dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
That's why it would have to be 25k from the start before I would fully back it
I hand on heart just cannot see how a 25,000 seater stadium could ever be built there.
I would say 12,000-15,000 absolute tops. There just isn't the room and the sunken pitch idea would add so much more to the cost.
I guess he can't say much. It is pretty implied he wants to, but he cant.
So, is the bottom line that Millerchip has the ultimate say? Without his go-ahead it can't happen?
Pretty powerful position from someone who just owns the land leasehold.
Can't Sisu bid for it?Yes, nothing can happen as he owns the lease. So either he sells it to Jon Sharp and Cov Rugby or agrees to it, else nothing happens...
Interesting reading mmm's views. And if Wasps are destined to become the richest Rugby club in the world I suspect that spells trouble for sisu and ultimately our football club.
Interesting reading mmm's views. And if Wasps are destined to become the richest Rugby club in the world I suspect that spells trouble for sisu and ultimately our football club.
Surely if that's what they want then Millerchip is taking a very big risk 'going it alone'. I'd have thought he'd be better off getting the football club aboard (no matter who the owners) to give the rugby club a better chance of survival in what will become a wasps onslaught.
Unless he is linked to Wasps so is going to cash in / take advantage of that
And send the Rugby club up the river? If this happened then the public at large may well see the bigger picture and realise that its not just the football club that s the problem. How would the telegraph defend it?
Still of a mind that if Millerchip didn't want to deal with SISU (it isn't CCFC really because they haven't got a pot to p*** in, so other than being a tenant to the project bring not a lot to the build) then he should just say thanks but no thanks. Statements about legals etc from him really help no one and carry little weight
I can understand why he might say no thanks, as he will have seen what has gone on and could very easily conclude that having SISU/CCFC involved increased the risks to the club he loves, significantly, but also risked other project relationships. Given the history of CRFC you might expect he and CRFC to be very risk averse. He could put those risks to one side but that's his choice to or not. To not deal with anything involving CCFC owned by SISU could be a conclusion that could be arrived at without CCC influence - but I am not so naiive to think that there have not been conversations going on between various parties. He may well have had "pressure" from CCC but he will also have had "pressure" from the CRFC directors who backed the stadium idea. Has he ever met Seppala, Fisher or Anderson, if so did that colour his thinking? He holds the key asset and doesn't have to deal if he doesn't want to.
This head lease - from what I can see its valued at £1m+ so how were CRFC going to afford to buy that without say Millerchip showing a huge amount of goodwill?. CRFC last accounts reveal net liabilities of £80k and are being kept afloat by loans from directors of £140k+. If that was the case and he was prepared to take a deal favourable to CRFC of course he is going to be concerned that the asset ends up in the right place. Yes I know you put terms in the contract ....... we all know that terms can be broken or challenged by expensive court cases though don't we. CRFC need to create income and to do that they need Millerchip onside, they need CCC onside, before they need CCFC.
CCC will not say much publically. There is litigation going on between them and companies that SISU have interests in - that includes OEG ltd trading as CCFC. Their legal department will be insisting on as little as possible being said. Reality is that whilst it is important to us the future of CCFC has become less important to them. They want the legal actions gone, it is too costly, too time consuming and it is for something that is way down its list of priorities for the City, when matched against, child protection, social welfare, public services etc etc (whether or not they are doing a good job). Are there conversations behind the scenes almost certainly. Is there a concerted organised effort to get rid of SISU (damage CCFC) I am not so sure because CCFC are now in a position whereby if any of the other players in this saga simply do nothing it causes problems - simply doing nothing hurts SISU's "investment" but the collateral damage is CCFC. Once one party says no or just ignores or changes direction it becomes easier for others to follow.
There is no way forward in this unless the sports clubs involved have a positive relationship and partnership with CCC - don't have to like them but you do have to work with them and get their backing.
Wasps - will just get on with their plans. They will be happy to have CCFC as a day renter but I doubt it is a need and certainly is not going to underpin their business plan. Yes we could in years to come win the Champions League (ok total fantasy) but right now we are a L1 team with no history of recent success only failure. In Wasps eyes we have become no great asset and would be no great loss. (look at it without your sky blue glasses on). The loss would be Coventry's not Wasp's. Hence why a good relationship between CCFC and CCC is so important - yes I know it takes two to tango
This all currently leaves CCFC stagnating or worse, as for SISU then you would think there will be more legal challenges issued by them (very often come out on a Friday it seems to me). Not sure anyone can properly explain the SISU plan for CCFC or even the way forward given what we know right now.
There is no real alternative to talking and creating positive relationships, too many involved are saying no to that though - but whose need is greatest?
aside : there may not be any formal action in court involving Wasps it doesn't mean there is no legal noise in the form of letters etc from lawyers acting on behalf of an aggrieved Football club owner - all court actions begin with a lot of background legal noise, just a thought
But how is millerchip affected?
Why weren't people saying not to deal with acl? Remember their legal action against Northampton?
I can understand they don't have to deal with them, it's just obvious the links..
Unless he is linked to Wasps so is going to cash in / take advantage of that
How is he linked to Wasps? Or are you just trying to make your conspiracy theory bigger? In fact CRFC relationship with Wasps appears quite frosty.
Don't you mean arseholer?Millerchip isn't representing CRFC though, is he? He's representing himself as leaseholder.
I'm not talking about crfc.. He is talked about as a different party.How is he linked to Wasps? Or are you just trying to make your conspiracy theory bigger? In fact CRFC relationship with Wasps appears quite frosty.
Interesting reading mmm's views. And if Wasps are destined to become the richest Rugby club in the world I suspect that spells trouble for sisu and ultimately our football club.
The engage! Project for a start...How is he linked to Wasps? Or are you just trying to make your conspiracy theory bigger? In fact CRFC relationship with Wasps appears quite frosty.
The engage! Project for a start...
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/coventry-rugby-coventry-bears-wasps-11347179Isn't he one of the funders of that?
It is strange how people try to play his links down and call it a conspiracy, they also label him as CRFC. In fact, his relationship with CRFC seems a bit frosty it's self doesn't it?
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/coventry-rugby-coventry-bears-wasps-11347179
Yeah he is part funding the city of rugby and engage! Stuff.
There is a link, like you its too.much if a coincidence that both wasps and millerchump has used the legals as excuses.
And you're right there does seem to be some friction between him and crfc
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
And Ann Lucus said at the press conference when they signed over the Ricoh that they wanted Coventry to become the first city of rugby....So it is pushed by Paul Breed and Millerchip, who was helping Wasps to move here but it is funded by Millerchip.
There is no link though is thereJust all co-incidence I guess. The same as there is no concidence that Wasps stopped talking about the Ricoh the same sort of time CSF didnt talk about the Ricoh.
It was also setup when wasps moved here?
And Ann Lucus said at the press conference when they signed over the Ricoh that they wanted Coventry to become the first city of rugby....
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Can't CRFC try and buy him out?http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/coventry-rugby-coventry-bears-wasps-11347179
Yeah he is part funding the city of rugby and engage! Stuff.
There is a link, like you its too.much if a coincidence that both wasps and millerchump has used the legals as excuses.
And you're right there does seem to be some friction between him and crfc
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Can't CRFC try and buy him out?
Now now Timothy.Don't you mean arseholer?
Do you want me to try and have a go when I win the Euro Millions?They have tried I think, I don't think he will sell.
They have tried I think, I don't think he will sell.
It's not that much though in the grand scheme of things in terms of maybe securing a future for both Cov and the City.Didn't OSB say the freehold is worth 1 million and CRFC won't have that kind of cash
Didn't OSB say the freehold is worth 1 million and CRFC won't have that kind of cash
Its all connected. Engage is behind the City of Rugby initiative of which Breed is part, as our the council. A good chunk of the money is provided by Millerchip.How is he linked to Wasps? Or are you just trying to make your conspiracy theory bigger? In fact CRFC relationship with Wasps appears quite frosty.
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?