Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Ann Lucas Statement (2 Viewers)

  • Thread starter RPHunt
  • Start date Oct 22, 2013
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

hill83

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #36
sky blue john said:
I think we have a new song for the terraces ?
Chris Rea home for Christmas !!!
Lucas she shoots she scores !!!!!!!
Click to expand...

 
H

Hugh Jarse

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #37
I've read what Lucas has said and this is what I make of it.

1. Pay us what you owe us and we'll talk about a return to The Ricoh.

2. If you don't pay up, The Ricoh can survive without a football club.

If this is her beloved Sky Blues, I'd hate to see what she would do to a company or organisation she disliked!
 

skybluefred

New Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #38
edgy said:
Seems this "pathetic" demo on the council steps wasn't in vain. Full marks to Stuart Cosgrove. Let's not stop now.
Click to expand...

The "pathetic" demo (your words) had nothing to do with this statement from Anne Lucas.

I read it as an invite to sisu to get round the table and talk,which is the ONLY way we will get back to playing at
the RICOH.
 
K

kmj5000

Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #39
SkyBlue_Taylor said:
Actions speak louder than words and when an offer is made to CCFC to come back to the RICOH then we can talk about how much Lucas 'cares' about CCFC coming 'home'.
Click to expand...

But JS said she will only come back if she can buy it so it's up to her to make an offer. The ball is therefore in her court don't you think?
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #40
skybluefred said:
The "pathetic" demo (your words) had nothing to do with this statement from Anne Lucas.

I read it as an invite to sisu to get round the table and talk,which is the ONLY way we will get back to playing at
the RICOH.
Click to expand...
That and the freehold
 
W

will am i

Active Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #41
fernandopartridge said:
They're acting as the Football Club. After all it is the club who has allegedly suffered a detriment due to the actions of the Council.
Click to expand...

They are acting as SISU and for SISU ("...get a return for my investors") - nothing there about the interests of the football club or its supporters. Never has been
 
K

kmj5000

Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #42
Hugh Jarse said:
I've read what Lucas has said and this is what I make of it.

1. Pay us what you owe us and we'll talk about a return to The Ricoh.

2. If you don't pay up, The Ricoh can survive without a football club.

If this is her beloved Sky Blues, I'd hate to see what she would do to a company or organisation she disliked!
Click to expand...

What!?

How exactly did you draw that conclusion? Please explain.
 
A

AJB1983

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #43
Expect the usual shite to come back in retaliation from fisher and co.
Just to clear something up as well, when fisher goes on about 'real decision makers' who have power to do things at the meetings they've had, the acl/CCC personnel that have been there had the power to talk/negotiate a rent deal, however sisu wanted to talk about the freehold, which they did not have the power to negotiate....it's been twisted.
The original withholding of rent cos it was too high was a smokescreen for ulterior motives.
 

olderskyblue

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #44
That doesn't mean talking to people who, I'm sure with the best of intentions, want to jump on a bandwagon and make claims about "sorting out" the football club and reuniting it with the Ricoh Arena. Let's keep this focused and serious - it's too important for frivolous gestures.
Click to expand...

This means you Nikki.....
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #45
olderskyblue said:
This means you Nikki.....
Click to expand...

Ye-es.

That was slightly needless really.
 

skybluefred

New Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #46
Warwickhunt said:
As far as I am concerned she has an 800 signature petition asking valid questions of the council which is what she needs to act on not make statements that do nothing in providing answers to those questions being asked.

Answer those questions to the voting public its nothing to do with SISU! what are the plans for the RICOH!! where does it say SISU?
Click to expand...

800 signatures out of a populace of 320,000 and over 3 times as many opposing the 800.Until sisu get their act together
and actually speak to the Council--the Council have no reason to discuss other plans for the Stadium with anybody,
particularly with the JR in November.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #47
skybluefred said:
the Council have no reason to discuss other plans for the Stadium with anybody.
Click to expand...

Depends if the Council want a football club in the city or not.
 
