councillor john 'thug' mutton (1 Viewer)

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

Wasn't mutton the one who didn't want the council to be involved in the biulding of the Ricoh when we sold HR?

Whatever you think of John Mutton it was through his effort and persistence that the vote went through the Council in October 2003 to build the Arena. It was Taylor, Foster and the Tories who opposed it all the way.

 

---

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

I've heard she is tall, fat, bald and looks like a bloke. She goes to all our games as well apparently. Knows zilch about football though.

The only game she has ever been to was the last v B'ham.

 

[theprince]

I have seen Mutton at a couple of events and heard him a lot on CWR. I even sit near him at the Ricoh. Personally I am not impressed (being polite for once).

Why should John Mutton have to impress you ?

 

[mustaphasbeard]

Why should John Mutton have to impress you ?

Now there's a man with a solid grasp of politics.......

 

[Sub]

SISU should never get the stadium they would load it with debt just like they have the club and wreck it form top to bottom mutton should be appluded for standing against SISU !!

 

[torchomatic]

I hate John Mutton like I hate all local politicians. He's just in it for himself. Ultimately, whether it's dealing with SISU or not having a high unsustainable rent is hurting the club and that is what we all apparently care about.

Mutton is a prick.

 

[procdoc]

And he is called Mutton, even more reason to hate him

 

[oldskyblue58]

I am really not sure how Mr Mutton thinks this hard line public posturing is helping the situation at the Ricoh and with the club he apparently loves. Whilst the parties concerned should be firm in their stance it does no good at all to entrench views publically. It is important that all parties continue to talk and look for a solution, the alternative is that SISU pull the plug. I think some of his outbursts are very unhelpful and best kept private.

This situation is not going to be solved on the radio or in press interviews

 

[torchomatic]

I couldn't agree more, OSB. He comes on says "I love the club, I've supported them for 57 years, you know. Am I going to help them survive? Nah."

Is the rent isn't looked at then something else will. The playing squad. Then we'll have more "bloody SISU" threads.

Without some kind of concession from ACL or CCC then we are in big trouble.

I am really not sure how Mr Mutton thinks this hard line public posturing is helping the situation at the Ricoh and with the club he apparently loves. Whilst the parties concerned should be firm in their stance it does no good at all to entrench views publically. It is important that all parties continue to talk and look for a solution, the alternative is that SISU pull the plug. I think some of his outbursts are very unhelpful and best kept private.

This situation is not going to be solved on the radio or in press interviews

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Concessions from CCC must be seen as in the interests of Coventry taxpayers and it's well known that the council is short of money itself. They're not loaded!

 

[Sub]

yeah lets let SISU have a rent reduction because they are struggling :facepalm::facepalm: that would be fair on all the other businesses in coventry that are struggling in the economic climate FFS get real :facepalm:they knew what the deal was when they brought the club why should it change now ?? no different to when you buy a house with the mortgage on it you know what it costs a month and you know it can go up or down or if you agree a term for five years you know what it is for five years!! SISU knew what they took on so tough shit they have screwed things up and it is totally down to them so why should they be given help when everybody else has to deal with their day to day costs and not make a massive profit?

 

[Grendel]

yeah lets let SISU have a rent reduction because they are struggling :facepalm::facepalm: that would be fair on all the other businesses in coventry that are struggling in the economic climate FFS get real :facepalm:they knew what the deal was when they brought the club why should it change now ?? no different to when you buy a house with the mortgage on it you know what it costs a month and you know it can go up or down or if you agree a term for five years you know what it is for five years!! SISU knew what they took on so tough shit they have screwed things up and it is totally down to them so why should they be given help when everybody else has to deal with their day to day costs and not make a massive profit?

Actually it is different and I suspect if Hoffman said it was preventing investors from buying the club Mutton would be singing a different tune.

 

[torchomatic]

Oh, I agree Brighton. I work for WCC myself, so I know how short of money local government is. However, I still think that Mutton is making a total fool of himself. He is so unhelpful and inflexible it's bordering on obsession.

Like I said, there's nothing worse than a local politician. Basically, because they're not good enough to be real politicians. Horrible man.

Concessions from CCC must be seen as in the interests of Coventry taxpayers and it's well known that the council is short of money itself. They're not loaded!

 

[torchomatic]

Yeah, I know what you mean. However, I don't see John Mutton slagging off The Codfather Fish and Chip Shop or Bob's Bakers in the press because they're struggling.

I'm amazed that so many fans have a "yeah, let's bankrupt the club with the rent" attitude because SISU say that the club is struggling to pay a wholly unsustainable figure.

