You don't need to apologise on my behalf.
Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.
You don't need to apologise on my behalf.
Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.
You really are a poor parody of a CCFC fan.
You don't need to apologise on my behalf.
Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.
You don't need to apologise on my behalf.
Sorry Michael - I stand by every word I said.
The offer was never going to be accepted and was never rent free.
If Sisu wanted to be at the The Ricoh they would be there, offers of free rent that actually aren't offers of free rent at all would never change that.
So what is your great idea to get our club home then Grendel?
This is why the "offer" was so frustrating and only put out there to get a cheap headline for Kcic.
Lets put a couple of myths to bed here.
1. No one going to sixfields will force the football league to do something. No it will not. There is nothing in the leagues ruled that say matches have to have minimal attendances. Given that the vast majority to not go shows fans are not considered by the league.
2. The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.
So we then get a supposed rent free deal. However this offer of no rent is of course spurious as the attendance figure is low. So, is there a million available or not?
If there is agree the deal with ACL to give them all match day costs and rent for 3 years. Then this constitutes a free offer. The Kcic / ACL offer then should be publicly displayed and should be discussed with the league. The trust should then take legal advice to see if the continued refusal to play for free at a stadium In the city does constitute a breach of their rules regarding allowing movement away.
The problem is Michael answers no questions.
If the offer is genuine this could all be done.
That's what I would do.[/QUOTE]
Well fucking do it then, you makes claims of being some sort of Alan Sugar like business man closing deals for hundreds of thousands of pounds just by phone yet you seem to spend most of your life on here. Spend less time on here, try to do what Michael did instead of picking holes in other people and pony up and have bash yourself, unless of course you are full of shit. I'll let others make their opinions on that.
This is why the "offer" was so frustrating and only put out there to get a cheap headline for Kcic.
Lets put a couple of myths to bed here.
1. No one going to sixfields will force the football league to do something. No it will not. There is nothing in the leagues ruled that say matches have to have minimal attendances. Given that the vast majority to not go shows fans are not considered by the league.
2. The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.
So we then get a supposed rent free deal. However this offer of no rent is of course spurious as the attendance figure is low. So, is there a million available or not?
If there is agree the deal with ACL to give them all match day costs and rent for 3 years. Then this constitutes a free offer. The Kcic / ACL offer then should be publicly displayed and should be discussed with the league. The trust should then take legal advice to see if the continued refusal to play for free at a stadium In the city does constitute a breach of their rules regarding allowing movement away.
The problem is Michael answers no questions.
If the offer is genuine this could all be done.
That's what I would do.
Well fucking do it then, you makes claims of being some sort of Alan Sugar like business man closing deals for hundreds of thousands of pounds just by phone yet you seem to spend most of your life on here. Spend less time on here, try to do what Michael did instead of picking holes in other people and pony up and have bash yourself, unless of course you are full of shit. I'll let others make their opinions on that.
Michael claims to have £1 million to pay the rent.
You are effectively saying he hasn't.
Don't you believe he has?
Please show me in my post where I 'effectively' said that.
Stop trying to move the goalposts like Labovitch or Fisher continually do and put your money where your mouth is or as I said in my last post and you certainly not proved otherwise, are you really full of shit?
I'm off to work now in my medium paid job which I do full time. You stick around on here for the rest of day (like every other day) and show that you really are full of shit. Deals over the phone my arse, you probably negotiated a loan from the social.
Michael claims to have £1 million to pay the rent.
You are effectively saying he hasn't.
Don't you believe he has?
yawn.
Here we go again. Time to grow up Grendel and embrace the first signs of positivity we've seen here for at least 18 months, even though it may not suit your agenda.
A positive thread turned into another confrontational, attention seeking pile of drivel. What a bore you are.
To the OP: Well said.
yawn.
Here we go again. Time to grow up Grendel and embrace the first signs of positivity we've seen here for at least 18 months, even though it may not suit your agenda.
A positive thread turned into another confrontational, attention seeking pile of drivel. What a bore you are.
To the OP: Well said.
Please show me in my post where I 'effectively' said that.
Stop trying to move the goalposts like Labovitch or Fisher continually do and put your money where your mouth is or as I said in my last post and you certainly not proved otherwise, are you really full of shit?
I'm off to work now in my medium paid job which I do full time. You stick around on here for the rest of day (like every other day) and show that you really are full of shit. Deals over the phone my arse, you probably negotiated a loan from the social.
Your emotional diatribe is irrelevant to the discussion.
If the money is there it should be used to create a situation where publicly sisu have no wriggle room and their objections can be countenanced.
Your emotional ranting suggests a lack of understanding as to what I am saying.
Hope it's not too hot in the burger van today.
It wasn't a positive post, it was a dig at those (Nick, Grendel, Torch, etc) who dared to question the offer:
Michael I would like to offer sincere apologies from the posters who abused you over the Rent deal.
I know they are not big enough to do it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
It wasn't a positive post, it was a dig at those (Nick, Grendel, Torch, etc) who dared to question the offer:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
How is the deal pointless?
The club win either way if they take the offer:
If attendance is equal to sixfields but less than double then they have saved on the rent paid at sixfields and are able to charge a higher rate on tickets ie the rate before the move.
If attendance moves over double that of sixfields, then ticket revenue will have more than doubled and will cover the sliding scale of re-imbursement for the rent offer.
In either case the club is better off and this does not even take into account the fact that corporate sponsors might come back on board once we are back in our proper stadium.
The goodwill of the fans will be vastly improved (although still damaged), and there will be a platform to start negotiations with the council on a way for for revenues or ownership.
SISU, Tim Fisher and Joy just do not have the best interests of the club at heart. It has now developed into a petty childish squabble of 'If I cant have exactly what I want then i'm not playing and i'm taking my ball with me'.
Surely the crowds would always be over 5000 regardless of how many people hate Sisu?
Therefore the "offer" as such isn't an offer, it's what Sisu could do themselves at any time with ACL, but don't want to.
Of course if Sisu limited ticket sales to 4999(as Northern suggested), then it would work out quite nicely for Sisu and ACL, just cost Michael and his backers for 3 years.
Regardless of your argument, cheap insults doesnt win you the argument, just makes you look silly.
Surely the crowds would always be over 5000 regardless of how many people hate Sisu?
Therefore the "offer" as such isn't an offer, it's what Sisu could do themselves at any time with ACL, but don't want to.
Of course if Sisu limited ticket sales to 4999(as Northern suggested), then it would work out quite nicely for Sisu and ACL, just cost Michael and his backers for 3 years.
The rent repayments by CCFC / SISU would be on a sliding scale and would be more than offset by increasing ticket revenues. In all eventualities the club would be better off than being at sixfields.
It was a starting point. Sisu could have negotiated something more favourable to themselves but never bothered to progress it.
When will people realise that Sisu say what they want and will not comprimise even if if it means oblivion for the club.
Rent refusal, court cases etc etc are just a continuous process for them and if they lose the club was just a bit of collateral damage.
How can people play to them, in this board, at Sixfields, when they don't care about them. Weak willed and selfish IMHO .... get some balls.
The league will make sisu take the rent offer by Kcic as its better than sixfields. This is illegal as it basically says the league have power to force a club to agree a rent arrangement by a seperate company. The amount charged is totally irrelevant as the deal involves some form of fee.
You're correct the FL can't force SISU to accept any deal offered by ACL but what they can do is enforce their own rules and state that they will only allow Coventry City to compete in the FL in the upcoming season if home games are played in Coventry.
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?