Appeal Decision? (18 Viewers)

Paxman II · Jul 26, 2014

Why is everyone so smarty pants told you so happy about the council/ACL winning the JR?
Had this been in Otium's favour then would you be asking the judge to overturn it so CCFC can go further into the abyss?

Just who's side are some of you on?

I'm on the football clubs side. I want them back at the Ricoh. I want the council to offer a plan to try and make that happen.
Without the only football club in this large city at this large venue then the council/ACL will eventually come unhinged from the Ricoh.
If it's not offered to CCFC now then will they ever offer it to CCFC? Their problem is with the owners of the franchise but that should not deter a deal for the football club to have some ownership and the associated income from the Ricoh. owners come and go the football club in the town they represent needs to remain a part of the community.

No future with SISU · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
Their investors are being paid interest. The risk yield really isn't huge. It seems they are extending this project to at least 15 years - it won't bother them at all if they believe their overall position is strengthened.

More made up rubbish from your micro brain processes. It sounds a bit like those processes you used to have about the council been in the wrong and you been right, but the judge came out with JR report council right Grendel wrong.

No future with SISU · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
If I were you I'd look back on what the owners have said in the past.

Think you might find they've actually done exactly what they've said they'd do!

Asked for a rent reduction, refused by CCC / ACL (same thing anyway).

If you don't we'll withhold the rent. Still no CCC response so we'll move out!

They moved out and if they can't agree beneficial terms for a return WILL BUILD A NEW STADIUM.

You like many others under-estimate these owners at your peril, personally none of the parties in this debacle can come out of this with any credit (not just the owners) but also CCC, ACL & COMPASS.

A balanced rather than biased view might go a long way to the reality rather than the fantasy.

You are liveing in fantasy land if you think they are going to any thing football related with city. They have lurched from mistake after mistake, everthing they do is just LOSE, LOSE,LOSE, need I go on.

No future with SISU · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
Once again no balance, LC & his agent manipulated his unsuccessful move to Wolves purely for financial gain (can't blame CCFC for that) and if you receive a substantial offer as a club you are obliged to inform the player.

CW is a level headed young man who I'm sure would have preferred to stay BUT he has to think about his family and his long-term future, playing in a higher division and quadrupling his earnings (with advice from his Agent, it's a no brainer).

I could go but am not prepared to waste my time!

Nobodies right here but it's not just one party at fault, many should be hanging their heads in shame, however it's pretty obvious that they don't have any.

You should READ the JR report and you will find it is only one party at fault, SISU.

Astute · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
Did not OSB agree that interest is being paid and that investors are being paid? I am sure he did.

So you make out that OSB is not worth listening to as he is very biased, but you then say he is right.

For months you and others said that the extortionate interest payments that are 50% higher than the rent was which was and is for something that our club needs.....somewhere in Coventry to play that is also big enough for all of us to get in......will never be paid and will just sit on the accounts. Now you are saying these same extortionate interest payments will make a profit for Joys investors.

Then you wonder why just about everyone says you are a WUM or SISU supporter.

No future with SISU · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
It's called confidentiality and I'm not prepared to break that for you or anyone else for that matter. Very good reasons but as I've previously stated, not rocket science and I'm confident a "short term" deal at the Ricoh is still possible but if I were you I wouldn't hold my breath!

Long term if we are going to exist we have to move and own our own stadium ( no chance of that with the Ricoh ), so onwards & upwards who ever owns the club.

I went past the liberty ground on monday, a big Ospreys sign on it. The locals said it holds 20,000 and cost £27m to build. The land was allready owned by the council. Where are SISU going to get £27m from and the money to buy the land?. Also one of them laughed and said the EU is going through the books about dodgy loans to sports clubs.

No future with SISU · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
Three Senior Appeal Court Judges just might be able to sort out the wood from the trees?

On the other hand have you ever heard or known of a Council being deceitful or corrupt in their dealings with COUNCIL TAX PAYERS money? Bailing-out a company that they have a vested interest in with a 43 year loan ( YES 43 YEARS ) to pay off their £14million debt!

