skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Did they? Any details?
Well they did propose a deal that was better for CCC and Higgs than was received from Wasps.
To think that CCC are out of the picture now is naïve. Any talk about a new ground in Coventry means SISU and CCC have to cross paths again so all of this discussion about telling truths are relevant from a credibility perspective. At the moment we cannot trust both parties as far as we can throw them
Well. CCC have publicly stated that they can't refuse a planning application from SISU just because it's SISU despite that very scenario being suggested. They even went as far as suggesting a possible site. So I guess the ball is in SISU's court now to reply. Maybe that's the big announcement coming in the new year?
Did they? Any details?
Well. CCC have publicly stated that they can't refuse a planning application from SISU just because it's SISU despite that very scenario being suggested. They even went as far as suggesting a possible site. So I guess the ball is in SISU's court now to reply. Maybe that's the big announcement coming in the new year?
Isn't the site they suggested too small? What CCC publicly stated was that they wouldn't break the law when questioned about it by Simon, that's a million miles away from saying they will assist the club in finding a new home in the city. How about Maton puts together a list of 60 acre sites within the city boundary that could be purchased by the club and which they council wouldn't object to having a stadium located at.
Isn't the site they suggested too small? What CCC publicly stated was that they wouldn't break the law when questioned about it by Simon, that's a million miles away from saying they will assist the club in finding a new home in the city. How about Maton puts together a list of 60 acre sites within the city boundary that could be purchased by the club and which they council wouldn't object to having a stadium located at.
Isn't the site they suggested too small? What CCC publicly stated was that they wouldn't break the law when questioned about it by Simon, that's a million miles away from saying they will assist the club in finding a new home in the city. How about Maton puts together a list of 60 acre sites within the city boundary that could be purchased by the club and which they council wouldn't object to having a stadium located at.
Why was the site too small?
Is that the same site that it is apparently already earmarked / planned for housing too?
Earmarked. I hate to point out the obvious but that's not the same as plan's submitted, plans accepted and ground broken. There is an opportunity to develop the site into something else if the appetite is there.
Earmarked. I hate to point out the obvious but that's not the same as plan's submitted, plans accepted and ground broken. There is an opportunity to develop the site into something else if the appetite is there.
Isn't there a city plan in place which states what type of development is preferred for each area? Of course that doesn't mean automatic refusal but it does make things harder and give the council or local residents grounds to make objections.
We are told a 60 acre site is required, that site isn't 60 acres. I would assume, if there actually is any plan, it involves selling off Ryton, not renting the AEHC and moving everything to one site.
It's like going to an estate agent and saying minimum 4 bedrooms and he comes back with details of a 2 bedroom house.
They would have bought the loan off YB, thereby removing any risk to taxpayers, offered £4.5million to Higgs(£1.5 million cash, and £4million over 10 years, CCC thought the offer was "significantally above market value"), and extend the lease to 125 years.
That was for just for the 50% Higgs share of course.
Now we have Wasps who have bought the 100% shareholding for about £5.5million, for a 250 year lease, and CCC still on the hook for the loan.
How were they going to buy the Yorkshire Bank loan when the YB had already turned down bigger offers than what SISU were proposing?
Didn't they also turn back on the Higgs deal you mention?
I don't know how far it is has got, just that it is in the process.
Do you really think a football ground would work at that site? Ever been around that area on a normal Monday morning?
That would have been Sisu's problem what price they negotiated with YB, now of course it's the local taxpayers problem, supporting a private enterprise owned by a hedge-fund.
I believe Higgs turned down the proposal.
Would you not say that what was offered was better than what actually transpired?
Earmarked. I hate to point out the obvious but that's not the same as plan's submitted, plans accepted and ground broken. There is an opportunity to develop the site into something else if the appetite is there.
Do we play alot of Monday morning games?
How were they going to buy the Yorkshire Bank loan when the YB had already turned down bigger offers than what SISU were proposing?
Didn't they also turn back on the Higgs deal you mention?
Well as you are obviously the expert on everything, why don't you tell me how traffic gets around there already and how much work it would be to resolve it?
The council tried to buy the loan from YB at the same rate Sisu said they would get it for. The bank turned CCC down 3 times before the council paid the full amount
There you have it then. SISU weren't offering an improved deal for anyone. They were offering pie in the sky.
Would have been Sisu's problem not the local taxpayers if they hadn't negotiated a better deal, they may well have been able to do one better than CCC managed, but never know now.
Regardless, there is still the outstanding loan now that CCC are on the hook for.
How would they have negotiated a better deal? Litigation maybe? Or a payment strike? Sorry, can't think of any other negotiation tactics we know SISU to use. Over to you.
Intellectually tony you are as much out of your depth here as Andy Webster would be in the champions league.
Keep going though - its hilarious looking at your juvenile little asides and thinking you are competing on a level playing field.
From the JR. In my view the offer was always doomed, the bank were never going to accept SISU's low offer.
SISU considered that the Bank debt could be purchased for £2m-5m. It was part of
their plan that the debt be purchased – in whole, or at least as to 50%, by them – for
that sum. They were not prepared to offer more. The Heads of Terms supposed that,
the debt having been purchased, it would be entirely written off; although the Council
was sensible to the possibility that SISU might purchase the debt from the Bank
(which had no constraints on the person to whom the loan and mortgage might be
transferred) and use their position as creditor to put further pressure on ACL and thus
the Council.
Tell me about the only show in town again? Or how SISU deliberately lost the JR.
At least I add points to debate not just insult people I don't agree with. Insults is hardly the height of intellect is it.
From the JR. In my view the offer was always doomed, the bank were never going to accept SISU's low offer.
SISU considered that the Bank debt could be purchased for £2m-5m. It was part of
their plan that the debt be purchased – in whole, or at least as to 50%, by them – for
that sum. They were not prepared to offer more. The Heads of Terms supposed that,
the debt having been purchased, it would be entirely written off; although the Council
was sensible to the possibility that SISU might purchase the debt from the Bank
(which had no constraints on the person to whom the loan and mortgage might be
transferred) and use their position as creditor to put further pressure on ACL and thus
the Council.
You might almost think that the SISU offer was another way of stringing ACL along in an unsustainable position.. I could imagine SISU still being in negotiations with YB to this day, 3 weeks and we expect to make an announcement.... etc.
Unfortunately, that is something that cannot be proved either way.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
If it wasn't possible to buy the debt from the bank for so low, then why did CCC try and buy it for the same price that SISU was saying they could get it for?
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?