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.
