Boycott of Home Games v Lack of Squad Investment (12 Viewers)

Cheshire Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

I won't criticise the lack of investment in the squad, SISU do not have sufficient cash to run the club. That much is obvious. Where I can be critical is that the lack of funds is down to SISU and them taking City out of Coventry. Fisher and Seppala gambled and lost, disregarded the fans and are paying for it.

Its a real shame because in SP they have a man of real talent. My concern is that the lack of available funds aligned with Fisher & Seppala's real ambition having nothing to do with football or CCFC will see SISU cash in on him. The barrel is not empty, but it is perilously close.

Samo · Feb 24, 2014

wingy said:
Something to that effect Sami
The sensationalized headline was
SPEND SPEND SPEND
The reality was IIRC that funds would be available to the manager for January
Long before Income from the cup or player sales was evidenced and. long enough into the season to know income had fallen off a cliff

Fair point, but wait a minute... you're not suggesting our owners have lied to us are you???

rupert_bear · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

But even if every home game was a sell out the gate would be little more than 7000 hardly going to fill the coffers with extra money is it, at the Ricoh and with our promising form I am certain we would have had over 15000 and the odd 20000+ gate and might have got a few bob in the bin.

Deleted member 5849 · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Fair point, but wait a minute... you're not suggesting our owners have lied to us are you???

tbf, the 'we'll spend cash, honest' is a Coventry tradition going back to far before SISU!

Even Peter Robbins was at it, promising £3mil of signings and it all started well when we signed Phil Babb, but then we patiently waited for players that never joined...

No future with SISU · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

Why are you raising this subject when you know they will not invest in the team even if there was a sell out at each game.

Cheshire Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

stupot07 said:
Is that when the Ricoh Russian or Saudi billion takes us over and starts spending £20-30m on players?

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

We don't need billionaires of any description. Just owners who want to work with the fans and the City in an ethical and honourable way. I do not think City will get back to the premier league within the next 15 -20 years, and just maybe never. But I will support them wherever they may be if they can demonstrate honour and trust. Something SISU and Seppala simply can not do.

valiant15 · Feb 24, 2014

Wasn't there some quote from Seppalla saying that Pressley can 'buy buy buy' or words to that effect?

Edit, ive just seen wingys post.

stupot07 · Feb 24, 2014

wingy said:
Something to that effect Sami
The sensationalized headline was
SPEND SPEND SPEND
The reality was IIRC that funds would be available to the manager for January
Long before Income from the cup or player sales was evidenced and. long enough into the season to know income had fallen off a cliff

I think it was this one...

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-fc-boss-gets-6303464

We have added to the squad to be fair - McGeough (I think loan with a view for a permanent move?), Delfouneso, Donnelly (for 1 day), arsenal lad, petesso, Seabourne (permanent), Marshall.

And Clarke did force a move through with his transfer request and refusing to play.

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

shmmeee · Feb 24, 2014

The decision to take us out of Coventry and all resulting consequences are Sisus alone.

Was it wise to decimate support and funds in arguably our best season sabotaging not only Robins' but it look like Pressley's chance of promotion by losing us 10 points two seasons running?

Wouldn't the smarter move to have pushed for promotion each season (we wouldn't have been a million miles off without the 10 points last season and this year we'd be a playoff side easy) then to have made the power play when supporter morale is highest and it's less likely to be so devastating to the finances and long term chances of the team?

It's yet another example of Sisu not understanding football. Your chances of promotion are best the first few seasons. As we lose fans and higher quality players we slip into mid table mediocrity.

Even if the strategy is right (and it's not) the timing is fucking amateur.

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

Even if Sixfields were being packed to the rafters every week the club would still be losing out considerably on the bigger Ricoh crowds.

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

shmmeee said:
The decision to take us out of Coventry and all resulting consequences are Sisus alone.

Was it wise to decimate support and funds in arguably our best season sabotaging not only Robins' but it look like Pressley's chance of promotion by losing us 10 points two seasons running?

Wouldn't the smarter move to have pushed for promotion each season (we wouldn't have been a million miles off without the 10 points last season and this year we'd be a playoff side easy) then to have made the power play when supporter morale is highest and it's less likely to be so devastating to the finances and long term chances of the team?

It's yet another example of Sisu not understanding football. Your chances of promotion are best the first few seasons. As we lose fans and higher quality players we slip into mid table mediocrity.

Even if the strategy is right (and it's not) the timing is fucking amateur.

You can go further than that and say we wouldn't even be in League 1 but for SISU's dire management, namely appointing total fools to oversee the running of the club on their behalf. What we have at the moment is an owner with a personal agenda against the council who is letting her hubris dictate what she does-we have seen that she is very happy to lose considerable sums to pursue this end and a few more people going to Northampton won't make the blindest bit of difference.

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

Cheshire Sky Blue said:
I won't criticise the lack of investment in the squad, SISU do not have sufficient cash to run the club. That much is obvious. Where I can be critical is that the lack of funds is down to SISU and them taking City out of Coventry. Fisher and Seppala gambled and lost, disregarded the fans and are paying for it.

Its a real shame because in SP they have a man of real talent. My concern is that the lack of available funds aligned with Fisher & Seppala's real ambition having nothing to do with football or CCFC will see SISU cash in on him. The barrel is not empty, but it is perilously close.

The funds available are entirely dependent upon Joy's ability to persuade fresh idiots to put some money in, which she has quite a talent for doing, given that £60-70 million has been chucked down the sink since their arrival. Money available isn't a problem, but what we'll be physically allowed to spend next season based on this year's turnover will be pitiful.

skybluebal · Feb 24, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

Totally disagree.

I think that most of us never believed SISU would invest anyway and that seems to be the proven with all the loan players being used. Of course Pressley will say the right players are not available, thats the toeing the line which he has to do. However, SISU made a mistake of colossal proportions in moving the club to Northampton and they are now in the position of being able to do less - not because the supporters won't support the team and provide valuable income, but because they insist in putting the vast majority of supporters in a situation where they can't support the team in its home town. It has been said many times - and again now - there is no economic sense in being in Northampton and SISU- yes they did say this - said they will cover all losses and have the money to fund the team and even a new stadium. So any criticism in the lack of investment is totally justified and can be laid at the feet of SISU. Return to the Ricoh and attendances will be up to 10K+, thats the business sense.

Cheshire Sky Blue · Feb 24, 2014

Brighton Sky Blue said:
The funds available are entirely dependent upon Joy's ability to persuade fresh idiots to put some money in, which she has quite a talent for doing, given that £60-70 million has been chucked down the sink since their arrival. Money available isn't a problem, but what we'll be physically allowed to spend next season based on this year's turnover will be pitiful.

Hey Brighton, don't be fooled by Timmy's doctrine of 60 - 70 million investment. it is total bull. SISU have invested silch, nothing, zero, Fuck all!!! Its all charges laid against the club for doing nothing other than bringing total destruction. If anyone of any level of ability had invested such sums would we be in the shite we are today? Only if they were complete and utter fuckwits............

letsallsingtogether · Feb 25, 2014

To be honest I don't think it matters who we want to sign or how much we are willing to spend.

Who the fuck would want to play for us at the moment.
When we signed players before they would turn up at the Ricoh and think WOW.

Now they turn up at shitfields and say what the fuck......

Why would they want to take a step down fuck me most of them play at better grounds with bigger crowds already.

We can't even compete with the likes of Stevanage FFS.

dongonzalos · Feb 25, 2014

Yes you are mistaken we had an embarrassment of riches but choose not to play them.......

TheParsonsHose · Feb 25, 2014

Samo said:
Can we, in all honesty, Boycott Northampton and then bemoan the lack of investment in the team? We starve the club of cash and then moan that they won't spend any! I have no problem whatsoever with either viewpoint but you really can't have it both ways, it flies in the face of common sense. Boycott games by all means but you have to expect the obvious consequence. Criticism of a lack of investment before the boycott, fair enough, but now they have a pretty solid excuse!
(and yes... I have my tin hat on!)

Totally agree. Our club is getting smaller as an entity after every game at sixfields.

What is unforgivable though is the loss of revenue having not accepted a different deal at he Ricoh. Selling 2000 tickets to a football match is not better than at least 10000 and the difference should easily cover costs.

If its about revenue then we should have gone back some time ago with our tail between our legs IMHO.

And i am not talking about beer and pies because we can boycott them.

