch invasions)
4. sisu finally see sense and accept the offer so ownership of CCFC passes to the interim company.
5. The interim financing of the club would be down to fans ie with sisu gone nopm-ers would be under pressure to return and buy season tickets. A simple approach would be to have pledges and even deposits in place against which a short-term loan would be available from sympathetic parties.
6. CCI then calls for bids for CCFC knowing that a supporters' share scheme would raise as much as somewhere like Portsmouth and that there are a fair few local business people who would be willing to invest sums of around half a million each.
7. The new ownership model takes over CCFC.
8. With new momentum behind CCFC and strong popular support, negotiations with Wasps about securing income streams for CCFC and profits to be made from the Ricoh would begin from a position of strength (and having forced the Ricoh return and sisu out, Wasps would be wise at that point to listen very carefully!)
Also, why an interim stage? Surely that costs money and any deal can be made direct with SISU, rather than this interim buffer?
Only reason for the buffer would be, surely, if the ultimate owners included people SISU refuse to work with. In which case, that needs being up front with at the start so it could be dealt with in whatever way appropriate.
Am rushed today so apols this is not a full answer but tbh I'd turn this round and say that ownership of ccfc for the last two decades has been a disaster, our current owners have no interest in football success, are not investing, have set the club up on the basis of being able to liquidate at short notice etc etc - so ffs do we not need a new approach?
I also like this graphic which reflects my experience and why wanting a guaranteed solution before taking a first step is not how the real world works
View attachment 4025View attachment 4025
I don't think that anybody denies that our owners over that period have been useless.
And no, I agree, a new approach is no bad thing. Stimulating debate on it is a good thing, in fact, as even if we disagree, it at least tries to push forwards rather than looking back. What's done is done, we are where we are (and other trite phrases).
But this interim stage baffles me. Its sole purpose seems to be, to get the club off SISU but... why not the ultimate owners do this direct?
At the base level, an interim stage costs money that needn't be spent. You'd need a fair wedge given to solicitors and auditors to sell a football club, I'd presume - the general admin in itself would be pretty horrendous.
So why do it twice?
I don't really understand what this interim period gains, other than to not reveal the ultimate owners to SISU. And that doesn't exactly move away from the idea of secretive owners. Why can't the ultimate owners be up front from the start, if it's a new approach?
Lots of little things annoy me.
like swearing, or those on these forums who hide there identities.
we all have to live with things we do not like or cannot do anything about.
I see that you completely dodged the quse ti on there.
Heres a good one for you that I got told last night. One of the people pushing Monday protest on twitter is called David Johnson who calls himself La Martyr or something like that. He may not be the organizer but he is big in favour of it. The Trust website says they are not involved in this protest and dont not know who is involved. But them minutes I posted before say at the next scg they will be represented by someone called David Johnson. Its gotta be the same bloke. So he’s on twitter saying sisu out then will be at the scg as trust rep pretending they want a good relationship with sisu. PMSL
Heres a good one for you that I got told last night. One of the people pushing Monday protest on twitter is called David Johnson who calls himself La Martyr or something like that. He may not be the organizer but he is big in favour of it. The Trust website says they are not involved in this protest and dont not know who is involved. But them minutes I posted before say at the next scg they will be represented by someone called David Johnson. Its gotta be the same bloke. So he’s on twitter saying sisu out then will be at the scg as trust rep pretending they want a good relationship with sisu. PMSL
Might be and then again there are 97 listed names of Johnson in the phonebook with god knows how many people living in those households. Mind you, nothing like a good conspiracy theory on here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?