Where would you (or I get a 43 year loan ?????????????????????????????)

Yet to hear of a guilty COUNCIL but of course there's a first time for everything!

This council is not guilty, a High Court Judge said so. No you are guilty of been the monkey for following Fisher/SISU.

Astute · Jul 26, 2014

Paxman II said:
Why is everyone so smarty pants told you so happy about the council/ACL winning the JR?
Had this been in Otium's favour then would you be asking the judge to overturn it so CCFC can go further into

Just who's side are some of you on?

.

Are you being serious here?

Yes a few people did want CCC/ACL to win the JR no matter what the truth is. But there was also a few that wanted SISU to win the JR whatever the truth is. Just look at Grendel and RFC's posts to see that it is still so.

The vast majority of us wanted the truth out. We all know that the rent was set too high. We all get that bit. But most of us acknowledge that there were reasons for this. At first the arena had no income and interest payments to be made. The rent could have been reduced earlier. It wasn't offered. We all get that. Our club was given a 50% share in ACL which our club sold. We all get that.

Gloating? Maybe a few do. Just like a few would have if SISU would have won the JR. But most of us couldn't see any grounds of them winning the JR, although we were expecting a smoking gun that never appeared.

It looks to most of us that SISU don't want to bring our club home still. They have stretched out the payment to ACL for as long as they can. They won't give up on the JR even though it couldn't have gone any worse for them. Is anyone gloating for noticing this?

I am like many others and can see the reasons for ACL not wanting to deal with SISU whilst the fruitless litigation is ongoing. We need the past to be left in the past. It isn't our fault that SISU have wasted millions on litigation. It isn't our fault that SISU lost millions in income from being in Northampton for a season. It isn't our fault that the money they have lost because of their plans to get the Ricoh on the cheap could have bought the 50% our club sold back. It isn't gloating to have noticed this.

Just about all of us want our club back in Coventry. But most of us are realistic in what needs to happen. This also isn't gloating. It is being plainly realistic.

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
I've been very restrained regrading using silly names Tony after nicks advice. You seem less so.

So telephone man have you picked the phone up to Mark? I did text him last week telling him all about you and he said he was soon to have a knee op but would take the call. I advised him that I thought you were full if shit and wouldn't do it.

So you did say by the middle of this week you'd make the call. How did it go Telephone man?

What do you think?

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
Three Senior Appeal Court Judges just might be able to sort out the wood from the trees?

On the other hand have you ever heard or known of a Council being deceitful or corrupt in their dealings with COUNCIL TAX PAYERS money? Bailing-out a company that they have a vested interest in with a 43 year loan ( YES 43 YEARS ) to pay off their £14million debt!

Where would you (or I get a 43 year loan ?????????????????????????????)

Yet to hear of a guilty COUNCIL but of course there's a first time for everything!

You do know that the money wasn't from the collection of council tax don't you? Apparently not.

The length of the loan wasn't the issue. The judge was looking at whether another commercial lender would have loaned them the same amount of money, as the YB had already offered them the same amount as a restructured loan the answer is clearly yes. The difference in the terms of the loan were not a consideration.

No wonder you think three judges will see the wood for the trees. You clearly don't understand what the JR was about.

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

Astute said:
Are you being serious here?

Yes a few people did want CCC/ACL to win the JR no matter what the truth is. But there was also a few that wanted SISU to win the JR whatever the truth is. Just look at Grendel and RFC's posts to see that it is still so.

The vast majority of us wanted the truth out. We all know that the rent was set too high. We all get that bit. But most of us acknowledge that there were reasons for this. At first the arena had no income and interest payments to be made. The rent could have been reduced earlier. It wasn't offered. We all get that. Our club was given a 50% share in ACL which our club sold. We all get that.

Gloating? Maybe a few do. Just like a few would have if SISU would have won the JR. But most of us couldn't see any grounds of them winning the JR, although we were expecting a smoking gun that never appeared.

