the only reason we’re where we are is because we still allow hedge funds, looters, carpetbaggers and assorted cranks into our national game because not to do so would be somehow discriminatory – and one presumes ‘against my human rights, innit?’, and the reason nothing changes is because the whole business of reform is being slowly inserted into its place on the dusty shelf alongside four other reviews in the last forty-odd years.
Nearly 40% of fans would disagree that SISU are the ONLY reason we are where we are. You know... The survey and all that.
the only reason we’re where we are is because we still allow hedge funds, looters, carpetbaggers and assorted cranks into our national game because not to do so would be somehow discriminatory – and one presumes ‘against my human rights, innit?’, and the reason nothing changes is because the whole business of reform is being slowly inserted into its place on the dusty shelf alongside four other reviews in the last forty-odd years.
Nearly 40% of fans would disagree that SISU are the ONLY reason we are where we are. You know... The survey and all that.
The article is pretty much the truth, and the majority, nearly 60% in fact, of city fans know it.
If it included the roles that ACL and previous owners of our club had played in the reasoning behind why a hedge fund ended up running our club, then it would be even closer to the truth.
No that would just be over complicating the story unnecessarily.
What in that article wasn't true?
The article is pretty much the truth, and the majority, nearly 60% in fact, of city fans know it.
If it included the roles that ACL and previous owners of our club had played in the reasoning behind why a hedge fund ended up running our club, then it would be even closer to the truth.
I haven't said anything in the article isn't true. But thanks for suggesting I did.
If it included the roles that ACL and previous owners of our club had played in the reasoning behind why a hedge fund ended up running our club, then it would be even closer to the truth.
I haven't said anything in the article isn't true. But thanks for suggesting I did.
915 do you mean?
And again someone goes back into the archives to drag up the past.
I haven't said anything in the article isn't true. But thanks for suggesting I did.
It happens continually on here (I suppose they take the lead from Fisher), but it is completely immaterial to the present and the future. Whatever any investigation or inquiry dug up, even if it put someone in front of a court, it would not sort out the current predicament. Only one party can do that and this endless rehashing of the past only serves to deflect the spotlight from that party.
Agreed 100%, the buck stops with the owner, the party responsible for the well being of the CCFC business.
It happens continually on here (I suppose they take the lead from Fisher), but it is completely immaterial to the present and the future. Whatever any investigation or inquiry dug up, even if it put someone in front of a court, it would not sort out the current predicament. Only one party can do that and this endless rehashing of the past only serves to deflect the spotlight from that party.
If you mean 'bring the club back to the Ricoh', the it will take two parts agreeing a price.
We're fucked then
It's probably best not to mention ACL or the previous boards. Just blame it all on the current regime. Makes things much simpler.
And that's the problem I have with these articles. We will highlight everything is wrong right now, but we won't say anything about how we got here or how we're going to get out of this hole. The owners aren't going to sign another rental agreement, and as owners of a club with no assets other than the players are within their rights to do so. ACL are unlikely to accept any offer that SISU are willing to make for any part of the stadium because they don't want to lose out on a money making business for the wrong price. So far neither side is willing to give in. If either side gave in, not just SISU, we'd be back at the Ricoh. But because SISU are the owners of the club, and because they are seen as the ones who are saying no deal to a rental agreement, they are the ones that have been given the blame.
The article is just written to make people who dislike SISU feel a bit better.
The article is just written to make people who dislike SISU feel a bit better.
Here you have hit the nail on the head with what many of us think.
Sisu are the guardians of your football club. As CEO everything is down to Tim Fisher. You or he might not like that, but that is his responsibility. Under his reign we have seen attendances fall by over 13k, relegation, liquidation, and the club is homeless. And before you start going on about what ACL did, a decent CEO should be able to put forward a proposal for Coventry City to play at the citys main stadium.
ACL are just a supplier. Nothing else. They have no obligation (either moral or legal) to even let the club near the Ricoh again. They have as much responsibility in the running of CCFC as the bloke that drives the team bus.
Even if you think ACL have caused a lot of damage, what sort of company allows its fate to be decided by a supplier?
So SISU are bad owners. Do you think ACL are suitable landlords for a football club?
And that's the problem I have with these articles. We will highlight everything is wrong right now, but we won't say anything about how we got here or how we're going to get out of this hole. The owners aren't going to sign another rental agreement, and as owners of a club with no assets other than the players are within their rights to do so. ACL are unlikely to accept any offer that SISU are willing to make for any part of the stadium because they don't want to lose out on a money making business for the wrong price. So far neither side is willing to give in. If either side gave in, not just SISU, we'd be back at the Ricoh. But because SISU are the owners of the club, and because they are seen as the ones who are saying no deal to a rental agreement, they are the ones that have been given the blame.
The article is just written to make people who dislike SISU feel a bit better.
Of course they are being given the blame. They could be back at the Ricoh accept the lower rent whatever it is and negotiate part sale then full sale. Do this in good faith then perhaps the pendulum would swing in their favour. At the moment they look like bullies and spoilt kids who take their ball away because they cant get what they want. What are people supposed to think they are willing to lose money hand over fist and "build" a new ground for far more than offering a decent price for the Ricoh. These are supposeed to be clever business people its about time they started to act like it.
So SISU are bad owners. Do you think ACL are suitable landlords for a football club?
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?