Maybe, you'll be happy then if we go into admin or liquidation because of it. High fives all round, eh?

yeah lets let SISU have a rent reduction because they are struggling :facepalm::facepalm: that would be fair on all the other businesses in coventry that are struggling in the economic climate FFS get real :facepalm:they knew what the deal was when they brought the club why should it change now ?? no different to when you buy a house with the mortgage on it you know what it costs a month and you know it can go up or down or if you agree a term for five years you know what it is for five years!! SISU knew what they took on so tough shit they have screwed things up and it is totally down to them so why should they be given help when everybody else has to deal with their day to day costs and not make a massive profit?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Now I get your point Torch-fair enough.

 

[Sub]

Actually it is different and I suspect if Hoffman said it was preventing investors from buying the club Mutton would be singing a different tune.

i bet he would to but the same thing would apply if hoffman brought the club and didnt own the stadium if you knew the rent was 100 grand a month then thats what it is why should it be changed because its a business that owns a football club ??

 

[oldskyblue58]

Have a lot of sympathy for that point of view Sub

Somewhere and somehow there has to be a compromise that suits both parties though.

The cynic in me sees the whole rent thing as way to deflect attention. Querying the rent is a valid question but is irrelevant if SISU do not deal with the other bigger issues at the club

 

[Grendel]

i bet he would to but the same thing would apply if hoffman brought the club and didnt own the stadium if you knew the rent was 100 grand a month then thats what it is why should it be changed because its a business that owns a football club ??

Because it is not sustainable in League One and you use mortgage examples but even individuals can renegotiate in difficult times even if this means paying back in better times. Taxpayers money is a red herring as the company makes money and if there are no payments the revenue stream is £1.2 million worse off anyway. It's an obscene rent and if the owners were popular people would be less on buffoon Mutton's side.

 

[Sub]

Yeah, I know what you mean. However, I don't see John Mutton slagging off The Codfather Fish and Chip Shop or Bob's Bakers in the press because they're struggling.

I'm amazed that so many fans have a "yeah, let's bankrupt the club with the rent" attitude because SISU say that the club is struggling to pay a wholly unsustainable figure.

Maybe, you'll be happy then if we go into admin or liquidation because of it. High fives all round, eh?

yeah thats right i would love to see the club go bust or dissapear forever but the point is they new the score when they took over and now only complain because there whole plan (or lack of one ) has gone tits up. i think the rent is to much but it has been like that for how long ??? and now they choose to complain after getting us relegated !! why ??

 

[torchomatic]

I know, I was being a twat! Sorry.

Yes, they knew the score with the rent and while we were getting money for players, getting 20K crowds then I suppose things were OK. However, money was tight, crowds have dwindled, we've been relegated which means even less money will be coming into the coffers, so SISU - quite rightly in my view - are seeking to cut the costs. If they can't then the playing side will suffer. Then, you get those who say they won't go until SISU have gone, again less money in the coffers to cover the essentials before we start getting onto luxuries, i.e. new players.

yeah thats right i would love to see the club go bust or dissapear forever but the point is they new the score when they took over and now only complain because there whole plan (or lack of one ) has gone tits up. i think the rent is to much but it has been like that for how long ??? and now they choose to complain after getting us relegated !! why ??

 

[covcity4life]

muttons a twat,has no intention of helping the club and will never sell 50% to anyone imo

 

[Grendel]

Torch is right. The rent is now a major problem and mutton is in my view being politically populist by making the stance he is doing. If the owners were popular he would negotiate as that would make him popular in that scenario. This is nothing to do with the taxpayer it's to do with a big fat councillors big fat ego.

 

[Sub]

thing is torch if they had invested a little this could of been advoided it is totally down to there miss mangemant that we were relegated and have lost 2millon of tv money alone let alone fans and sponsorship money and they are now trying to pin it on the council saying the rent is to high(which i think it is) but they said nothing when they took the club on and before all the bad feeling started, why didnt they try to negotiate then ?

 

[torchomatic]

Oh, I agree. SISU are obviously not innocent in any of this. For me, their biggest crime was believing that a club who did not own their own stadium with a small hardcore of fans would make them money. They have found out the hard way.

But, boring as it seems, if we don't pay less in rent then we will ultimately have to put up with a poorer squad and watch while every good player we get is sold to cover the wages. And rent.

Classic Catch 22.

thing is torch if they had invested a little this could of been advoided it is totally down to there miss mangemant that we were relegated and have lost 2millon of tv money alone let alone fans and sponsorship money and they are now trying to pin it on the council saying the rent is to high(which i think it is) but they said nothing when they took the club on and before all the bad feeling started, why didnt they try to negotiate then ?

 

[Blueandwhites]

Joy must be lapping this up! Successfully deferred the problem from being a failure to generate investment/ relegation, to being the councils fault for.......charging rent. Genius!

 

[Sub]

Oh, I agree. SISU are obviously not innocent in any of this. For me, their biggest crime was believing that a club who did not own their own stadium with a small hardcore of fans would make them money. They have found out the hard way.

But, boring as it seems, if we don't pay less in rent then we will ultimately have to put up with a poorer squad and watch while every good player we get is sold to cover the wages. And rent.

Classic Catch 22.

your right but all the family silver has been sold and the SISU credit cards are maxed out so they are up the creek without a paddle

 

[Grendel]

Joy must be lapping this up! Successfully deferred the problem from being a failure to generate investment/ relegation, to being the councils fault for.......charging rent. Genius!

On this particular issue the council have a role in the blame game. Also it is not a sisu issue just an issue that must also detract potential investors.

 

[You'll Never Beat McPake]

The City of Coventry has been slowly dying a tragic death over a number of decades. The decline of the city centre, football club, rugby club and others has reflected this. Coventry City council need to get off their backsides and start to promote this great city and realise that without the football team the majority of citizens will have nothing to excape to. We need strong leadership with forethought and significant investment to ensure the football club is sustainable for many years to come. The likes of Councillor Mutton are not, in my opinion, helping anyone but themselves. Maybe with the upcoming Mayor of Coventry elections we can put someone in place who can make a difference.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The council finds itself stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, agreeing a substantial rent reduction will provide the club with vital breathing space and relieve some of the burden on its finances. However, in doing so it deprives itself of revenue it badly needs to provide services for the people of Coventry and to deliver value for the taxpayer-to compensate, tax rates may go up or services may be stretched more thinly.

On the other hand, the council can play hard-ball and refuse to budge from its position. This maintains the financial burden on the club which, in a yet lower division with less revenue, is much more severe and presents a real threat to its future. If it breaks the club and SISU withdraw, the council is then seen as responsible for the demise of the football club, loses its rent income, and costs a good number of people their jobs at the club. Furthermore, the city loses the economic benefits of having a decent sized club which creates jobs and brings in added revenue on matchdays in the city centre.

In both scenarios, the taxpayer, and potentially the people of Coventry, lose. In the latter scenario, everybody loses-I fully sympathise with the council having to choose between the two, and it is not an easy decision to make; though on balance, I feel the former option has much greater and obvious long term benefits for all parties. It requires the council to make some short term concessions for long term benefits-but the club equally cannot duck its responsibilities.

 

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

the amount paid to HMRC each year in PAYE and NI has been c £5,000,000. Rent is £1,200,000. Are wages not a bigger problem?

 

[torchomatic]

Wholly agree, Brighton. We just need Mutton to drop the attitude.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

the amount paid to HMRC each year in PAYE and NI has been c £5,000,000. Rent is £1,200,000. Are wages not a bigger problem?

Wages will drop with relegation WCP-through a combination of salary drops and the departures of high earners. I would be very surprised indeed if we keep this season's wage structure without the revenue to back it up, though if Eastwood's wages are indeed in the region of say £8k/week, we could attract potentially 3 good quality League One players with half of that then save the other half; a saving of £200k. Purely hypothetical though

 

[stupot07]

The council finds itself stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, agreeing a substantial rent reduction will provide the club with vital breathing space and relieve some of the burden on its finances. However, in doing so it deprives itself of revenue it badly needs to provide services for the people of Coventry and to deliver value for the taxpayer-to compensate, tax rates may go up or services may be stretched more thinly.

On the other hand, the council can play hard-ball and refuse to budge from its position. This maintains the financial burden on the club which, in a yet lower division with less revenue, is much more severe and presents a real threat to its future. If it breaks the club and SISU withdraw, the council is then seen as responsible for the demise of the football club, loses its rent income, and costs a good number of people their jobs at the club. Furthermore, the city loses the economic benefits of having a decent sized club which creates jobs and brings in added revenue on matchdays in the city centre.

In both scenarios, the taxpayer, and potentially the people of Coventry, lose. In the latter scenario, everybody loses-I fully sympathise with the council having to choose between the two, and it is not an easy decision to make; though on balance, I feel the former option has much greater and obvious long term benefits for all parties. It requires the council to make some short term concessions for long term benefits-but the club equally cannot duck its responsibilities.

The council take no money or dividends out of the ricoh - the Ricoh is a long term asset investment not a revenue one. (see OSB post in finance section) thus a reduction in rent will not take money away from services in Coventry or money away from tax payers.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It must have some impact upon them though otherwise there would be no point charging the club rent, surely?

 

[stupot07]

the amount paid to HMRC each year in PAYE and NI has been c £5,000,000. Rent is £1,200,000. Are wages not a bigger problem?

Wages have already been slashed with the non replacement of the players that left last season, we have one of bottom 3 wage bills in the championship. For comparison purposes - Ours was c. £5m and Derby's was £9.6m.