RoboCCFC90 · Feb 25, 2014

Lack of investment in the team? Up until this season we had signed in Sisu's tenure 43 players on permnament contracts and 24 players on loan contracts* over 5 full seasons, meaning we brought in on average 8 players every season permnamently and 3 players on loan, the transfer fee's are harder to determine because of the amout of undisclosed amounts but being realistic with the fee's I have managed to average that we spent over £8,000,000 on transfer fee's, now this may sound obvious but there is more to signing a player on the Clubs part than just spending a transfer fee, all players get a signing on fee, Agents fee's are paid and in loan scenario's sometimes a Club will be charged a small fee to take that player on loan, like I suspect with Delfounseo and McGeouch this season.

* This list doesn't include players like Leon and Blair Adams, who signed on loan who we then subsequently signed permnamently.

I think this is clear investment in the playing squad, happy to be shown otherwise.

hill83 · Feb 25, 2014

Sisu have definitely invested in the club over the years, why that is even still being questioned is beyond me.
I suppose some believe the money isn't a true investment but more loans. Either way they have kept the club afloat.
But that's not enough for me now.

We are on the brink of disaster. Everyone involved needs a giant slap.

Noggin · Feb 25, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
Lack of investment in the team? Up until this season we had signed in Sisu's tenure 43 players on permnament contracts and 24 players on loan contracts* over 5 full seasons, meaning we brought in on average 8 players every season permnamently and 3 players on loan, the transfer fee's are harder to determine because of the amout of undisclosed amounts but being realistic with the fee's I have managed to average that we spent over £8,000,000 on transfer fee's, now this may sound obvious but there is more to signing a player on the Clubs part than just spending a transfer fee, all players get a signing on fee, Agents fee's are paid and in loan scenario's sometimes a Club will be charged a small fee to take that player on loan, like I suspect with Delfounseo and McGeouch this season.

* This list doesn't include players like Leon and Blair Adams, who signed on loan who we then subsequently signed permnamently.

I think this is clear investment in the playing squad, happy to be shown otherwise.

now work out the transfer fees from selling players, and then you have a valid number for discussing investment in the playing a squad, sell a player for a mill, buy a player for half a mill you havn't invested, so you need both numbers to have a discussion.

Honestly though I don't think peoples serious issues come from the start of their tenure, despite the fact we've had plenty of reasons to be unhappy with them I still wanted them to get the Ricoh a year or so go. It's only the last the year where they have shown they will hurt the club and hurt them very seriously to get what they want.

and while there has been a lack of investment in the past and some short sighted selling of players that quite possibly cost them and the club the really cronic lack of investment only started this season where we decided we were going to start a season with a squad so small and thin there was almost no chance of being able to make it through without major issues.

Sky Blue Dal · Feb 25, 2014

mark82 said:
At last someone talking sense. Cue "but they said they could cover losses"

That's what I thought too ... well more BS as usual from our beloved owners.

GaryPendrysEyes · Feb 25, 2014

Sisu are the business owner. They took us Northants, knowing it would dramatically reduce revenue.
They are not interested in the team, investment in it, progress in it- the are interested in the Ricoh.
So let's not blame the fans. The buck stops with Sisu.

italiahorse · Feb 25, 2014

We all know there were other ways to sort this out.

Unfortunately SISU need to get the Ricoh Arena and the team being there would not apply any leverage.

Will Sisu apologists just stop being in denial :facepalm:

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 25, 2014

Cheshire Sky Blue said:
Hey Brighton, don't be fooled by Timmy's doctrine of 60 - 70 million investment. it is total bull. SISU have invested silch, nothing, zero, Fuck all!!! Its all charges laid against the club for doing nothing other than bringing total destruction. If anyone of any level of ability had invested such sums would we be in the shite we are today? Only if they were complete and utter fuckwits............

Unfortunately that is genuinely the total sum invested.

The Prefect · Feb 25, 2014

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Unfortunately that is genuinely the total sum invested.

The accounts for Sky Blue Sports and Leisure Ltd will show the figure. The £60-£70m comes from the club and is one of their usual 'facts' - similar to 'debt free' that we all heard a while back.

While a lot of money has been 'invested' it is my opinion that supporting losses in a badly run enterprise (CCFC) can not be included as 'investment'. For me, the word 'investment' is associated with monies put in to move things forward and improve a business - something that hasn't happened with Coventry City.

Losing £35m (a much more likely figure) through abysmal management and failing to deal with the underlying problems with one of your businesses is a lesson in how to waste money, not invest it.

chiefdave · Feb 25, 2014

I certainly think you can make the case to lay blame with SISU for the small squad size this year. At the start of the season we were told it was SP choice to have a small squad which some doubted was true but I can't imagine for a minute he was thinking it was OK to have so few forwards we'd be playing Jordan Clarke up front.

When SISU moved us to Northampton they knew they would lose millions in revenue and we were told by them and by the league that this wasn't an issue and they had the money to cover the loss of revenue. Now you could of course interpret this as meaning they would just cover losses rather than invest in the team but even if you did think that what about the extra money from the FA Cup run? That's money they wouldn't have budgeted on getting so why can't SP have some of that.

I don't buy the FFP excuse as the owners can, I believe, put in additional funds so long as they do it as equity and not a loan.

For the third season in a row our top scorer is no longer with us after January and there's been little in the way of replacement. If you don't blame SISU for that who do you blame?

letsallsingtogether said:
When we signed players before they would turn up at the Ricoh and think WOW.

Now they turn up at shitfields and say what the fuck.

To a certain extent players will go where the money is but the chance of playing somewhere like the Ricoh in front of some of the biggest crowds in the division must have been an attraction. More worrying is how quickly a number of players seem to be leaving for personal reasons or some other rubbish not long after signing.

RoboCCFC90 said:
Lack of investment in the team? Up until this season we had signed in Sisu's tenure 43 players on permnament contracts and 24 players on loan contracts* over 5 full seasons, meaning we brought in on average 8 players every season permnamently and 3 players on loan, the transfer fee's are harder to determine because of the amout of undisclosed amounts but being realistic with the fee's I have managed to average that we spent over £8,000,000 on transfer fee's.

To make that argument you need a net figure. If they've spent £8m but received £16m then they aren't really making an investment are they?

Noggin · Feb 25, 2014

chiefdave said:
To a certain extent players will go where the money is but the chance of playing somewhere like the Ricoh in front of some of the biggest crowds in the division must have been an attraction. More worrying is how quickly a number of players seem to be leaving for personal reasons or some other rubbish not long after signing.

It does make you wonder if agents/players just google coventry city stadium which still brings up the ricoh arena and so players are getting a real shock when they get here.

RoboCCFC90 · Feb 25, 2014

chiefdave said:
To make that argument you need a net figure. If they've spent £8m but received £16m then they aren't really making an investment are they?

At some point throughout the day I'll work it out.

letsallsingtogether · Feb 25, 2014

I'm sure they have made more money from the sale of players going back to the beginning with the likes of fox etc.

The players they have brought in have mostly been free or a menial fee, even one of our currant best players Moussa was free.

letsallsingtogether · Feb 25, 2014

Funny how will you do that when we buy and sell a player it is undisclosed?

RoboCCFC90 said:
At some point throughout the day I'll work it out.

RoboCCFC90 · Feb 25, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
Funny how will you do that when we buy and sell a player it is undisclosed?

Be generous for instance:

Chris Hussey was a bag of shit meaning in CCFC logic we'd of paid about £1,000,000 for him.

stupot07 · Feb 25, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
At some point throughout the day I'll work it out.

That'll be a difficult task, without knowing sell on clauses, etc. for example the press stated that Celtic bought fox for £1.5m, which with the leaked documents we know is untrue - it was actually £700k, but we'd already paid £400k for him and Walsall had a 25% sell on cause on the £300k difference meaning we only made £225k on him. Also as he didn't ask for the move we'd have paid him a loyalty bonus on leaving.

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

magic82ball · Feb 25, 2014

People who translate "going to cover losses" to "going to invest in the team" are fucking stupid. Or their just looking for another stick to beat SISU with. In which case there are enough sticks lying about the place to use rather than making shit up.

torchomatic · Feb 25, 2014

Oh dear.

bigfatronssba said:
Just part of the responsibility that those of us have to accept. For me its a price worth paying, as every victory in Northampton is pretty much worthless anyway.

As a boycotter I accept the harm I'm inadvertently causing to the team.

I just wish those who attended would accept that they are inadvertently supporting the concept of CCFC playing at Sixfields.

chiefdave · Feb 25, 2014

magic82ball said:
People who translate "going to cover losses" to "going to invest in the team" are fucking stupid.

SISU didn't term it cover losses did they? Didn't they actually say they could cover the loss in income caused by the move? That's a different thing and implies there will be zero impact on playing budget as SISU will make up any lost revenue. If SISU had said we need to fill Sixfields every week or we're going to need to sell players that's a different story but that's not really how they presented it.

Boycott of Home Games v Lack of Squad Investment (12 Viewers)

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency