Chocolate Teapot? (2 Viewers)

[stupot07]

Has anyone thought that by stalling the talks Wasps are playing Sisu at their own game?

Yes, I keep saying it. They are trying to distress the club and delay any deal until the last minute in order for force the club into taking a substantially worse take it or leave it deal. IMO it is this and not the 'legal noise' which is stopping them from negotiating now.

It just seems easier to most to believe wasps.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

---

[Gosford Green]

Even the most rabid anti CCC/Wasps person on here must admit this would all be a lot easier if they dropped JR2, they have had their days in court with the council everyone but SISU and their lawyers are tired of it.

 

[Tonylinc]

Yes, I keep saying it. They are trying to distress the club and delay any deal until the last minute in order for force the club into taking a substantially worse take it or leave it deal. IMO it is this and not the 'legal noise' which is stopping them from negotiating now.

It just seems easier to most to believe wasps.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Is that the reason? or is it that they hope to pick up the club for a knock down (realistically the proper) price?

 

[stupot07]

I'm sure it would be a bit easier, but
1) Sisu ain't going to drop it,
2) the blackmail stance doesn't sit well with me,
3) the black mail stance suggests there is something to hide (perhaps talks have been going on for a lot longer than they would want us to know)
4) out of the 2 JRs this is the one that fans should be most keen to pursue and get the truth out,
5) I don't believe wasps anyway.

I would hazard a guess, if us cov fans, the trust, simon, gave wasps a bit more stick rather than just shrugging our shoulders then I doubt they would be pushing this line for so long. They get a free pass from everyone. Loom back at the academy, as soon as the trust started talking about a protest wasps couldn't wait to get back around the table.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

Is that the reason? or is it that they hope to pick up the club for a knock down (realistically the proper) price?

I honestly can't them wanting to buy the football club. Their business model isnt reliant on the football club, and the financial risks of running football clubs is huge and would put the ability to pay back the bonds and meet the interest payments in huge risk. Its not gonna happen, wasps don't have the cash to run a football club on top of trying to turn around 2 loss making businesses and make the rugby club the biggest and most successful club in Europe.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Tonylinc]

Look, I know absolutely nothing about rugby and don't want to; it is not a game that interests me at all; but I do know something about running a business. Wasps have rolled up at the Ricoh (lets leave all the franchise stuff alone) and will be after gaining the support of the local population. What better way of doing that by supporting the local football team? It makes perfect business sense to me to have both teams under the same roof. How you bring that about is the question. Perhaps Wasps feel that this is the way to go about it.

 

[Gosford Green]

I'm sure it would be a bit easier, but
1) Sisu ain't going to drop it,
2) the blackmail stance doesn't sit well with me,
3) the black mail stance suggests there is something to hide (perhaps talks have been going on for a lot longer than they would want us to know)
4) out of the 2 JRs this is the one that fans should be most keen to pursue and get the truth out,
5) I don't believe wasps anyway.

I would hazard a guess, if us cov fans, the trust, simon, gave wasps a bit more stick rather than just shrugging our shoulders then I doubt they would be pushing this line for so long. They get a free pass from everyone. Loom back at the academy, as soon as the trust started talking about a protest wasps couldn't wait to get back around the table.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Point 4
We had all this before JR1. Smoking guns and the truth was going to come out but when the JR was published the judge only just stopped short of calling SISU crooks. Fisher called out that the judge did not know what he was talking about! Would you want to do business with him?
My worry is neither side will budge, the League will get a panic on about Christmas 2018 and demand a solution. SISU move the club to some shit hole, said shit hole gets gates of 1000 and the club goes bust and we have no club to argue about. All because Joy would not back down, or from your side of the fence- Wasps would not negotiate.

 

[Gosford Green]

Look, I know absolutely nothing about rugby and don't want to; it is not a game that interests me at all; but I do know something about running a business. Wasps have rolled up at the Ricoh (lets leave all the franchise stuff alone) and will be after gaining the support of the local population. What better way of doing that by supporting the local football team? It makes perfect business sense to me to have both teams under the same roof. How you bring that about is the question. Perhaps Wasps feel that this is the way to go about it.

Wasps would not buy the club, but they might know someone who would, yes its highly possible that SISU are being played at their own game

 

[Tonylinc]

Wasps would not buy the club, but they might know someone who would, yes its highly possible that SISU are being played at their own game

I think that you are wrong mate. I truly believe that wasps want to bring about the two teams under the same roof. It adds value to both entities.

 

[Gosford Green]

I think that you are wrong mate. I truly believe that wasps want to bring about the two teams under the same roof. It adds value to both entities.

Wasps are skint, they would have to bring in outside money probably.

 

[Tonylinc]

Without knowing any of the detail financial history I am sure that you are correct. However, what would be the financial implications of a successful promotion to the Championship? and then on to the Prem?

 

[Tonylinc]

I would love the opportunity to sell that to a "would be", investor.

 

[wingy]

I see LR's Observer article today expresses doubt that SISU /OTIUM /US/whatever would engage with this due to his(Collins) previous views and stance re the Initial fracas and outfall.
He does however suggest they somehow park the legal avenue in the long grass.

 

[Houdi]

They aren't taking wasps to court, they are taking the council to court about thr councils decision making. Regardless of whether Sisu win or lose, it will have little affect on wasps.

We know businesses take each other to court all the time whilst continue to working together. Why are you buying wasp's bullshit? Why are you giving Wasps a free pass on this?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I'm not quite sure who you think will put pressure on Wasps though. CCC certainly won't, the FA or FL can hardly put pressure on a team/sport they have no authority over. In all the games I've never heard any vocal fans protest against Wasps, SISU yes but never Wasps. I have never been to a Wasps game but have never heard of any protests against them,either inside or outside the ground. So it is hardly likely fans are suddenly going to turn the heat on Wasps now, when nobody has bothered before. That is the harsh reality we face.
So if Wasps stick to their current stance, what do SISU do in a little over 12 months time. Wasps whether we like it or not don't have to do anything, they have a ground, the one that was built for CCFC. If they stick to their current stance of no talks without dropping of legal action,which they know Sisu won't do,then we and Sisu are screwed.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Can't help thinking this sounds better than can be actually achieved. Mediation has to be focussed not wide ranging or it does not work. It is not about an investigation it is about solving a particular problem by compromise. Why would a rugby club that now owns what has become through ownership a rugby ground with a football tenant be drawn in to a select committee on football governance. Whether CCFC rent off Wasps or not is not a football governance issue

What is the dispute between Wasps and CCFC really. It isn't about the current contract or its terms. Is it a dispute at all? It is whether they can negotiate a new deal together. That comes down to Wasps and CCFC wanting to, then to whether the terms possible are a good fit for both clubs. There will be pre conditions on both sides. There is nothing to stop one or both saying no thanks to any deal or even mediation no matter how high up you go in government. CCFC have no right to be at the Ricoh past August 2018. It is up to CCFC to obtain the best solution the directors feel best suit the needs of the company trading as CCFC - and yes that includes considering playing outside of Coventry. There is nothing to stop Wasps saying this is the deal take it or leave it no matter what an MP might say. Or even no thanks find somewhere else. It is not a dispute it is about an offer or tender, about a negotiation that both can accept or either can walk away from. Not sure how MP's however well meaning can solve that

Wasps do not need to go to mediation, the need for a solution short medium or long term is CCFC's and we are vulnerable

 

[rupert_bear]

I am sure Wasps will stick to their mo legals stance from their point of view they have to

 

[Nick]

I am sure Wasps will stick to their mo legals stance from their point of view they have to

They have already played it down haven't they? With the "not quite like that" type comment?

 

[stupot07]

I'm not quite sure who you think will put pressure on Wasps though. CCC certainly won't, the FA or FL can hardly put pressure on a team/sport they have no authority over. In all the games I've never heard any vocal fans protest against Wasps, SISU yes but never Wasps. I have never been to a Wasps game but have never heard of any protests against them,either inside or outside the ground. So it is hardly likely fans are suddenly going to turn the heat on Wasps now, when nobody has bothered before. That is the harsh reality we face.
So if Wasps stick to their current stance, what do SISU do in a little over 12 months time. Wasps whether we like it or not don't have to do anything, they have a ground, the one that was built for CCFC. If they stick to their current stance of no talks without dropping of legal action,which they know Sisu won't do,then we and Sisu are screwed.

I'm not saying Damien Collins or the select committee can make wasos doing anything, I'm saying wasps don't seem to like adverse publicity and therefore wouldn't like the extra negative press. At the minute they get non like you say, as soon as the trust talked about a protest about the academy, wasps buttered them up. Wasps can do what they like when they like, like you say no ones bothered. ( Collins and the select committee can't make sisu drop the JRs either)

Wasps will do whatever is best for them, however I'm sure they wouldnt lime too many questions around the Ricoh deal, the bonds, the owner paying himself back, the promise to the council that they wouldnt negatively impact on the club, etc.





Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[lifeskyblue]

This has got to be a step forward. Perhaps only a small one but at least something. When you think murdoch and greene as well as Blair have been 'required' to give evidence to different select committees it shows they have some sway.
I hope Collins demands sepalla and fisher to attend. Neither wasps or SISU will enjoy being required to give evidence so it might put pressure on them to bend a little. It can't make private companies act but it can make life uncomfortable for them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

This has got to be a step forward. Perhaps only a small one but at least something. When you think murdoch and greene as well as Blair have been 'required' to give evidence to different select committees it shows they have some sway.
I hope Collins demands sepalla and fisher to attend. Neither wasps or SISU will enjoy being required to give evidence so it might put pressure on them to bend a little. It can't make private companies act but it can make life uncomfortable for them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's offered to mediate discussions not call them to a public enquiry or select committee.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[oldskyblue58]

Think there has been a great leap from mediation to forcing attendance at the select committee on football governance. How are the select committee terms of reference actually going to relate to Wasps exactly.

Even if Wasps were forced to attend all they have to say is they are the legal long lease owners of the ground and can let it to whoever they choose on terms that suits them. What else could they say that is actually relevant? Forcing the owners of CCFC to attend now that is a different matter but surely would apply to a number of other clubs too - so why has it not been done already?

Fail to see how Collins or the select committee really solve what is going on, it doesn't really apply much pressure either because SISU & Wasps simply do what they are doing now - say nothing

I wouldn't get your hopes up

 

[Nick]

Think there has been a great leap from mediation to forcing attendance at the select committee on football governance. How are the select committee terms of reference actually going to relate to Wasps exactly.

Even if Wasps were forced to attend all they have to say is they are the legal long lease owners of the ground and can let it to whoever they choose on terms that suits them. What else could they say that is actually relevant? Forcing the owners of CCFC to attend now that is a different matter but surely would apply to a number of other clubs too - so why has it not been done already?

Fail to see how Collins or the select committee really solve what is going on, it doesn't really apply much pressure either because SISU & Wasps simply do what they are doing now - say nothing

I wouldn't get your hopes up

So then it begs the question why they can get away with saying nothing without any pressure at least from the local media and CCFC fans. It is all well and good having shit loads of articles about FOIS where you can call the outcome anyway, but it all seems very quiet on them not speaking.

 

[oldskyblue58]

You don't know that the CT and others are not questioning Wasps ........ but by the same token how often do we hear from SISU?

In these situations then best advice is often say nothing - be it Wasps or SISU

Not the way it should be but it is the way it is

Wasps tend only to speak on things that show them in a good light.

Perhaps the media will get a chance to question them better when covering the release of the 2016 Wasps Holdings figures due by Monday

 

[Nick]

You don't know that the CT and others are not questioning Wasps ........ but by the same token how often do we hear from SISU?

In these situations then best advice is often say nothing - be it Wasps or SISU

Not the way it should be but it is the way it is

Wasps tend only to speak on things that show them in a good light.

Perhaps the media will get a chance to question them better when covering the release of the 2016 Wasps Holdings figures due by Monday

So SISU stay quiet and how many articles are there? Wasps stay quiet and how many are there?

Let's not pretend Wasps don't get an easy ride.

 

[lifeskyblue]

My apologies...I jumped the gun with wishful thinking hoping they would all come under public scrutiny


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[oldskyblue58]

But what do you want to know from Wasps Nick? Its CCFC with the problems on and off the pitch, CCFC the club in crisis, the club under threat - bad news has always made better copy than good news. What problems at Wasps do you want to know about or are interested in? What to do with Wasps are you interested in?

You have the owner of the stadium going about its business, the only real question I want to know is what is it they mean by " legal noise" because that is what stops CCFC having some stability short term whilst the stadium issue is sorted out

 

[Nick]

But what do you want to know from Wasps Nick? Its CCFC with the problems on and off the pitch, CCFC the club in crisis, the club under threat - bad news has always made better copy than good news. What problems at Wasps do you want to know about or are interested in? What to do with Wasps are you interested in?

You have the owner of the stadium going about its business, the only real question I want to know is what is it they mean by " legal noise" because that is what stops CCFC having some stability short term whilst the stadium issue is sorted out

It is more about the whole refusing to talk stuff, they don't have to do a deal if they don't want to. Fair enough, they own the place.

Let's not let them just spin it as "Legal Noise" and hide away without any questions.

Have Wasps ever been pushed on anything? Somebody points out on here for example that Wasps have bought ST land, after a couple of weeks of pushing the telegraph look into it and get a "no comment" and it gets left.

Fisher says nothing, there are FOI's going in left right and centre.

Surely Wasps can be pushed on their refusal to answer what it would take to get talks going? As can CCFC.

We have MPs shouting at the FL to prevent CCFC from being able to move, yet I don't think she mentioned anything about the people currently refusing to talk.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Think the difference is Nick that Wasps get things done then it comes out - leaves not too many questions or doubts

On the other hand TF says something (usually a might, could, may happen, cant because of someone else) everybody immediately doubts it and questions. Most times there are no obvious actions or achievements

On the other side of that plenty of people on here repeatedly state that CCFC is the bigger more important sports club if so then they have to live with a brighter spot light.

Put your questions to Gilbert or Reid challenge them to go further and ask why they dont

 

[wingy]

If the view is that Collins isn't balanced enough, I can't think of a better opportunity to appraise him of a different viewpoint than some face to face.

 

[Nick]

Think the difference is Nick that Wasps get things done then it comes out - leaves not too many questions or doubts

On the other hand TF says something (usually a might, could, may happen, cant because of someone else) everybody immediately doubts it and questions. Most times there are no obvious actions or achievements

On the other side of that plenty of people on here repeatedly state that CCFC is the bigger more important sports club if so then they have to live with a brighter spot light.

Put your questions to Gilbert or Reid challenge them to go further and ask why they dont

That's because things get done and it selectively gets ignored, doesn't it? The same as some council stuff seems to get selectively ignored.

Why wouldn't anybody want pressure on Wasps to say why they won't really do talks? The same as people would want pressure on CCFC to sort talks about the Ricoh.

ie. Banging their heads together.

Instead of banging heads, it seems to be people jump in on CCFC while Wasps stand there and brush the bit of dirt off their tweed jacket and watch.

 

[Grendel]

But what do you want to know from Wasps Nick? Its CCFC with the problems on and off the pitch, CCFC the club in crisis, the club under threat - bad news has always made better copy than good news. What problems at Wasps do you want to know about or are interested in? What to do with Wasps are you interested in?

You have the owner of the stadium going about its business, the only real question I want to know is what is it they mean by " legal noise" because that is what stops CCFC having some stability short term whilst the stadium issue is sorted out

I would like wasps to answer three questions.

1 is it true that despite the observation on legal noise that you actually presented the football club with a proposed rent arrangement?

2. Is the suggestion that The real reason for the breakdown in talks was actually to do with the length of contract on offer, the terms of the separation clause and the proposed rental position from year 3 onwards true or false?

3. When the council agreed to sell the lease to you they assured ccfc fans that their clubs future will not be negatively impacted. Can you confirm this commitment will be honoured.

Not hard is it? Especially 3 as its in the public domain.

 

[Nick]

I would like wasps to answer three questions.

1 is it true that despite the observation on legal noise that you actually presented the football club with a proposed rent arrangement?

2. Is the suggestion that The real reason for the breakdown in talks was actually to do with the length of contract on offer, the terms of the separation clause and the proposed rental position from year 3 onwards true or false?

3. When the council agreed to sell the lease to you they assured ccfc fans that their clubs future will not be negatively impacted. Can you confirm this commitment will be honoured.

Not hard is it? Especially 3 as its in the public domain.

It would just be "No Comment" like when Duggins was asked and then forgotten about.

 

[wingy]

Yes, I keep saying it. They are trying to distress the club and delay any deal until the last minute in order for force the club into taking a substantially worse take it or leave it deal. IMO it is this and not the 'legal noise' which is stopping them from negotiating now.

It just seems easier to most to believe wasps.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I think something other is going on.
Do they particularly need to distress CCFC in this game of poker, you and I know we have a weak hand, so do Wasps IMO

 

[Nick]

I think something other is going on.
Do they particularly need to distress CCFC in this game of poker, you and I know we have a weak hand, so do Wasps IMO

Yes, but if they just capitalised on the weak hand they would look bad.

They play the legal line and they get no blame.

Get to close to the deadline, they can name a price and still look like heroes.

 

[chiefdave]

leaves not too many questions or doubts

There's plenty of questions and doubts about what Wasps have done, just because they have actually done something doesn't mean they should get a free pass.

The no negative impact to CCFC that Grendel points out should be getting massively pushed at Wasps and CCC by the CT.
Off the top of my head why aren't Wasps pushed on why the Higgs rather than any other of the 17 sites they claim to have identified. The answer the gave was that Higgs was close to the Ricoh and in the city centre yet the CT just printed that and didn't question it!
Why did they suddenly stop talks with CCFC? The legal noise arguement is rubbish, especially as CCFC aren't taking any legal action against Wasps.
There's questions around rugby facilities being included in the councils plans for a swimming pool at Higgs.

Sure there's lots more. Point being, substitute CCFC or SISU for Wasps and there's article after article. Why is one side getting pushed and others just left to do as they wish?