Nick
Administrator
You do realise you have just contradicted yourself about the first two sentences of that?
Coventry City fans to discuss possibility of supporter-led takeover (31 Viewers)
- Thread starter skybluebeduff
- Start date
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
There was also a guy from SD on the stage as well as a guy from the PST. Are you confused about them too?
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Does ticket prices being lowered makes SISU our hero's? If they opened the games up for free, gates would still be down, why? It's not so much cheaper seats(It does help) but investment on the team is what's needed. Instead of suing anyone and everyone, put money to a better cause, put it towards buying better players than the dross we've got now, you know what I mean? Buy a good CF at the first opportunity, rather than wait to see what shit we can pick up for nothing on the last day of the transfer window. To cut a long story short, all CD ever does is throw figures at you. Letting the heart rule the head is not always the best route to go, but it's not always the wrong way. CD and Nick, are always the first to jump to the defence of SISU... "Just for balance".... Btw, have you had a word with Grenduffy yet? I'll bet not!
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Don't worry yourself about that Nick. It's not like our present owners have done it eh!
Nick
Administrator
It was a perfectly valid point and question but instead you just start ranting about other stuff and abusing people. Surprise.
You are getting annoyed about somebody using facts during a debate?
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
He also mentioned that moves are afoot to limit overspending by legal and regulatory means in higher divisions and talked about how small victories to move towards this model were important in the interim, but you'd rather not discuss the issues would you Nick and just support a status quo that leaves this club in a deeply unsatisfactory situation.
Nick
Administrator
I have discussed plenty of other points throughout the thread haven't I?
Do you mean moves like FFP?
What status quo am I supporting?
Generally Midfield
Well-Known Member
I can understand why the trust would have people from SD and PST there and it makes good sense. From the bits I saw on periscope they were good and the pompey guy in particular seemed very good indeed . My question is about the trust saying the protest group is separate but if actions speak louder than words it seems like the trust and the protest are bound up together? Answers welcome!
cloughie
Well-Known Member
You said
'David Johnson going on about a boycott as a scenario as the fans buying the club because they can pick the club up via administration.'
Seems pretty much what you did say, but no you wriggle and wriggle but increasingly more and more people are seeing through you
Nick
Administrator
So am I wrong that it was mentioned twice in the same day?
What exactly is being seen through me? Would be interesting to know.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Just caught Free Radios news bulletin. It only mentioned boycotting not that fans met to discuss a possible takeover. It basically said "fans were told last night that they will have no choice other then to boycott games if they want to takeover the club at a fans forum meeting last night"
This is pretty much what Nick has been saying. The meeting discussed many things but the soundbite that's been picked up is to boycott (regardless of whether it came from the floor or panel)
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
This is pretty much what Nick has been saying. The meeting discussed many things but the soundbite that's been picked up is to boycott (regardless of whether it came from the floor or panel)
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
That's the press for you.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Yep, but most fans werent at the meeting and when I was tuned into Periscope only 74 people were on that. So the majority of fans will get their information/updates through thr media. And that is saying boycott.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
You sure they weren't talking cricket?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Nah, we're nowhere near as solid in defence than Geoffrey
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
It was a perfectly valid point and question but instead you just start ranting about other stuff and abusing people. Surprise.
You are getting annoyed about somebody using facts during a debate?
So the "Fact" about my saying the budget has decreased every year since the present owners took charge isn't a valid point then? Football being the entity that it is needs footballers yes?.... Depending on how well the team that you own does in the leagues depends on how much you invest, yes? If like an upwardly looking owner supplies his manager with the resources, a good percentage of them will do well in their league and even gain promotion. If however, you happen to have owners like ours, there is only one way our Football Club will go, and it isn't up!..... With regards to CD and yourself. It's not the "Debate" that gets to me, it's the way in which both he and you come across as descending and holier than thou. I'm all for debate, but I definately won't be talked down too by you or anyone else.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
being spun by some on here not just the press
Nick
Administrator
Yet you call somebody a prick for asking you a perfectly valid question when discussing attendances / budgets?
Nick
Administrator
Strange that multiple people got that general idea from it isn't it? The main point CovMad have taken from it and mentioned is about season ticket renewals rather than anything else also.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Is that the only tweet you read about the event?
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Strange that no one mentioned that it was clearly stated several times by different people that a boycott was not needed as it was happening naturally by people voting with there feet and making their own personal decision not to renew next season. Which is a whole lot different from an organised boycott, but spin away as you wish
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Lost in the sea of arguements but it seems to me that what's apparent is that we are already ran in the same manner as fan ownership now. Except with people whose priority is another company?
For those who could attend the meeting, Is this the case?
Last edited:
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
i wodner what will happen next season. league 1 or 2 i cant see ST sales being much more than 2k
ive been called a sisu lover many times on this forum but i have been a handful of times this season only and i am not fussed about going up again anytime soon
last year i went to 15 odd
i know many others that have stopped going too. no organised boycott just had enough
ive been called a sisu lover many times on this forum but i have been a handful of times this season only and i am not fussed about going up again anytime soon
last year i went to 15 odd
i know many others that have stopped going too. no organised boycott just had enough
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
No I didn't!.... I called him(and you if the cap fits) a Condescending prick!
Nick
Administrator
What's being spun?
I said that was the way I could see it going, the next morning a radio station are pushing that same line.
Now, what should be done is that somebody should clear it up, contact Free Radio and correct them, come on here and correct it and explain what's meant by the admin stuff that was said twice yesterday at different occasions that is clearly putting into people's heads that by doing a boycott it's a way to get fan ownership.
Note, that isn't me saying the Trust said everybody should boycott. I said it is putting the idea into people's heads that a boycott could lead to admin which then leads to fan ownership.
If free radio are running that on their news then something must have given them that idea also mustn't it? Instead of just shouting it never happened, correct it.
Last edited:
NortonSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
If our fans are serious about starting a fund to look at buying the club from the owners then I would be willing to contribute. I wouldn't mind who was the lead body in taking this forward and would offer any support I could muster from manning the turnstiles to making the pies.
All I would ask is that there is no point in asking how we got to this point, more about how do we get control from the club and move forward without the owners, whether as a purchase or even look at franchising the club from sisu, paying them an annual fee to them to stay away from the running of the football club.
It is not what Portsmouth did or Swansea achieved, its about a business model that will succeed for Coventry City.
All I would ask is that there is no point in asking how we got to this point, more about how do we get control from the club and move forward without the owners, whether as a purchase or even look at franchising the club from sisu, paying them an annual fee to them to stay away from the running of the football club.
It is not what Portsmouth did or Swansea achieved, its about a business model that will succeed for Coventry City.
Moff
Well-Known Member
First and foremost, you answered the question. You raise some decent points. Pity you didn't answer the question first time around.
Second CD asked you a question you didn't answer you insulted. I seem to recall you banging on and on and on at Nick when he doesn't answer your questions. Pot and kettle come to mind.
Third, if Grendel had been on the thread and called someone a condescending prick I would have said the same to him. He didn't, and I am fucked if I am going to monitor the site all the time like you do to see if Grendel insults anyone, just so I can call him out to please you.
Fourth what the fuck has Grendel got to do with this post. Are you obsessed with him? For fucks sake if you like him that much ask him on a date.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]
Of course it would get him off as he was only breaking FL rules if he was chairman of another club - that's the only think the FL would be interested in and any investigation would cease when he resigned
Do you think he should have made the loans? With redirect I have posed the original question and you will not answer - answer and then I will address the counter question.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
1) Get your facts right. I said Nick is always answering questions with a question from everyone on the forum, like a built in defence mechanism.
2) Strange that I've never seen you pull him up when he's sworn at posters, or, come to think of it, any other poster that swears on this forum. Or is it you only come on the forum when I'm on?
3)If my point number 2 is correct, why haven't you asked me out?
4) Grenduffy has everything to do with this post Moff. If you look back 2-3 pages he was the one to start it all off.... Or are you another Nick? only looks at the last page and then starts from there?
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Far enough. It only said 74 when I was on it. Does it count repeat viewers separately?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Nick
Administrator
That was people watching live at that time, it was going up and down as people opened / closed it so it was about 60 / 70 odd a lot of the way through.
The overall figure will be total watched including those since, I am sure Captain Dart knows that though
4waspsting
Active Member
Please oh please lets all forget about this. Its not going to happen, the fan base is now finished to finance it.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Of course it would get him off as he was only breaking FL rules if he was chairman of another club - that's the only think the FL would be interested in and any investigation would cease when he resigned
Do you think he should have made the loans? With redirect I have posed the original question and you will not answer - answer and then I will address the counter question.[/QUOTE]
The investigation was started BEFORE he resigned so would carry on untill he is found guilty, or not guilty..... You're not in a soap opera now Grenduffy.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
The trust have been working on this for two years we are told. I would expect after two years for them to have something to show for it. That's not unreasonable when they start talking about people putting money into escrow accounts and committing to buying shares is it?
This is the point isn't it. They need to be completely separate yet you have David Johnson up on stage at a Trust event about fan ownership. You have the Trust posting things about JHW protests on their website and you even had Moz getting the two mixed up. They very clearly aren't separate and they need to be.
Before the fans takeover they average 12.232 in L1 despite being bottom and getting relegated. Simple fact is they are a better supported side than us, in a much smaller city. If you then look that they required a large council loan and several individuals to put in large amounts it shows you what we are up against. And that was buying out of admin, unless we're saying push the club into admin we would need a lot more finance.
Pomepy's business plan for the first couple of years post fans takeover had 7 figure losses budgeted. They've since had to dilute their ownership as additional funds have been required.
That was the thing that struck me. A lot of what was being said by the Supporters Direct / Pompey representatives could have been straight out of Fishers mouth. Said in a less antagonistic way but still the same thing which will have the same end result. I wasn't really clear on how fan ownership would really change the way the club is run. Yes you'd have people who cared about the club involved which is obviously a good thing but if you have £1m to spend now or £1m to spend with fan ownership you're getting the same end result.
There was a vague notion that you'd get more sponsorship and more people turning up with fan ownership but IMO that's a long way from guaranteed.