Another letter... (1 Viewer)

peace ndlovu

Well-Known Member
I think we're all feeling frustrated about the stadium debacle and we often feel that we're at the mercy of a lot if people we have little faith in.
Living overseas and being able to attend a maximum of 1 or 2 games a season, I often feel even more powerless to do anything to help prevent what is increasingly looking like a grim outcome. Like a lot of posters on here, I don't feel adequately represented by the Sky Blue Trust. Not deriding CJ's efforts, but I've written my own letter that I was intending to email to Duggins and his colleagues in Coventry CC:
[email protected]
I'm posting it below, in the hope that if other posters broadly agree with what I've written, they might copy it and send it with their name at the bottom (amending the content as.you see fit).
Maybe a barrage of emails might make the CC feel a bit more accountable and understand we don't all buy into their narrative?
Maybe not, but there's sod all else I can do!
PUSB


Dear Mr Duggins,

I write to you with regard to the increasingly alarming situation regarding Coventry City's possible departure from the city, or worse, expulsion from the Football League.

I am dismayed by the evidence provided by the football club's owners that the City Council has repeatedly acted against the interests of the City's football club and supporters, at the expense of a Buckinghamshire based Rugby Union club and what appears to be a campaign against the club's owners.

Since SISU have taken control over Coventry City in 2007, I have even routinely disappointed by many of the decisions they have made. The only thing more disappointing than SISU's stewardship of the club is decisions made by Coventry City Council - which is a dreadful indictment of you and your colleagues.

When the council initially courted London Wasps to become owners of the stadium built for the City's football club, you must have been aware that this would effectively limit any prospects of financial stability and success for Coventry City FC, long after the departure of their current owners?

What you and your colleagues clearly did not understand is that SISU are merely temporary custodians of the City's football club. The only thing enduring about a sporting team is the supporters. Everything else is transient and changes: players, managers, boardroom staff, sometimes even badges and team colours, and in many cases, the venue that the team plays in. The City Council has not grasped this, and in this failure has caused immense harm to a sporting institution integral to the history and identity of the city.

We expect little from a London based hedge fund, but at least they seem to be learning from their litany of mistakes. You have a responsibility to publicly respond to each and every piece of evidence they have cited in their last two statements. You, like SISU, also have an enduring responsibility to cease this depressing war and start to act in the best interests of an extremely important community asset. Please stop this vendetta because it is not SISU you are harming most, but the thousands of people who love Coventry City Football Club. This means entering into a serious dialogue about a viable alternative to the stadium that now belongs to an out of town Rugby Union club with a 250 year lease.

If not, your legacy will be to have damaged (possibly fatally) a proud 136 year old football club, which although has endured nearly two decades of turmoil, is still an internationally recognized sporting brand. Despite your attempt to make SISU exclusively responsible for this sorry mess, the evidence suggests that the City Council is also hugely culpable - and I believe history will judge you accordingly. The irony of this all coming to a head in the year the city claims to be The City of Sport adds a depressing twist to this saga.

I sincerely hope you and all the other parties in this sorry saga will adopt a more conciliatory approach and make a genuine attempt to seek a resolution in the short time we have left.

Kind regards,
 

usskyblue

Well-Known Member
giphy.gif
 

LilleSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
I also live abroad and get to one or two matches a season, though unlike you I have little idea why the club I have supported ferociously and exclusively for 33 years is menaced with expulsion from the football league.

Greed? Pride? They wouldbe my first guesses...

Anyway, I applaud your initiative!
 

peace ndlovu

Well-Known Member
giphy.gif

Blimey.
Got a reply from Cllr Duggins this morning.
Not just a one line acknowledgement but very much a detailed response.
Did anyone else?
 

Seamus1

Well-Known Member
I was in Singapore a couple of weeks ago and a local with whom I was chatting recognised the name of Coventry City and even knew which league we were playing in! So the comment about the name being recognised internationally does hold a great deal of merit. Although I did not ask, I doubt he would know who Wasps are.
 

peace ndlovu

Well-Known Member
Share it then!
What's the etiquette on posting someone's else's email sent to a private recipient?
If it's ok with Nick, I'm happy enough to do it.
Prepare to experience absolutely zero surprise whatsoever by what he said.
All credit to him for taking the time to reply tho...on a Sunday morning
 

pipkin73

Well-Known Member
I was in Singapore a couple of weeks ago and a local with whom I was chatting recognised the name of Coventry City and even knew which league we were playing in! So the comment about the name being recognised internationally does hold a great deal of merit. Although I did not ask, I doubt he would know who Wasps are.
Met loads of Scandies who follow CCFC, as we have had lot's of Scandie player in our past. One even had a great big CCFC Tattoo and knew more facts about our club/our history than i do. Maybe we need more of them to improve our marketing.
 