R

RoboCCFC90

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #48
I have just read the full statement I must admit I had a little doubt in Ann Lucas before but this statements sounds creditable.

The ball is served and is now in Otium and Joy's court, so it's now time for Otium to make the next move.

A lot of posters have picked out the 'I will not short change them' part of the statement you can either read that statement two ways. Firstly they would be willing to listen to offers at a fair price or they have no interest in selling the Arena and will continue to offer a rental deal to the club.
 
S

sky blue zam

Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #49
fair statement for me, explained why she cant talk, invited sisu AGAIN. she is right though, only seppala can bring ccfc back. worth pointing out though that she does have 320,000 people to consider and while 90% of ccfc fans are boycotting sixfields how many times did we fill the ricoh with 10% ?of covs population.

what slse can cov council do?
 
Last edited: Oct 22, 2013

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #50
skybluefred said:
800 signatures out of a populace of 320,000 and over 3 times as many opposing the 800.Until sisu get their act together
and actually speak to the Council--the Council have no reason to discuss other plans for the Stadium with anybody,
particularly with the JR in November.
Click to expand...

What do you oppose the 800 for? Surely their stated aim is the same as everybody's?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #51
There are a couple things you could take from it

- it is clearly a bargaining position of sorts but dont read in to it that the freehold is for sale. Council prepared to talk but its up to SISU to make the approach. Pretty much what has gone on at the Higgs centre and what ACL are saying at the Ricoh. So consistent in a sense. It puts the ball in SISU's court

- It says that anyone who doesnt have real substance need not approach and that well meaning or self publicising individuals are not helpful

- One issue that is put around is that the Council wont talk or consider a deal with SISU. I believe that forms part of the JR application. Clearly AL is saying they will talk to anyone prepared to deal in a fair way (that includes SISU). It counters the statements and sentiments of previous council leader to some degree

- It shows faith and support for what is being done by ACL, whilst seeming to be concilliatory to other parties. They want CCFC back at the Ricoh but it isnt at any price, the world will still turn without them.

- yes there are emotive parts to it ..... why not?

- it says there will not be detailed statements from the CCC on the dispute untill the JR is settled

- to a degree it takes the wind out of the new protest group sails - it is not however a panic or pressured response to it (it was a small protest group meeting for first time, really going to cause such a statement? really?)

- it could also be read as the clock is ticking that SISU have a short time span in which to bring the club back, there are others interested in the stadium and the opportunity wont be there for ever

Yes it is a political statement but is it really any thing other than expected?
 
Last edited: Oct 22, 2013

skybluefred

New Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #52
RoboCCFC90 said:
I have just read the full statement I must admit I had a little doubt in Ann Lucas before but this statements sounds creditable.

The ball is served and is now in Otium and Joy's court, so it's now time for Otium to make the next move.

A lot of posters have picked out the 'I will not short change them' part of the statement you can either read that statement two ways. Firstly they would be willing to listen to offers at a fair price or they have no interest in selling the Arena and will continue to offer a rental deal to the club.
Click to expand...

I think the (I WILL NOT SHORTCHANGE THEM) Is aimed at the Council tax payers--not sisu.
 
H

Hugh Jarse

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #53
C'mon Ann, you wrote it!

Read the statement then read between the lines of it and you will see that what I've written is correct.
 

skybluefred

New Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #54
fernandopartridge said:
What do you oppose the 800 for? Surely their stated aim is the same as everybody's?
Click to expand...

The aim of the 800 surely is to sell the Ricoh to sisu, I am not one of them and never will be.
 

Hobo

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #55
fernandopartridge said:
Yet again littered with emotive crap - and people say Fisher plays to the crowd.
Click to expand...

Another wonderful one liner from Fernandopartridge?
Well at least Anne Lucas has been a season ticket holder for years, before she even got elected I think.

The nearest your beloved Joy can get is how she feels for the fans because she is a Christian and football is a religion.

No need to worry about gas prices this winter we can all warm ourselves on the glow off Joys empathy.

Anne Lucas statement seems pretty straight down the line. But it shows they are still willing to negotiate...SISU?
 

olderskyblue

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #56
Deleted member 5849 said:
Ye-es.

That was slightly needless really.
Click to expand...

maybe, but NS was spreading crap awhile ago about AL not attending a meeting with some no mark, which was not in any way helpful. I think those words will now become an "end note" for anything Nikki has to say now..
 
S

sky blue zam

Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #57
with ann lucas saying she would like to see ccfc back at the ricoh by christmas, would this mean that plans are set up for something to happen after christmas
 
R

RoboCCFC90

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #58
skybluefred said:
I think the (I WILL NOT SHORTCHANGE THEM) Is aimed at the Council tax payers--not sisu.
Click to expand...

I realise that however 'shortchange' doesn't imply that they aren't willing to talk to SISU about agreeing a fair price for the Arena in my opinion.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #59
fernandopartridge said:
Yet again littered with emotive crap - and people say Fisher plays to the crowd.
Click to expand...

You need to explain as all is says really is they want us back.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #60
The politicians are maintaining a united front.

Council leader Ann Lucas has today made the following statement about Coventry City Football Club during the meeting of the Full Council. Leader of the Opposition Cllr John Blundell fully supported the statement.
Click to expand...
 
R

RPHunt

New Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #61
Jack Griffin said:
The politicians are maintaining a united front.
Click to expand...

Just a pity the fans can't.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #62
Hugh Jarse said:
I've read what Lucas has said and this is what I make of it.

1. Pay us what you owe us and we'll talk about a return to The Ricoh.

2. If you don't pay up, The Ricoh can survive without a football club.

If this is her beloved Sky Blues, I'd hate to see what she would do to a company or organisation she disliked!
Click to expand...

You need to read it again then .........
 

ohitsaidwalker king power

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #63
Deleted member 5849 said:
Depends if the Council want a football club in the city or not.
Click to expand...

or the owners- for it is them that took it away...... open your eyes...please....
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #64
edgy said:
Seems this "pathetic" demo on the council steps wasn't in vain. Full marks to Stuart Cosgrove. Let's not stop now.
Click to expand...

Good old Cozzy!

I worked with him for 20 years. He's a good lad.:claping hands:
 
Last edited: Oct 22, 2013

Astute

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #65
italiahorse said:
You need to read it again then .........
Click to expand...

the reading part of it is easy. It is understanding the words he is having a problem with
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #66
Warwickhunt said:
As far as I am concerned she has an 800 signature petition asking valid questions of the council which is what she needs to act on not make statements that do nothing in providing answers to those questions being asked.

Answer those questions to the voting public its nothing to do with SISU! what are the plans for the RICOH!! where does it say SISU?
Click to expand...

now i'm confused. do you want ccfc back at the ricoh or just anybody as a sitting resident. because if its ccfc you want back at the ricoh then it has everything to do with SISU, them being the owners and all that.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 22, 2013
  • #67
RPHunt said:
Just a pity the fans can't.
Click to expand...

90% in support of a Sixfields boycott is pretty good.
 

lewys33

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 23, 2013
  • #68
It really does make me laugh that people do not want CCFC to have anything to do with the council, yet want the council to do all the running around to make this happen??
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 23, 2013
  • #69
fernandopartridge said:
They're acting as the Football Club. After all it is the club who has allegedly suffered a detriment due to the actions of the Council.
Click to expand...

Well it's probably best to get that issue resolved before there are too many more statements from the Council then, eh?

And talking abour detriment, it's absolutely proven in a court of law that ACL have suffered a 'detriment' at the hands of SISU, this as a result of their failure to pay the rent that was contractually due.

And The football club was CCFC Ltd - how much of a detriment has that entity endured under it's owners. If there's one thing that's crystal clear it's that the 'club' has suffered massively at the hands of it's current owners.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?