"Coventry City owners lead club to Northampton and towards the abyss" (4 Viewers)

shmmeee · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Having let the club rent a ground outside of Coventry for 3-5 years, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to have the same deal agreed within Coventry...

10 years totally irrelevant, it'd only be relevant if the club had a ground lined up for the next 10 years anyway. If they're building a new one in the right place, then renting AN Other ground in the city that bears the club's name is hardly going to be rejected by the football league, so a short term temporary agreement can be continued elsewhere.

But the FL say they only agreed to the groundshare because a new stadium is planned and there is no stadium in Coventry suitable.

The entire justification for the move is the Ricoh isn't available. The FL said they only agreed to Northampton because otherwise the club couldn't fulfil their fixtures.

Besides, this point was couched in "if this is a new co". And like everything else ACL had to assume the FL would follow their own rules, they didn't, you can't blame ACL for that.

And like everything else: why couldn't this be a starting point for negotiations rather than dismissing it out of hand? Oh yeah, because rent was never the issue. FFS I can't believe some (not you) are still talking in these terms. You'd have to be simple to not see that none of the justifications from Sisu stand up to even a five year olds scrutiny.

Nick · Dec 2, 2013

If it is the case they have offered rent free then I take it back and I expect the telegraph to do an exclusive in a couple of weeks

Grendel · Dec 2, 2013

bigfatronssba said:
You mean would I prefer my club to be guaranteed to be playing in Coventry for 5 years or 10 years?

Only council obsessed haters like yourself would prefer less security of our future.

No I don't give a toss if the rules are broken if I benefit. It's you who gets all prissy about FPP rules being waived - from other clubs' perspectives this is just as damaging - as you know to me the club is all that matters so free ground, bended rules couldn't care less.

ohitsaidwalker king power · Dec 2, 2013

Grendel said:
It's clear they would let the rule go - they've agreed a move outside the city so if both parties were happy then it would be ridiculous.

They cannot force a club to move though as that means they make judgement as to what is reasonable.

Lots of hysterical nonense tonight as usual. As northern said we need to know more details.

Weber Shadwick are silent - says a lot.

You might be right G... and I agree.. we should await the data backed verdict.. equally some who have and will continue to defend the apparent indefensible will need to take a long hard look at their reflection?

Nick · Dec 2, 2013

Can you defend it if they turned down rent free at the ricoh with no strings and then 100k a year after?

Will we ever get to know the small print as it sounds like a great deal when it is put like that.

Godiva · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
I haven't, I've questioned people other than OSB blindly quoting a rule of the football league, and refusing to accept the possibility that, having let the club rent a ground outside of Coventry for 3-5 years, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to have the same deal agreed within Coventry...

10 years totally irrelevant, it'd only be relevant if the club had a ground lined up for the next 10 years anyway. If they're building a new one in the right place, then renting AN Other ground in the city that bears the club's name is hardly going to be rejected by the football league, so a short term temporary agreement can be continued elsewhere.

Exactly - so the question should be: Is ACL prepared to make the rent offer on 3-4 year lease and would the club gain any access to additional matchday income.

bigfatronssba · Dec 2, 2013

Godiva said:
Exactly - so the question should be: Is ACL prepared to make the rent offer on 3-4 year lease and would the club gain any access to additional matchday income.

The match day income is irrelevant in the short term as it will be a pittance at Northampton anyway.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 2, 2013

Godiva said:
Exactly - so the question should be: Is ACL prepared to make the rent offer on 3-4 year lease and would the club gain any access to additional matchday income.

I'd even say the matchday income becomes irrelevant if it's only the same term as Northampton while you build your own ground.

Nowt to do with NOPM, you could stop having to sell tickets as low as £9 a pop, and get an average gate 50% higher than Northampton's capacity.

Guess the running costs of the Ricvoh are somewhat more than Sixfields, but if the deal really was no strings for the time it takes to build a replacement stadium (while we're at it, perhaps the council could even offer some potential sites in the city for that stadium, really call their bluff) then it's pretty hard to turn down really.

James Smith · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
I'd even say the matchday income becomes irrelevant if it's only the same term as Northampton while you build your own ground.

Nowt to do with NOPM, you could stop having to sell tickets as low as £9 a pop, and get an average gate 50% higher than Northampton's capacity.

Guess the running costs of the Ricvoh are somewhat more than Sixfields, but if the deal really was no strings for the time it takes to build a replacement stadium (while we're at it, perhaps the council could even offer some potential sites in the city for that stadium, really call their bluff) then it's pretty hard to turn down really.