Esoterica

Well-Known Member
What's the etiquette on posting someone's else's email sent to a private recipient?
If it's ok with Nick, I'm happy enough to do it.
Prepare to experience absolutely zero surprise whatsoever by what he said.
All credit to him for taking the time to reply tho...on a Sunday morning
You wanted us to all send the same email so a generic shared response seems fair to me
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
What's the etiquette on posting someone's else's email sent to a private recipient?
If it's ok with Nick, I'm happy enough to do it.
Prepare to experience absolutely zero surprise whatsoever by what he said.
All credit to him for taking the time to reply tho...on a Sunday morning
He's responding as a councillor so very little issue with it being shared unless he's attached an NDA
 

mark82

Super Moderator
What's the etiquette on posting someone's else's email sent to a private recipient?
If it's ok with Nick, I'm happy enough to do it.
Prepare to experience absolutely zero surprise whatsoever by what he said.
All credit to him for taking the time to reply tho...on a Sunday morning

I'm sure he'd be happy for you to share if it stops him receiving more emails. Assume there's nothing confidential in there as he wouldn't have shared with you.

Not breaking forum rules for you to share, so feel free to go ahead.
 

peace ndlovu

Well-Known Member
Ok thanks Mark. Here you go:

Thank you very much for your email.

You would not expect my colleagues on the council to agree with all you say.

I do accept supporters are permanent and if the sky blues leave Coventry will suffer.

We have answered publicly everything sisu have said about the council and if you have not done so then you might find reading judge hickinbotham judgement of June 2014 clears up many of those claims.

When the council did the deal with wasps to sell the shares in acl, the football club had just returned from playing in Northampton. Nothing to do with the city council.

And before that the rent strike.

When the club left in August 2013, they were going to be building their own ground, a fact documented in the media.

That is still their apparent ambition and our officers have given them advice about how to take this work forward.

The stance of the council has been consistent we want the sky blues to play in Coventry. At present if you add the rent strike and legal action together then it is entering an eighth year of action against the council. As a council we have a duty to all citizens in Coventry be they supporters or not to tell sisu to end the litigation because of the cost to you and me.

I too hope the issue will be resolved but my colleague councillors and this is a joint Labour conservative approach can't force sisu to end litigation and wasps to offer a further deal.

You will remember wasps gave the club a one year extension to play the 2018 19 at the Ricoh, insisting they did so for the supporters but if the legal action had not ended there would not be another deal. Once again thank you for your email
Best wishes George
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
We have answered publicly everything sisu have said about the council
Have they? Did they respond to the emails etc that SISU released with them dropping their pants to wasps a year before we were in Northampton? And the email chain saying they were just negotiating as a stalling technique?
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Have they? Did they respond to the emails etc that SISU released with them dropping their pants to wasps a year before we were in Northampton? And the email chain saying they were just negotiating as a stalling technique?
Yep referring to the judges comments probably covers it.
 

Nick

Administrator
Is he 12? His writing ability is shocking.

When the council did the deal with wasps to sell the shares in acl, the football club had just returned from playing in Northampton. Nothing to do with the city council.

Erm.

He should really be letting his assistant or the comms team reply to them.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
People are commenting on the contents. Try not to defend your mate too much.
You weren’t and the guy following with the capital letters wasn’t, although he does have a point.
Don’t know cllr Duggins at all I’m afraid. WHat he has allowed to happen is completely unacceptable but at least he’s responding as a public servant. Also Sisu dong seem to have managed to make a legal case.
 

Nick

Administrator
You weren’t and the guy following with the capital letters wasn’t, although he does have a point.
Don’t know cllr Duggins at all I’m afraid. WHat he has allowed to happen is completely unacceptable but at least he’s responding as a public servant. Also Sisu dong seem to have managed to make a legal case.

I clearly was commenting on his reply, wasn't I? I even quoted from it.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I clearly was commenting on his reply, wasn't I? I even quoted from it.
Nope you were commenting on how it was written and not the contents. Do you disagree with the statement? I do as there is a point there about Sisu returning and being told there was a timeline to ownership whilst the council were seemingly negotiating with wasps
 

Nick

Administrator
Nope you were commenting on how it was written and not the contents. Do you disagree with the statement? I do as there is a point there about Sisu returning and being told there was a timeline to ownership whilst the council were seemingly negotiating with wasps

I quoted contents from it.

It comes across as an old bloke who has opened up his Outlook Express on a Sunday and has reeled off loads of stuff he has been told to say in an unstructured, badly written email. It looks more like somebody fuming after a bad defeat on here writing a post than it does something you would expect from somebody in charge of a council.

He just hides behind the judgement (which only judged on it being state aid), that SISU said they were building a stadium and tries to say that the Council doing a deal with Wasps was nothing to do with the council. Some of the stuff he is reeling off is pretty much identical to the stuff that the strange Twitter accounts seem to chirp up with and is just playing the "it woz all SISU" game.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Actually State aid was only one of the grounds.

The judgement handed down by Hickinbottom also dealt with "failure to take in to account material considerations" and "irrationality" of the loan made

The State Aid claim - Judgement said it was not State Aid and that claim failed

"In the failure to take in to account material considerations" there were 7 sections
- that material advice had been kept from the councillors- Judgement says it had not
- that CCC had recognised that a lower offer to settle loan was more than any private investor would pay - Judgement says these grounds had no merit
- that ACL & SISU were already in advanced talks with the bank to settle the loan so no other unilateral action should have been taken, also covered whether CCFC had agreed a new rental amount - Judgement says these grounds were "hopeless" and the parties were "far apart" in settling a rent. The CCC were entitled to explore other options whether it suited SISU or not
- that the rent had been paid by virtue of the draw down from the Escrow account - Judgement says the "rent was not paid" and Escrow account not a substitute
- that CCC had recognised the commercial advantage of delaying a permanent rent deal - Judgement says this argument carried very little weight if any
- that ACL faced ongoing financial difficulties whether or not CCFC paid the rent due -Judgement says CCFC withholding rent distressed ACL
- That CCC had been party to Heads of terms in August 2012 but had undermined that by commencing unilateral negotiations with the bank - Judgement says it was impossible to agree such a deal because SISU could not obtain the AEHC share (SISU & AEHC had both walked away from that deal by August 2012 per the judgement in that other case ) so the Heads of Terms had "ceased to be a material consideration" well before CCC made the loan

The grounds of Irrationality - failed because all other points had failed

SISU failed on each and every one of the arguments it claimed. The judge passed comment on much more than State Aid

On appeal the Judgement of Hickinbottom was confirmed in its entirety

The Judges had access to all documents provided on discovery not just the ones mentioned in court

A lot of the judgement appears to be at odds with the history provided by SISU in their statements

The more current stuff since those judgements concerning a new site etc it is not clear who is right, so I favour an opinion that both sides (CCC & SISU) are probably economic with the facts and truth and are both culpable in this fiasco
 
Last edited:

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
We have answered publicly everything sisu have said about the council and if you have not done so then you might find reading judge hickinbotham judgement of June 2014 clears up many of those claims.
No they haven't. In the past their response has always been "but SISU", now they are being asked specific questions but both SISU and the Observer they aren't answering. Certainly not in a manner anyone would deem acceptable.
When the council did the deal with wasps to sell the shares in acl, the football club had just returned from playing in Northampton. Nothing to do with the city council.
When the club returned for Northampton the Council were the freeholder and owned 50% of the company operating the stadium. Strange definition of 'nothing to do'.
That is still their apparent ambition and our officers have given them advice about how to take this work forward.
He needs to make up his mind about this as the story keeps changing.
The stance of the council has been consistent we want the sky blues to play in Coventry.
The councils actions are not consistent with that stance.
At present if you add the rent strike and legal action together then it is entering an eighth year of action against the council. As a council we have a duty to all citizens in Coventry be they supporters or not to tell sisu to end the litigation because of the cost to you and me.
They don't seem too concerned about legal costs when handing out gagging orders or pursing fruitless claims regarding parking tickets. Perhaps Duggins could state how much, as a percentage of the councils annual budget, they expect this cost to be given that they keep telling us they are certain to win and will then no doubt be awarded costs.
You will remember wasps gave the club a one year extension to play the 2018 19 at the Ricoh, insisting they did so for the supporters but if the legal action had not ended there would not be another deal.
So what? They also said last year they wouldn't do a one year deal and then did. More importantly the council also assured everyone they would not sell to Wasps if the clubs future wasn't guaranteed.
 

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
Actually State aid was only one of the grounds.

The judgement handed down by Hickinbottom also dealt with "failure to take in to account material considerations" and "irrationality" of the loan made

The State Aid claim - Judgement said it was not State Aid and that claim failed

"In the failure to take in to account material considerations" there were 7 sections
- that material advice had been kept from the councillors- Judgement says it had not
- that CCC had recognised that a lower offer to settle loan was more than any private investor would pay - Judgement says these grounds had no merit
- that ACL & SISU were already in advanced talks with the bank to settle the loan so no other unilateral action should have been taken, also covered whether CCFC had agreed a new rental amount - Judgement says these grounds were "hopeless" and the parties were "far apart" in settling a rent. The CCC were entitled to explore other options whether it suited SISU or not
- that the rent had been paid by virtue of the draw down from the Escrow account - Judgement says the "rent was not paid" and Escrow account not a substitute
- that CCC had recognised the commercial advantage of delaying a permanent rent deal - Judgement says this argument carried very little weight if any
- that ACL faced ongoing financial difficulties whether or not CCFC paid the rent due -Judgement says CCFC withholding rent distressed ACL
- That CCC had been party to Heads of terms in August 2012 but had undermined that by commencing unilateral negotiations with the bank - Judgement says it was impossible to agree such a deal because SISU could not obtain the AEHC share (SISU & AEHC had both walked away from that deal by August 2012 per the judgement in that other case ) so the Heads of Terms had "ceased to be a material consideration" well before CCC made the loan

The grounds of Irrationality - failed because all other points had failed

SISU failed on each and every one of the arguments it claimed. The judge passed comment on much more than State Aid

On appeal the Judgement of Hickinbottom was confirmed in its entirety

The Judges had access to all documents provided on discovery not just the ones mentioned in court

A lot of the judgement appears to be at odds with the history provided by SISU in their statements

The more current stuff since those judgements concerning a new site etc it is not clear who is right, so I favour an opinion that both sides (CCC & SISU) are probably economic with the facts and truth and are both culpable in this fiasco

giphy.gif

giphy.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top