It looks to most of us that SISU don't want to bring our club home still. They have stretched out the payment to ACL for as long as they can. They won't give up on the JR even though it couldn't have gone any worse for them. Is anyone gloating for noticing this?

I am like many others and can see the reasons for ACL not wanting to deal with SISU whilst the fruitless litigation is ongoing. We need the past to be left in the past. It isn't our fault that SISU have wasted millions on litigation. It isn't our fault that SISU lost millions in income from being in Northampton for a season. It isn't our fault that the money they have lost because of their plans to get the Ricoh on the cheap could have bought the 50% our club sold back. It isn't gloating to have noticed this.

Just about all of us want our club back in Coventry. But most of us are realistic in what needs to happen. This also isn't gloating. It is being plainly realistic.

Exactly. Too simple for some to grasp though.

kmj5000 · Jul 26, 2014

The ruling was made on 18th July so SISU have known about it for a week. Is it not surprising that they haven't come out with any comment or a declaration from Tim saying that the Judge is incompetent and they want to take the appeal to 3 senior High Court judges.

They must be busy putting together their case for the Court of Appeal as there are only 6 days left for them to do so. Given the Judge's emphatic statement, the question is, Tim, are you really that foolish to do so?

AFCCOVENTRY · Jul 26, 2014

kmj5000 said:
The ruling was made on 18th July so SISU have known about it for a week. Is it not surprising that they haven't come out with any comment or a declaration from Tim saying that the Judge is incompetent and they want to take the appeal to 3 senior High Court judges.

They must be busy putting together their case for the Court of Appeal as there are only 6 days left for them to do so. Given the Judge's emphatic statement, the question is, Tim, are you really that foolish to do so?

Foolish is Tim's middle name....

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

kmj5000 said:
The ruling was made on 18th July so SISU have known about it for a week. Is it not surprising that they haven't come out with any comment or a declaration from Tim saying that the Judge is incompetent and they want to take the appeal to 3 senior High Court judges.

They must be busy putting together their case for the Court of Appeal as there are only 6 days left for them to do so. Given the Judge's emphatic statement, the question is, Tim, are you really that foolish to do so?

I don't think that this is Tims decision. Joy makes the calls.

Hobo · Jul 26, 2014

Astute said:
Are you being serious here?

Yes a few people did want CCC/ACL to win the JR no matter what the truth is. But there was also a few that wanted SISU to win the JR whatever the truth is. Just look at Grendel and RFC's posts to see that it is still so.

The vast majority of us wanted the truth out. We all know that the rent was set too high. We all get that bit. But most of us acknowledge that there were reasons for this. At first the arena had no income and interest payments to be made. The rent could have been reduced earlier. It wasn't offered. We all get that. Our club was given a 50% share in ACL which our club sold. We all get that.

Gloating? Maybe a few do. Just like a few would have if SISU would have won the JR. But most of us couldn't see any grounds of them winning the JR, although we were expecting a smoking gun that never appeared.

It looks to most of us that SISU don't want to bring our club home still. They have stretched out the payment to ACL for as long as they can. They won't give up on the JR even though it couldn't have gone any worse for them. Is anyone gloating for noticing this?

I am like many others and can see the reasons for ACL not wanting to deal with SISU whilst the fruitless litigation is ongoing. We need the past to be left in the past. It isn't our fault that SISU have wasted millions on litigation. It isn't our fault that SISU lost millions in income from being in Northampton for a season. It isn't our fault that the money they have lost because of their plans to get the Ricoh on the cheap could have bought the 50% our club sold back. It isn't gloating to have noticed this.

Just about all of us want our club back in Coventry. But most of us are realistic in what needs to happen. This also isn't gloating. It is being plainly realistic.

This is a good post and is a good reflection of people's stance. There is some balance and counterpoint in the text.....rather than the one way traffic you get from RFC, Grendel and Paxman.

SISU's stubborn pursuance of the appeal, shows for me, they still have no intention of doing a deal to bring the club home. Still trying the back door route. Tim Fishers hypocritical call for the council to listen to the will of the fans and the tax payer....when it is SISU who are deaf and dumb to compromise.

ccfcway · Jul 26, 2014

serious question, when will this all end, ie how many times and to who can they appeal ?

I ask my boss for a pay rise, he says no so I go to the CEO, he says no and that's it.

How many appeals can they have and to who ?

letsallsingtogether · Jul 26, 2014

Excellent post, funny how the usual suspects ether ignore or do not have an answer to these type of threads thought one might even give you a like????

I for one see it exactly that way yes I do veer off on a tangent, but that is only to be expected when the so called educated ones attack anything not in their agenda.

Astute said:
Are you being serious here?

Yes a few people did want CCC/ACL to win the JR no matter what the truth is. But there was also a few that wanted SISU to win the JR whatever the truth is. Just look at Grendel and RFC's posts to see that it is still so.

The vast majority of us wanted the truth out. We all know that the rent was set too high. We all get that bit. But most of us acknowledge that there were reasons for this. At first the arena had no income and interest payments to be made. The rent could have been reduced earlier. It wasn't offered. We all get that. Our club was given a 50% share in ACL which our club sold. We all get that.

Gloating? Maybe a few do. Just like a few would have if SISU would have won the JR. But most of us couldn't see any grounds of them winning the JR, although we were expecting a smoking gun that never appeared.

It looks to most of us that SISU don't want to bring our club home still. They have stretched out the payment to ACL for as long as they can. They won't give up on the JR even though it couldn't have gone any worse for them. Is anyone gloating for noticing this?

I am like many others and can see the reasons for ACL not wanting to deal with SISU whilst the fruitless litigation is ongoing. We need the past to be left in the past. It isn't our fault that SISU have wasted millions on litigation. It isn't our fault that SISU lost millions in income from being in Northampton for a season. It isn't our fault that the money they have lost because of their plans to get the Ricoh on the cheap could have bought the 50% our club sold back. It isn't gloating to have noticed this.

Just about all of us want our club back in Coventry. But most of us are realistic in what needs to happen. This also isn't gloating. It is being plainly realistic.

Mr T - Sukka! · Jul 26, 2014

I find it very funny that the ones who say CCC were ripping off the club with rent.

They dont use the same logic and say SISU are ripping off the club by paying near enough the same amount in management fees!

So they reckon its wrong for CCC to rip off CCFC. But fine for SISU.

Very strange attitudes they have this will not get an answer. Yes im on about paxman2 and RFC.

James Smith · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
If I were you I'd look back on what the owners have said in the past.

Think you might find they've actually done exactly what they've said they'd do!

So where are the plans and planning permission and potential sites for the new stadium? How long ago were we promised we'd see movement on that? As I don't think we'll be back at the Ricoh anytime soon we need to get on with building it now.

RFC said:
Asked for a rent reduction, refused by CCC / ACL (same thing anyway).

As the Sisu barrister admitted in court the high rent was a result of the loan/mortgage from the Yorkshire Bank. The council refinance ACL so much cheaper rent possible and get taken to court for their trouble.

RFC said:
If you don't we'll withhold the rent. Still no CCC response so we'll move out!

The Trust Q&A says that current owners asked for a rent reduction after starting the rent boycott not before. There had been discussions with the previous board (pre Sisu), but hard to lower rent for reason above. Since Sisu came in there were

"one or two light touch discussions with Sisu but nothing that amounted to a serious proposition."

They also didn't start talking to the Higgs until the rent boycott had started.

RFC said:
They moved out and if they can't agree beneficial terms for a return WILL BUILD A NEW STADIUM.

Good I'm all for it, now can we see some evidence please that it will ever be built because that's already been a year and all I've seen is a retouched image or two of the new Brentford stadium.

RFC said:
You like many others under-estimate these owners at your peril, personally none of the parties in this debacle can come out of this with any credit (not just the owners) but also CCC, ACL & COMPASS.

Wait a minute what have Compass done to anyone? How have they come out of it badly? That's the sort of thing Mr Labovitch says when painted into a corner, please explain what Compass have done wrong here.

RFC said:
A balanced rather than biased view might go a long way to the reality rather than the fantasy.

As far as I can see the major fantasy is the new stadium, as no serious work appears to have been done at all. The reality is we're stuck in Northampton and our owners appear to be keen for us to stay there whether or not the "home" games have any Coventry fans there excepting you obviously.

I have no love for Coventry Council as they aren't my council and I had hoped that once the JR was over the loser would either be looking for a new loan and talking to our club or talking to ACL about coming back for the start of the season. I guess that was fantasy right there.

Depressing isn't the word.

will am i · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
Please articulate further with detail.

I'll articulate. How did you arrive at this conclusion as my brain is too small to understand how this could be true. If it takes 15 years I doubt CCFC would exist in its current form and I doubt even you will be turning up at Sixfields.

"Their investors are being paid interest. The risk yield really isn't huge. It seems they are extending this project to at least 15 years - it won't bother them at all if they believe their overall position is strengthened".

Grendel · Jul 26, 2014

will am i said:
I'll articulate. How did you arrive at this conclusion as my brain is too small to understand how this could be true. If it takes 15 years I doubt CCFC would exist in its current form and I doubt even you will be turning up at Sixfields.

"Their investors are being paid interest. The risk yield really isn't huge. It seems they are extending this project to at least 15 years - it won't bother them at all if they believe their overall position is strengthened".

To be fair I meant to say at least 10 to 15 years. 10 is 3 years from now. There is little doubt this is now a time plan. The real worry I have is that they may even go ahead with land purchase and ground development. It's an outside possibility but one that cannot 100% be ruled out given that they are nothing if not predictable in their lack of consistency.

RFC · Jul 26, 2014

No future with SISU said:
The club was going backwards at Highfield road, it is why they had £60m of debt then. The ground was falling apart and could only hold 24,000, which ment they could not compete in the prem. That is why they decided to build a new stadium, but their debt forced the council to bail them out to get the stadium built. Then Higgs had to bail them out as well and then the worse owners ever came in, downhill all the way since. There was no way back to highfield road as they had allready sold it and were paying £1.2m in rent on a 24,000 seat stadium.

Kingokings204 said:
They also said they wouldn't sell leon Clarke and CW.

They also said they would invest in the team.

They also said they would liquidate the club in 2012.

They also stated they would be open and transparent with the fans.

They also said they would hold a forum on the accounts and delayed it and meant to be end of July last I heard?

They also said plans were 3 weeks away only over a year ago.

They also said, well see my point. There are many more.

Any I'm missing?

Mr T - Sukka! said:
I find it very funny that the ones who say CCC were ripping off the club with rent.

They dont use the same logic and say SISU are ripping off the club by paying near enough the same amount in management fees!

So they reckon its wrong for CCC to rip off CCFC. But fine for SISU.

Very strange attitudes they have this will not get an answer. Yes im on about paxman2 and RFC.

All clubs charge management fees (or whatever you want to call them) just take a look at a few (Man. U, Leeds, B'Ham). Football has been about business & greed ever since Murdoch arrived on the scene, hyping the product and vastly over-charging consumers (fans).

Go back and take a look at our history of ownership and try and account for some of the monies that have "allegedly" disappeared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

shmmeee · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
All clubs charge management fees (or whatever you want to call them) just take a look at a few (Man. U, Leeds, B'Ham). Football has been about business & greed ever since Murdoch arrived on the scene, hyping the product and vastly over-charging consumers (fans).

Go back and take a look at our history of ownership and try and account for some of the monies that have "allegedly" disappeared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your best argument for our owners is they're as bad as the others, I'm not sure that's an argument at all.

Astute · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
All clubs charge management fees (or whatever you want to call them) just take a look at a few (Man. U, Leeds, B'Ham). Football has been about business & greed ever since Murdoch arrived on the scene, hyping the product and vastly over-charging consumers (fans).