Do we know anything about the deal with Northampton, like pitch side advertising, car parking, F&B etc? Would be a bit daft if we're getting less from those at Sixfields than we were at the Ricoh.

skybluefred · Dec 2, 2013

Guess the running costs of the Ricvoh are somewhat more than Sixfields, but if the deal really was no strings for the time it takes to build a replacement stadium (while we're at it, perhaps the council could even offer some potential sites in the city for that stadium, really call their bluff) then it's pretty hard to turn down really.[/QUOTE]

If somebody had stabbed you in the back and was now busy dunking all over you, would YOU offer them help to find there next victim.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 2, 2013

skybluefred said:
If somebody had stabbed you in the back and was now busy dunking all over you, would YOU offer them help to find there next victim.

If I wanted the football club back in the city, and ACL/Ricoh was more than viable without the football club then yep, I'd be bending over backwards to offer them a site for a new ground within the city boundaries.

Wouldn't you?

Godiva · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
I'd even say the matchday income becomes irrelevant if it's only the same term as Northampton while you build your own ground.

Nowt to do with NOPM, you could stop having to sell tickets as low as £9 a pop, and get an average gate 50% higher than Northampton's capacity.

Guess the running costs of the Ricvoh are somewhat more than Sixfields, but if the deal really was no strings for the time it takes to build a replacement stadium (while we're at it, perhaps the council could even offer some potential sites in the city for that stadium, really call their bluff) then it's pretty hard to turn down really.

True - so either there's other strings attached or sisu is still trying to bleed out ACL or they are so fed up with CCC/ACL that no deal but a complete takeover of the Ricoh is acceptable.

Nick · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
If I wanted the football club back in the city, and ACL/Ricoh was more than viable without the football club then yep, I'd be bending over backwards to offer them a site for a new ground within the city boundaries.

Wouldn't you?

Especially if it meant the economy gaining from it again!

bigfatronssba · Dec 2, 2013

Godiva said:
True - so either there's other strings attached or sisu is still trying to bleed out ACL or they are so fed up with CCC/ACL that no deal but a complete takeover of the Ricoh is acceptable.

If its the last reason then they are the most unprofessional business I've ever heard of.

If a deal is the right deal then you put aside personal feelings.

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
Especially if it meant the economy gaining from it again!

And what better thing to do than call the club's bluff?

It's why I'd hope this offer reported is genuine, without strings. Too much game playing in the wrong way before, but assume SISU are entirely genuine in their desire to be back in Coventry, assume they're entirely genuine in their desire to build a new ground... assume ACL are entirely genuine in their claims to be able to succeed without CCFC.

Two major leisure facilities in the city is not a bad thing.

And if the club isn't genuine, and it refuses all offers of land, and all offers of rent free for 90 years and a day...

James Smith · Dec 2, 2013

bigfatronssba said:
If its the last reason then they are the most unprofessional business I've ever heard of.

If a deal is the right deal then you put aside personal feelings.

"Any feelings and not everyone had feelings.....etc."

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

RoboCCFC90 said:
A few things with this article:

"Sisu's decision to take the club 35 miles from Coventry to Northampton Town's Sixfields Stadium, and play hardball with Coventry city council, which built and owns the high-quality, 32,000-seat Ricoh Arena." - David Conn makes it sound as it CCFC gave nothing for the Arena and that it was built all out of the heart by the council. We gave up our spiritual home at Highfield Road and everything that came with it to move into the Ricoh.

"The presence of around 7,000 fans watching Pressley's team win 3-1 at MK Dons on Saturday demonstrated abiding support for the club and overwhelming rejection of the move to Northampton." - I agree to an extent, but it's not all fueled by the SISU - Council saga, we took 4998 fans to MK Dons last year and I think the word has spread positively about the stadium and the area in which made the game last season, not just a great game but also a fantastic occasion in general.

"The council, with the Alan Edward Higgs Charity which, as Arena Coventry Limited, jointly run the Ricoh, recently offered Sisu a return rent-free, paying only matchday costs, but Joy Seppala, Sisu's chief executive, has refused even those terms." - Does he mean the deal that was offered to Paul Appleton, who answered by saying "I wouldn't have a team to field"??

"She is insisting the council should sell Sisu the freehold ownership of the Ricoh Arena, which cost £113m to build; Mark Labovitch, a Sisu director, suggested to the Guardian that Sisu's valuation of the arena could be as low as £4m. The council, which spent £14m of council taxpayers' money building the arena, is not inclined to be harried into selling a major civic asset, and certainly not cheaply" - Starting to sound like David Conn is trying to make this sound like "My cock's bigger than yours in respect to the council." As I have already elluded too Coventry City gave up so much and put so much money into the Ricoh, who do you think realistically gave more, CCFC or the Council?

Just a few things I noticed reading it first time round..

The club brought the land of the gas board and then sold it to the council, where did all that money go. Now SISU want it back for nothing to make a profit as they have messed up running the club.

bigfatronssba · Dec 2, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
And what better thing to do than call the club's bluff?

It's why I'd hope this offer reported is genuine, without strings. Too much game playing in the wrong way before, but assume SISU are entirely genuine in their desire to be back in Coventry, assume they're entirely genuine in their desire to build a new ground... assume ACL are entirely genuine in their claims to be able to succeed without CCFC.

Two major leisure facilities in the city is not a bad thing.

And if the club isn't genuine, and it refuses all offers of land, and all offers of rent free for 90 years and a day...

I would agree with you on certain conditions, namely a time limit. If they do insist on a new stadium then acl need to be able to move on.

As the club won't commit to a long term Ricoh future, acl would need to look for a new anchor tenant. In that situation I would think it fair for acl to say you've got 5 years here as anchor tenant. After that there might be someone/ something else using the bowl at 3pm on a Saturday, and they get priority.

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
So did ACL offer SISU the ground rent free over the summer to try and keep them or not?

It looks like it was at the last meeting about a month ago.

James Smith · Dec 2, 2013

No future with SISU said:
The club brought the land of the gas board and then sold it to the council, where did all that money go. Now SISU want it back for nothing to make a profit as they have messed up running the club.

Um no the club never owned the land apparently

oldskyblue58 said:
Lets be clear that CCFC were repaid all but 308k of their net investment in the Arena project. In being so paid they deposited not only the monies spent and shown as assets but also all the associated debts into the arena project. If this had not happened then we would not be having this conversation because the club would have been liquidated in all likelyhood. Considering the distressed state of CCFC at the time they did well not to lose far more than £308k on the deal that was done 19/12/03

CCFC H Ltd had the option to purchase the site of the stadium and never exercised that option (it lapsed before 31/05/02). CCFC at no time ever owned the site. The council acquired the title to the site after the CCFC option on it failed. CCFC didnt have the money to purchase it.

Having gained the title to the site the council sold part of it to Tesco. They could only do that because they had title to it. Therefore any profit or funds from the deal belonged legitimately to CCC. Those funds were then invested in the build, together with £10m of council money and various grants etc. put the initial CCC investment at over 70m (nearly 80m when you factor in the interest received that was involved and the contribution recieved from selling rights to the casino build)

Talk that the council paid £10m are wrong or that there should be some inclusion of CCFC's contribution, the most it could have been was 308k

Talk of 4m for the site frankly looks a little silly ..........

Deleted member 5849 · Dec 2, 2013

bigfatronssba said:
I would agree with you on certain conditions, namely a time limit. If they do insist on a new stadium then acl need to be able to move on.

As the club won't commit to a long term Ricoh future, acl would need to look for a new anchor tenant. In that situation I would think it fair for acl to say you've got 5 years here as anchor tenant. After that there might be someone/ something else using the bowl at 3pm on a Saturday, and they get priority.

Indeed, 3-5 years is what they've agreed with Northampton after all.

And I'm sure even if the ground was delayed, if we saw it nearly finished come 5 years being up, and had to pop back to Northampton for 6 months while they finished it... a fair few of us would be a lot more tolerant in such a situation than now.

If a site's found by the council elsewhere in the city, and they agree to back planning permission... would all pass a lot quicker than the current situation now, too.

And if in 5 years time no land's bought, let alone built on, then the club can bog off elsewhere, ACL can carry on with Plan B, and we can all bog off to the Butts with Coventry Rovers!

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

RoboCCFC90 said:
Lets start with this BHSB "Coventry city council, which built and owns the high-quality, 32,000-seat Ricoh Arena." Was the Council the only entity to input money into the Arena's construction and if so much by how much in % of the total cost?

They were the developers, so have to arange the financing of the building of the stadium. The club pulled out as they could not arrange the building of the stadium.

cofastreecity · Dec 2, 2013

Guardian Journalist David Conn wins UK Sports Journalist of the Year tonight, and Reid grabs onto his shirt tails phoning SISU for a reactionary story, which he plasters locally tonight, pathetic

bigfatronssba · Dec 2, 2013

cofastreecity said:
Guardian Journalist David Conn wins UK Sports Journalist of the Year tonight, and Reid grabs onto his shirt tails phoning SISU for a reactionary story, which he plasters locally tonight, pathetic

Not before starting a twitter argument with him first though.

dongonzalos · Dec 2, 2013

covmark said:
Extremely one sided, could've.been written by one of the sisu bashers on here.

Yes but instead it was written by an independent journalist wasn't it?
I don't know him. Is he a Cov fan?

dongonzalos · Dec 2, 2013

Oops 10 pages to read
Lets see who he is.......

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
Wouldn't we have heard about it if it was recently though? You are saying "tells its own story" like you know for a fact this offer is recent? Do you know something?

Read Mark Labovitch statement

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

RFC said:
Unfortunately Nick I despair about so many totally inaccurate 'posts' but in fairness do any of us really know many of the facts?

Politics are still getting in the way of the football though and what Steven & his brilliant Staff & young players have so far achieved IMHO!

It's no good looking back, we've got to move forward and embrace whoever owns our Club ( as supporters we don't get to select who owns us FACT! ). Just take a long hard look at what's going on up and down the country Hull, Cardiff, Newcastle, Blackburn ALL are unhappy with aspects of what their owners are doing to those Clubs!

I look forward with relish to our next game at Sixfields against Crewe and would urge everyone 'slating' our owners and boycotting to think again and look at the bigger picture, as it's those not attending who are missing-out on the best football I've witnessed for more than 15 years!!!!!!!!!!

Remember two other parties are equally to blame for our present plight, maybe even more responsible??????????

Read Mark Labovitch statement it looks like they turned down a offer to return to the ricoh, but i suppose you will come up with an excuse to remain with fisher, but i think some of the supporters will start to see fishers plan is the wrong one to follow.

covmark · Dec 2, 2013

No future with SISU said:
Read Mark Labovitch statement

think you'll find Nick posted this before the Labovich stuff came to light. Any excuse to jump on someone's back though eh?

No future with SISU · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
Which post are you talking about? I am confused

We are talking about things in the article.

A great article would be one that starts from the start of the whole arena situation, with past owners, agreements, building of the Ricoh and then SISU coming in, then us moving out.

SISU took over and it was supposed to be a fresh start( debt free they said) so what has the past before sisu took over got to do with it. It is just SISU lovers trying to blame other people in the past.

Ashdown1 · Dec 2, 2013

tisza said:
I'm sorry did I comment on the offer or just say what the reported deal was.

Sorry Tisza, the reply was really aimed at Knowl who has had some suspect views for a long time when it comes to a certain hedge fund.

Nick · Dec 2, 2013

Is there a link to ML's statement?

chickentikkamasala · Dec 2, 2013

What will the Football league make of this?

James Smith · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
Is there a link to ML's statement?

Mark Labovitch, Otium’s non-executive director, said: “We clearly understood from Ann’s statement on October 30 that she was prepared to discuss ownership. We were surprised when that turned out not to be the case.
“We were equally surprised at the way ACL directors, the council executives Martin Reeves and Chris West, did not communicate this change of heart to us in a direct and straightforward way, but did so instead with off-record whispers on a fans’ podcast, the Nii Lamptey show.
“We have made it clear that no club can have a viable financial future unless it owns its own stadium.
“There is no prospect of us returning to the former landlord/tenant relationship with ACL, a company which bled the club dry for many years over two generations of owners, and wilfully sought to damage the club with actions which led to needless points deductions over the last two seasons.
“Such inexplicable actions have severely damaged our promotion chances. It is a credit to Steven Pressley and the players that so much of the damage caused by ACL has been made good.

“Joy’s door is open to Ann for further discussions. But we would have to be clear this time that it would be a discussion about stadium ownership.”
“In the absence of a clear commitment to discuss ownership, we are pressing ahead with the plans for our new stadium on the outskirts of Coventry.”

From the article

Danceswithhorses · Dec 2, 2013

Nick said:
Is there a link to ML's statement?

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/sisu-boss-joy-seppala-rejects-6363684

"Coventry City owners lead club to Northampton and towards the abyss" (4 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency