You ask how ? The answer cost them money and stick together. I believe we need the Ricoh landlord to maintain their "drop the legals" ultimatum, no ground threat and our value plummet to bugger all. Any Ricoh rental negotiation I bet will be quiet a bit more than it is now and hope sisu are asked for a chunk up front they might look to get out. Just an assumption that but as said costing them hard money might jolt them into pissing off.
You ask how ? The answer cost them money and stick together. I believe we need the Ricoh landlord to maintain their "drop the legals" ultimatum, no ground threat and our value plummet to bugger all. Any Ricoh rental negotiation I bet will be quiet a bit more than it is now and hope sisu are asked for a chunk up front they might look to get out. Just an assumption that but as said costing them hard money might jolt them into pissing off.
Ever since SISU acquired the CCFC brand they have seen it as one there has been no recent change in that
I can think of plenty of ways that CCFC/ SISU as agents for investors are effectively one .................... struggling to think of much that keeps them as separate other than statements in the press by TF. Even that changes depending on which way the wind blows
So open question to everyone what makes CCFC autonomous and separate from SISU control? Who really controls Otium Entertainment group Ltd trading as CCFC?
If the club were only ever talking about a temporary deal. Then they didn't go into the talks looking for a long term deal. So that was not true by Mr Anderson.
If the deal colapsed because Wasps wanted a 20 year plus deal and CCFC wanted a 2 year deal with an option. Then Mr Armstrong hadn't told the truth when he said the talks collapse because of the distractions of the legal action.
I can see if that was the reason why it broke down why neither side are actually saying that.
Both of them can still blame the other if that is the case anyway.
Especially CCFC you would think they would say. Not sure why the legal action is suddenly getting mentioned we wanted to extend the but the length of the extension was the issue.
CCFC are not separate from Sisu control - that's obvious. However, I still see CCFC as a separate entity from Sisu. Surely, in the past, CCFC were not seen as being the same as Richardson, Robinson and the rest of them.So open question to everyone what makes CCFC autonomous and separate from SISU control?
Maybe people are so keen to say CCFC are SISU and vice versa so it seems to make it OK when they fuck CCFC over to try and get at SISU?
Put it this way, if CCFC go tits up will Joy and Tim be living in a cardboard box? If SISU are CCFC then surely if CCFC go bust then SISU will too?
Just a thought.
An utterly nonsensical thought.
CCFC are not separate from Sisu control - that's obvious. However, I still see CCFC as a separate entity from Sisu. Surely, in the past, CCFC were not seen as being the same as Richardson, Robinson and the rest of them.
You get it even if Nick doesn't. LOL.It's more that the entity is responsible to them, though. Like it or not, Robinson weilded control over what happened to CCFC, and now Seppala does the same. Obviously they're not *literally* the same, but the relevant paymasters have aims which may not tally with a football club and, ultimately, the actions will be what's best for the paymasters. If lucky, they coincide.
The difficulty is that the football club ends up collatoral damage. Equally, others' actions won't be what's best for the football club and, if distorted by a wider ideological anger about what the owners are all about, then the club gets caught in the firing line... from all directions, it must be said. Even if truly shoddy custodians, that's what Robinson and SISU have been really (or *should* have been, ratheer than owners!) and it's the consequences once owners bog off that's more concerning. Robinson's actions led to SISU, while SISU's actions will lead to...?
Answer? Same as it has been ever since the beginning:banghead: Other parties may not like what SISU are about but, like it or not, they're the opwners of the club so have to be worked with, and understood. Ditto, SISU may not like council regulation and what *that's* all about, but they need(ed) to work with CCC to strengthen their position, rather than going it alone.
Us being 24th isn't the fault of our MD neither is us not owning our stadium or losing the academy.
Wouldn't be getting any stick if we were not bottom of the league.
Probably release a new book just on his few months working under sisu alone lol
You get it even if Nick doesn't. LOL.
Do people not work notice nowadays?
A bit like the SISU OUT chance. Fair enough I know why fans are chanting it, but they weren't doing it when we were top of the league.
CCFC are not separate from Sisu control - that's obvious. However, I still see CCFC as a separate entity from Sisu. Surely, in the past, CCFC were not seen as being the same as Richardson, Robinson and the rest of them.
you would assume that one of the other directors would attend. Which would be TF or MV.
Although it wouldn't surprise me if the meeting were to be delayed because all the "turmoil" CA leaving has caused :banghead:
My Mum ( his sister ) still talks to him but then she thinks Christmas is next monthI'm used to talking to dead men walking I'm a city fan
Unfortunately for me ccfc and sisu are one of the same and sisu use our name.Am I reading that right? The only party in what you want to happen being damaged is CCFC and not SISU.
That's actually what frustrates me, mind. SISU were shit owners when we signed Jordan Henderson, they were shit owners before we played Chelsea in the cup, they were shit owners when we had a good start to last season... league form doesn't make owners any better or worse. They're no more shit owners now because we've drawn 0-0 at the weekend!
If SISU had any sense they'd relegate us again so we could win a few matches next season, allow people to say how they'd learned from their mistakes.
Unfortunately for me ccfc and sisu are one of the same and sisu use our name.
No one said the legal action prevented a deal - it was never said in that way. It was carefully worded.
I accept that, OSB, but I don't support Sisu - I support CCFC. That's how I look at it. I can separate the two. It's a pity that those who want to damage or drive out Sisu can only do so by damaging CCFC.OEG t/a CCFC being separate to SISU is a legal nicety that is wheeled out when a particular picture is required to be painted or to lower profile for actions taking place, but the reality is the actions of OEG are governed by SISU and therefore autonomy is a myth
I accept that, OSB, but I don't support Sisu - I support CCFC. That's how I look at it. I can separate the two. It's a pity that those who want to damage or drive out Sisu can only do so by damaging CCFC.
I accept that, OSB, but I don't support Sisu - I support CCFC. That's how I look at it. I can separate the two. It's a pity that those who want to damage or drive out Sisu can only do so by damaging CCFC.
It's a pity that the warring factions can't see that. Or maybe they can see it but just don't care.The real damage done is to the supporters - without them there is no club
My Mum ( his sister ) still talks to him but then she thinks Christmas is next month
I can understand that sbd we each ratify things in our own way and nothing wrong in that. Unfortunately this has become a war between very stubborn generals, who are not afraid to use any weapons available to them and CCFC is a weapon used by both sides suffering and causing collateral damage. The real damage done is to the supporters - without them there is no club
Proof positive then that Christmas came early - she said the same thing last month!I hope it isn't, as we normally have our bad spell after xmas
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?