dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
:spam::spam::spam:
How can I be lying when I am quoting something
Not bothering with you now
Usual wumming.
How can I be lying when I am quoting something
Not bothering with you now
Usual wumming.
Still lying
He said he was going to look at a long term deal for the Ricoh.
He had his 17 point plan and Wasps say they agreed to a lot of it.
Wasps then say the final deal couldn't be struck due to the legal action.
<snip>
He was doing his bit. Sounds like we need to drop the legal action on a guarantee CA's 17 points are signed and the academy gets a more suitable co use of the venue.
<snip>.
A) they haven't agreed on a lot of the 17 point plan, wasp said they were half way to 2/3rds through the list and they had agreed on some and disagreed on others of the points. We don't know how many they have agreed on and how important those particular bits are.
B) the second part isn't going to happen anyway, we don't know what hadn't been agreed on and whether those hurdles can be got over, we also don't know whether wasps can give us enough access to the facilities to satisfy our cat 2 academy
The problem is wasps stance is "we're not talking to you until you drop it" they could turn around and say fuck you or OK but only if you okay £1m (or any other arbitrary figure) rent and screw is over or but let us have enough access to the facilities to satisfy the cat 2 academy.
Wasps should continue to negotiate and if the terms are suitable for us, then make it a requirement of dropping the legals before it can be signed off.
But no, they are going to shaft us anyway. This has no impact on them at all and the latest JR appeal made no noise at all.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
:spam::spam::spam:
How can I be lying when I am quoting something
Not bothering with you now
Usual wumming.
Because they have been offered a deal and do not agree the terms. Wasps have offered terms - Armstrong did not say anything about the legal action being a barrier - he used a term which people like you can latch onto.
As others have stated now we back the club - we have no choice - wasps as I've always said want to destroy the club.
Either back us or fuck off under your rock along with sky blue John, Royal scam and all the other clowns.
What we do not need now is great long diatribes from you about pointless crap.
Wasps should continue to negotiate and if the terms are suitable for us, then make it a requirement of dropping the legals before it can be signed off.
Something like that would be the best course of action I think, the way it's playing out at the moment there is nothing to stop wasps shafting us on the Ricoh deal if legals are dropped.
Continue to negotiate, get a deal everyone is happy with, if they can do that then draw up the contracts and then insert a clause that the contract/deal is only valid on the dropping of the legal action, sign the deal and then if SISU fail to drop legal action within for example 2 weeks then the contract is null and void.
Protects us from being shafted and if everything goes well then legal action will be dropped like the council want.
That said I don't thin there is any chance SISU would drop the legal action even in those circumstances so maybe pointless.
“We were making very good progress, we were probably halfway to two thirds of the way through the list.
“We still had some points not agreed, but we agreed some of the key points for example how to make food and beverage work from their point of view, how hospitality would work, where to locate a club shop in the stadium - all those sort of things were agreed.
I had to do a short course on the basics of contract law a few years ago. The first thing we were told is just because something is in a contract does not make it true or enforceable. Its the same principle here. He's given a soundbite, probably fed to him by a PR company, which those pre-disposed to blame everything on the club will latch on to.How can I be lying when I am quoting something
They were 1/2 to 2/3rds through the list. The second paragraph says they had agreed on some if the points but but hadn't agreed on others.
That indicates to me they had not agreed all that had been discussed and they haven't even discussed the final third.
As usual you're getting hung up on a few works and making the assumption that everything discussed was agreed. Nowhere does it say that everything discussed has been agreed.
You also fail to consider that Anderson said these weren't formal negotiations and only general discussions.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
As usual you're taking a soundbite and taking it as fact.Said exactly what he said over half nearly 2/3rds
Re read what I said and please stick to what I said.
Then he said only a few things left to discuss
As usual you are trying to be negative
I had to do a short course on the basics of contract law a few years ago. The first thing we were told is just because something is in a contract does not make it true or enforceable. Its the same principle here. He's given a soundbite, probably fed to him by a PR company, which those pre-disposed to blame everything on the club will latch on to.
No legal action is being taken or planned against Wasps. No legal action being taken or planned by SISU can impact on Wasps. So how does it impact on the ability to agree a deal to stay at the Ricoh?
As usual you're taking a soundbite and taking it as fact.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
As usual you're taking a soundbite and taking it as fact.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
like you dismissed the below soundbite from Chris Anderson? doesnt say what you want it to as it doesnt make wasps sound like heroes. I'd rather take into account ALL statements then either make a decision based on everything or reserve judgement as this seems to be a convenient distraction from our academy being shafted. Better to reserve judgement than take something as fact without knowing the truth...As usual you are dismissing a sound bite without knowing any better than it.
I can't understand that to be honest. I realise they are glad to have WASPs suckle up to them, helping promote things in the city rugby wise, but other than paying the rent, what do the council actually gain? They don't have a stake anymore in ACL, neither do Higgs.
I'd have thought it would be in the council's interest to let them develop the Butts - it helps keep/create jobs in the city, you've got income from business rates. More fans spending money in the town, rather than in another. Surely much better than than SISU's empty threats of moving the club to a different borough suddenly turning into reality.
Perhaps all of a sudden, permission is given...coinciding with a dropping of legal action.
On the radio this morning he said that he couldn't understand how Wasps could apply for planning permission when they don't have a lease on the Higgs Centre. It suggests to me that he is either naive or stupid.
Does he really expect Wasps to enter into a binding lease agreement without firstly knowing whether their plans will be approved?
I suspect we're now deep down in the world of murky politics.
For better or worse, CCC have staked a lot on Wasps succeeding. For better or worse, they're firmly attached to their city of culture bid.
Any threat to Wasps now risks bringing down both the culture bid, and politics as a whole. Like it or not, our fan base is a threat/competition to Wasps, and a rival for media space.
Therefore, politically, you could argue the council are now forced to drive forward with Wasps as chosen partner... for better or worse.
If Wasps can be involved why can't we - despite ongoing crap?
Sponsorship money.
Sponsorship money.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ricoh-arena-official-sponsor-coventrys-11056404Us or them? Have we paid in? Don't understand ..
For better or worse, CCC have staked a lot on Wasps succeeding. For better or worse, they're firmly attached to their city of culture bid.
Says a lot regarding our predicament doesn't it. A big contrast to dragging the home city to a European Court with a JR. big PR value for Wasps. Pity we can't use the club's heritage and Brand to contribute in some way - to show that we are still around..
How are negotiations with the football club over the Ricoh Arena progressing?Still lying
Were you able to reach any provisional agreements / common ground on the 17 or so areas where you were looking for a better deal for the club?How are negotiations with the football club over the Ricoh Arena progressing?
“We actually enjoyed a couple of months of very constructive conversations about a long-term deal here at the Ricoh Arena.
“I have seen Chris make reference to his 17-point plan, and I didn’t realise there were 17 points until he said that - but there probably were.
“But it wasn’t done where they came with a list of 17 demands, if we were going to do a long deal - and we were talking about a 20- or 25-year deal, he had drawn up a list of issues he thought we needed to address.
“We went through those line by line and put together a plan that would address what Coventry City need from it and that would still be commercially viable for us.
“We were making very good progress, we were probably halfway to two thirds of the way through the list.
“We still had some points not agreed, but we agreed some of the key points for example how to make food and beverage work from their point of view, how hospitality would work, where to locate a club shop in the stadium - all those sort of things were agreed.
“What we found difficult was, as those conversations progressed, concluding on any arrangement of that sort while the various legal actions and judicial reviews were still going on.
“We decided that we wouldn’t conclude the conversation at that point in time. This was during the time when various appeals were going on at the Court of Appeal.
“I’m not a lawyer but you can’t ignore the volume of comment about it. We felt it was difficult to conclude on a long-term arrangement while all that was still going on. But we had made very good progress
"There were still a few to agree, though I can’t go into the details of what but it was a discussion conducted in a very conductive and cooperative manner over several meetings between Chris and I.”
You were saying something about him lying?
Were you able to reach any provisional agreements / common ground on the 17 or so areas where you were looking for a better deal for the club?
"No. We had productive and friendly conversations about the various areas that an agreement should cover, like parking, rent, ticket office and retail shop, health and safety, even the colour of the seats and the Jimmy Hill statue or Memorial Garden - but we never got to that stage."
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
There’s a suggestion you don’t have the commercial flexibility to give the football club what it wants in some areas. The food and beverage deal with Compass would be an obvious example. Do you think there’s anyway these things could be addressed?Were you able to reach any provisional agreements / common ground on the 17 or so areas where you were looking for a better deal for the club?
"No. We had productive and friendly conversations about the various areas that an agreement should cover, like parking, rent, ticket office and retail shop, health and safety, even the colour of the seats and the Jimmy Hill statue or Memorial Garden - but we never got to that stage."
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
You carry on quoting CA, and just for "Balance" I'll quote ArmstrongI wish my customers were like Dongle and SBK - they are so gullible it's not true.
Take it from me. CA is a nice guy with great ideas but alas is nothing more than a puppet. When SISU say jump.. He says how high?
Have you?Have you met CA much?
Have you?
You probably do Grenduffy... But I'm not so gullible to believe an estimation from a factI wish my customers were like Dongle and SBK - they are so gullible it's not true.
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?