Go back and take a look at our history of ownership and try and account for some of the monies that have "allegedly" disappeared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How many other clubs are charged much more than their turnover in management fees by someone who is to blame for vastly reducing the turnover?

When SISU took over our average gates were well over 20,000. They are now about 2,000. Management charges were over 1.8m the last time the books were revealed. So this means that each person going to games at Northampton needs to pay £40 just to cover the management charges. Yet you think it is OK as other clubs get charged them.

will am i · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
To be fair I meant to say at least 10 to 15 years. 10 is 3 years from now. There is little doubt this is now a time plan. The real worry I have is that they may even go ahead with land purchase and ground development. It's an outside possibility but one that cannot 100% be ruled out given that they are nothing if not predictable in their lack of consistency.

Fair enough, I thought 15 years from now looked unlikely. I think another 3 to 8 years is also unlikely - surely no one will believe their bullshit for more than another year.They will have been told to piss off by the Court of Appeal by then too.

James Smith · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
All clubs charge management fees (or whatever you want to call them) just take a look at a few (Man. U, Leeds, B'Ham). Football has been about business & greed ever since Murdoch arrived on the scene, hyping the product and vastly over-charging consumers (fans).

Go back and take a look at our history of ownership and try and account for some of the monies that have "allegedly" disappeared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you respond to my post #369 and the comments/questions within?

will am i · Jul 26, 2014

RFC said:
All clubs charge management fees (or whatever you want to call them) just take a look at a few (Man. U, Leeds, B'Ham). Football has been about business & greed ever since Murdoch arrived on the scene, hyping the product and vastly over-charging consumers (fans).

Go back and take a look at our history of ownership and try and account for some of the monies that have "allegedly" disappeared!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So previous owners have ripped us off, owners of other clubs rip their fans off, so its ok for SISU to rip us off. It makes sense now - Im off to get my season ticket.

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

will am i said:
Fair enough, I thought 15 years from now looked unlikely. I think another 3 to 8 years is also unlikely - surely no one will believe their bullshit for more than another year.They will have been told to piss off by the Court of Appeal by then too.

I find it really hard to believe that anyone still believes their BS now. I know Grendull has his they wanted to lose the JR theory, Rob S was doing his new ground PR yesterday and RFC is, well RFC.

But surely when a judge is going further than denying someone an appeal by giving them free legal advice saying there is no point in pursuing further litigation. Surely, surely no one takes them seriously anymore?

stupot07 · Jul 26, 2014

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/showthread.php?t=45928

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

wingy · Jul 26, 2014

So just to be clear Stu does the Tevez money skew things ?

stupot07 · Jul 26, 2014

wingy said:
So just to be clear Stu does the Tevez money skew things ?

A tad, but they still had £5.2m admin/management expenses and £2m interest charges, and made annual losses of over £5.6m.

Problem is we have no idea what the admin/management charges relate to who, who they are paid to etc to make a judgement of whether it's shady business or not.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Grendel · Jul 26, 2014

stupot07 said:
A tad, but they still had £5.2m admin/management expenses and £2m interest charges, and made annual losses of over £5.6m.

Problem is we have no idea what the admin/management charges relate to who, who they are paid to etc to make a judgement of whether it's shady business or not.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Management charges are pretty common in retail franchise businesses.

skybluetony176 · Jul 26, 2014

Grendel said:
Management charges are pretty common in retail franchise businesses.

Is there a rough formula for turnover and profit too management charges?

RFC · Jul 26, 2014

James Smith said:
Can you respond to my post #369 and the comments/questions within?

Little or no point, your entrenched view is your view but not mine.

RFC · Jul 26, 2014

BBC CWR Stuart Linnell

"@Stuart_Linnell: In reply to my messages today, Sky Blues Chief Exec Tim Fisher does not rule out a return to the Ricoh but says there is no deal yet."

Appeal Decision? (18 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency