December Stadium Deadline (21 Viewers)

oldskyblue58 · Sep 18, 2015

Guess we wait and see.

Were we not paying £28 at one point per match ticket in the Championship though. Is £30 such a leap?

The only thing I would add is that success or failure at the Ricoh is not just about attendances though. If the commercial department really gets its act together then the other features at the site will soften the blow of lost attendances.

oldskyblue58 · Sep 18, 2015

chiefdave said:
One thing I take from OSB's posts is that if the people of Coventry hadn't rushed in their thousands to go and see Wasps they might be in a somewhat trickier position and therefore we might have a shot at getting at least part ownership of the Ricoh.

Can't imagine people rushing to buy bonds if the attendances at the first few matches had just a few thousands they'd driven up from London on free coaches.

that's a valid view point certainly but depends on the business model Wasps could have adapted to I would think

The bonds are currently still trading at a premium will be interesting to see what happens to them when the first financials are reported

oldskyblue58 · Sep 18, 2015

oldfiver said:
So are you agreeing there are lots of freebies but the "secondary spend" makes up for this? But how much of that goes to Compass?

I agree there are free tickets ...... I have no idea how many. I did not say that the secondary spend makes up for the free tickets. I suggest you read it properly and also do your own research

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

I believe that another issue is that the majority of people in Coventry have little/no interest in the stadium.

There's around 330,000 living in Coventry and only about 11,000 going to CCFC matches, so less than 4%.

The sale of the Ricoh to an outside club/group doesn't matter to most.

torchomatic · Sep 18, 2015

It's a lot less than 4%. Don't forget all those fans who go and support CCFC at the Ricoh and don't live in the City.

armybike said:
I believe that another issue is that the majority of people in Coventry have little/no interest in the stadium.

There's around 330,000 living in Coventry and only about 11,000 going to CCFC matches, so less than 4%.

The sale of the Ricoh to an outside club/group doesn't matter to most.

Nick · Sep 18, 2015

armybike said:
The sale of the Ricoh to an outside club/group doesn't matter to most.

Unless it was SISU...

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

torchomatic said:
It's a lot less than 4%. Don't forget all those fans who go and support CCFC at the Ricoh and don't live in the City.

Fair point.

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

Nick said:
Unless it was SISU...

You honestly think the vast majority residents of Coventry give two hoots about who owns the Ricoh? (< question mark)

Or are you just assuming that's the case? (< question mark).

torchomatic · Sep 18, 2015

The support in Coventry for its football team is even poorer than many people realise.

armybike said:
Fair point.

torchomatic · Sep 18, 2015

No, personally I don't. Unfortunately a handful of people on the Council - and on here - do. And they shout very loudly.

Still think if we'd had anyone but Lucas and her cronies then Wasps might not have been allowed to move in. And obviously without SISU Wasps may not have moved in.

armybike said:
You honestly think the vast majority residents of Coventry give two hoots about who owns the Ricoh? (< question mark)

Or are you just assuming that's the case? (< question mark).

Skyblueweeman · Sep 18, 2015

oldskyblue58 said:
the meeting I had with Seppala leaving me troubled and not surprised by what has happened since.

Wait...what?! Did I miss a thread on this?! If not, can you divulge any further details OSB?

oldfiver · Sep 18, 2015

oldskyblue58 said:
To answer your points

No I wouldn't advise my clients to do that. But I would suggest there is more the club could/should have done to inform fans, to get them on side with the new stadium scheme and to snowball the pressure to get it done. So far we have had rhetoric, pictures of a Brentford scheme, a lame fans consultation that had little merit other than to tick a box at FL headquarters, two Fans group representatives that said they have seen something but don't know where it is but cant tell anyone anyway,add to that meetings said to have happened that seemingly never did followed by one that did in March that was not followed up according to the council concerned as yet. Hardly convincing is it. Surely they need the fans on board with their plan?

Whats this fair deal then? Are the club prepared to commit to such a deal? Are the club able to spend money to make the deal work or do they expect it for free? Were the corporate suites available to the club in the first place or had they been booked out prior to the clubs return? SW says the club has a good working relationship with Wasps is that not the case then?

Why would I be in the know? Seems to me if I question something at the football club that you tend to jump to try to discredit what I ask with fanciful notions of my involvement with certain parties but not others. You do not know me, never met me so you can not know one way or another. I assume you have your own reasons for doing so rather than sticking to a decent discussion

So lets clear this up. I work for none of the parties involved never have. I am not connected to any of the parties involved. Why would they need to run their confidential plans, figures etc past me - the notion is laughable, silly. I have not had any contact of any kind with any of the parties involved in this debacle during 2015. I have met face to face all sides during this dispute. I have had contact only once with CCC when I met Ann Lucas face to face - telling her whilst she may have had a business case the sale to Wasps was wrong and put CCFC & CRFC at risk, she should have thought again, the stadium should be CCFC's (doing somewhat more than the keyboard warriors on here I am sure) - there has been no other contact of any sort. In fact I have met the directors, owner and professionals acting for CCFC on far more occasions, the meeting I had with Seppala leaving me troubled and not surprised by what has happened since. I assume that must mean I am also not working for but connected to CCFC/SISU then?

I think what all that does give me is the benefit of a balanced amount of information and from that a more balanced platform from which to ask my questions. All the meetings were private which is why I have not mentioned any details and I will not be disclosing any other details now or in the future. Do I trust everything I have been told by any of the sides? No that's why I ask questions. Are most questions directed at CCFC ? Well yes its a CCFC forum isn't it?

I have spent my own time finding out, trying to get a balanced view and making my own mind up. Frankly I have no time to be involved in silly games revolving around CCFC/CCC/Wasps etc nor was I ever..... I have a business to run, a family I am immensely proud of ,love and want to be with, and a life of my own to lead. Hopefully I have helped the fans understand and question more which has been my only objective. Do I mind them questioning the information or opinions in my posts not at all, snide remarks that's a different matter.

There are a number of good contributors to this site, I don't always agree with them but I respect their opinion, and their willingness to discuss and debate properly

I wont be making any further comments to justify the reasons for the questions I ask, the explanations I give or the opinions I express. People can take or leave what I say, accept it or reject it. To paraphrase a famous line from a movie "frankly I don't give a damn"

PUSB

You are clearly more in the know, by way of your meetings with the parties, than the rest of us!

duffer · Sep 18, 2015

ccfcway said:
not living in the City, a question to anyone who does. Is there any local politicians who, as part of their manefsto if they got in, promised to help CCFC find a suitable site within the city of Coventry ?

Rather the opposite, I think. The political support is all behind Wasps, as well it might be. If Wasps goes tits up, or just ends up with low to middling support, then it won't look good for the Councillors who endorsed selling it to them.

As far as CCFC goes, the council need CCFC to stay at the Ricoh to support Wasps financially for exactly those reasons. So my guess is that they aren't going to make it easy for CCFC to find a new ground in the city.

There will be crocodile tears and faux outrage from the council if CCFC do actually leave the city as the result of all this though, especially from super-fan and born-again Brummie Ann Lucas.

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
So my guess is that they aren't going to make it easy for CCFC to find a new ground in the city.

You think they can hinder/prevent an application just because it's submitted by SISU/Optium? Planning rules won't allow this to happen.

Also, where within the city is there the 60 aches of land Tim Fisher has said would be required?

Plus, Fisher has said the investors won't finance development of a stadium within Coventry.

Whilst some will say he's said numerous things that are just soundbites, maybe because of his seeming inability to stick to what he says that discussion between CCFC/CCC faltered.

Ann Lucas says something on record, it's deemed as set in stone. Fisher says something on record and it's just 'Silly Old Tim' again.

duffer · Sep 18, 2015

armybike said:
You think they can hinder/prevent an application just because it's submitted by SISU/Optium? Planning rules won't allow this to happen.

Also, where within the city is there the 60 aches of land Tim Fisher has said would be required?

Plus, Fisher has said the investors won't finance development of a stadium within Coventry.

Whilst some will say he's said numerous things that are just soundbites, maybe because of his seeming inability to stick to what he says that discussion between CCFC/CCC faltered.

Ann Lucas says something on record, it's deemed as set in stone. Fisher says something on record and it's just 'Silly Old Tim' again.

The question was - is anyone in the city council going to help the club find an area for the stadium? I've said what I think the answer to that is, and why.

The council can't legally hinder an application, but if they don't support it then they can certainly make it a lot more awkward for it get through - but that's actually not the question that was put.

The truth is, like it or not, that the council's eggs are all in one basket - the success of Wasps to justify the sale.

There was no great consideration given to either the future of CCFC or CRFC when that decision was made, and as I see it there won't be much from the council for CCFC going forward. The council will want CCFC to stay at the Ricoh and I doubt they'll make it easy for the club to move anywhere else in the city, even if the club's owners current or future decide that's the best option.

They will though, bleat loud and long if the club decide to pull out of the city, of that I've no doubt.

skybluetony176 · Sep 18, 2015

armybike said:
You think they can hinder/prevent an application just because it's submitted by SISU/Optium? Planning rules won't allow this to happen.

Also, where within the city is there the 60 aches of land Tim Fisher has said would be required?

Plus, Fisher has said the investors won't finance development of a stadium within Coventry.

Whilst some will say he's said numerous things that are just soundbites, maybe because of his seeming inability to stick to what he says that discussion between CCFC/CCC faltered.

Ann Lucas says something on record, it's deemed as set in stone. Fisher says something on record and it's just 'Silly Old Tim' again.

We have Ryton and an arrangement with Higgs for the academy so it begs the question why do we need 60 acres. We've been here before with Arena 2000, sell an asset move and improve. How did that workout for us? I assume selling Ryton will make up part of the funding. Seems to me all we actually need is enough space for the stadium and some parking. What was HR? 24 acre's is the figure I have in my head. So say 30 acre's. That's going to be much easier to come by than 60 acre's either in Coventry or just outside it's borders.

Astute · Sep 18, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
We have Ryton and an arrangement with Higgs for the academy so it begs the question why do we need 60 acres. We've been here before with Arena 2000, sell an asset move and improve. How did that workout for us? I assume selling Ryton will make up part of the funding. Seems to me all we actually need is enough space for the stadium and some parking. What was HR? 24 acre's is the figure I have in my head. So say 30 acre's. That's going to be much easier to come by than 60 acre's either in Coventry or just outside it's borders.

I wonder if we would need 70 acres if 60 acres were available.

duffer · Sep 18, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
We have Ryton and an arrangement with Higgs for the academy so it begs the question why do we need 60 acres. We've been here before with Arena 2000, sell an asset move and improve. How did that workout for us? I assume selling Ryton will make up part of the funding. Seems to me all we actually need is enough space for the stadium and some parking. What was HR? 24 acre's is the figure I have in my head. So say 30 acre's. That's going to be much easier to come by than 60 acre's either in Coventry or just outside it's borders.

I know we come at this from different places on much of this, SBT, but I absolutely see what you're saying here. I suppose the only argument against it is SISU's suggestion that it's going to be partly funded by having retail space available. If true, of course, that will make planning permission even harder to get, imho.

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
The question was - is anyone in the city council going to help the club find an area for the stadium? I've said what I think the answer to that is, and why.

The council can't legally hinder an application, but if they don't support it then they can certainly make it a lot more awkward for it get through - but that's actually not the question that was put.

The truth is, like it or not, that the council's eggs are all in one basket - the success of Wasps to justify the sale.

There was no great consideration given to either the future of CCFC or CRFC when that decision was made, and as I see it there won't be much from the council for CCFC going forward. The council will want CCFC to stay at the Ricoh and I doubt they'll make it easy for the club to move anywhere else in the city, even if the club's owners current or future decide that's the best option.

They will though, bleat loud and long if the club decide to pull out of the city, of that I've no doubt.

So where's the sixty arces of land in Coventry that Fisher has said would be required? How can anyone from CCC help a piece of land that isn't available for development within the city? If the piece of land isn't available, how can CCC hinder the progression of an application? If CCC have such issue with the club, why would it bother them if they left?

LB87ccfc · Sep 18, 2015

I have not read the 20 pages of spouted bollocks as its the same bollocks brought up time and time again, however, December - Maybe it will just be in line for Christmas for SISU to say Merry Christmas we have been full of shit and never even intend to build anything.

Surely that would be a good christmas present for the majority ( unless you still need a nurse if you still believe this bollocks)

torchomatic · Sep 18, 2015

I honestly don't think it would.

armybike said:
why would it bother them if they left?

duffer · Sep 18, 2015

armybike said:
So where's the sixty arces of land in Coventry that Fisher has said would be required? How can anyone from CCC help a piece of land that isn't available for development within the city? If the piece of land isn't available, how can CCC hinder the progression of an application? If CCC have such issue with the club, why would it bother them if they left?

Here's the question again, because you seem a bit obsessed with the whole 60-acre thing and planning permission thing

Is anyone in the city council going to help the club find an area for the stadium?

Who knows what's available until someone actually looks. As others have mentioned maybe sixty acres aren't really needed.

And it will bother them if CCFC leaves because it will lose the city money (Wasps are worth countless millions to us, apparently) and more important to the the councillors, votes.

skybluetony176 · Sep 18, 2015

Astute said:
I wonder if we would need 70 acres if 60 acres were available.

How very suspicious of you. That thought has never entered my head as I'm sure it never has Mr Fishers either

skybluetony176 · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
I know we come at this from different places on much of this, SBT, but I absolutely see what you're saying here. I suppose the only argument against it is SISU's suggestion that it's going to be partly funded by having retail space available. If true, of course, that will make planning permission even harder to get, imho.

Dare I say it but possibly inflate the price per acre too meaning a 30 acre Brownfield's site in the City is going to work out cheaper thrice. Once because you're only buying half the plot size, Twice because you're going to pay less per acre and thrice because as we know from the Ricoh development there are grants available for regeneration schemes which this surely would be.

The point I'm making is that just because having a retail partnership means you have someone to share the costs with doesn't automatically make it your cheapest option.

Still I'm sure all the figures for these options are in a comprehensive SISU business plan somewhere

armybike · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
Here's the question again, because you seem a bit obsessed with the whole 60-acre thing and planning permission thing

Is anyone in the city council going to help the club find an area for the stadium?

Who knows what's available until someone actually looks. As others have mentioned maybe sixty acres aren't really needed.

And it will bother them if CCFC leaves because it will lose the city money (Wasps are worth countless millions to us, apparently) and more important to the the councillors, votes.

I'm not obsessed with the sixty acres, this is the size of land that Fisher has stated would be required.

From the Rugby Borough Council mins -

"Councillor Michael Stokes (MS)
Tim Fisher (TF)

TF clarified that the requirement is for a community integrated Stadium for 18,000 capacity, together with some other adjoining developments – want to consolidate all club resources on one site. Also, want to move the Academy (as this is the pillar for the business moving forward), this would include the first team training facility.

MS asked for an indication of the size requirements?

TF confirmed around 60 acres (2 x 30 acres)."

Cllr Maton from CCC has said that he is not aware of an area of land that would be of sufficient size for CCFC's requirement and all current land is earmarked for housing.

With regards others views that the land wouldn't need to be sixty acres, this is the size CCFC are currently looking for.

Can you think of any land of this size that could be developed within Coventry, with the infrastructure that would be required?

Also, if CCFC being part of the fabric of the survival of the Ricoh surely Wasps would be desperate to tie them in for a much longer rental agreement than the current one of 2+2 years?

Godiva · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
I know we come at this from different places on much of this, SBT, but I absolutely see what you're saying here. I suppose the only argument against it is SISU's suggestion that it's going to be partly funded by having retail space available. If true, of course, that will make planning permission even harder to get, imho.

The retail solution was first mentioned by TF as an example of how a new stadium could be financed.
Since then we have more or less taken this as gospel and have rarely discussed alternatives.

I am sure offices could be an alternative. How about a green tech center?

Jack Griffin · Sep 18, 2015

Godiva said:
The retail solution was first mentioned by TF as an example of how a new stadium could be financed.
Since then we have more or less taken this as gospel and have rarely discussed alternatives.

I am sure offices could be an alternative. How about a green tech center?

The retail option is a dead duck these days, all the supermarkets are canning their hyper market schemes and selling off substantial parts of their land banks.

A residential or hi-tech industrial development is more plausible than a retail development in the current climate.

I still don't believe SISU have the ability to deliver a stadium, I think it more likely that SISU will try to get housing planning for Ryton and realise the asset than build a stadium.

chiefdave · Sep 18, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
We have Ryton and an arrangement with Higgs for the academy so it begs the question why do we need 60 acres.

I can see the reasoning but I don't see why they all need to be together. It doesn't look like there's much, if any, room for expansion at Ryton and in this day and age it is a relatively small setup when compared with the likes of Southampton - who we shoud be aspiring to match IMO.

As for Higgs that's easy - it's not ours. They've already threatened to kick us out once. Much better to have everything under our own control.

But of course its unlikely Fisher or looking for 60 acres or anything at all.

rupert_bear · Sep 18, 2015

Planning permission for housing at Ryton has been tried before a number of times always turned down and challenged by the locals. Do you honestly think if planning wasn't an Issue we would still own it ? Would have been sold way back in the Richardson/McGinnety era.

duffer · Sep 18, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
Dare I say it but possibly inflate the price per acre too meaning a 30 acre Brownfield's site in the City is going to work out cheaper thrice. Once because you're only buying half the plot size, Twice because you're going to pay less per acre and thrice because as we know from the Ricoh development there are grants available for regeneration schemes which this surely would be.

The point I'm making is that just because having a retail partnership means you have someone to share the costs with doesn't automatically make it your cheapest option.

Still I'm sure all the figures for these options are in a comprehensive SISU business plan somewhere

And again, I find myself in agreement here. Worrying. I wonder if the missus has secretly upped my dosage without telling me.

Like pretty much everyone here, I have very serious doubts that SISU have any genuine plan for a stadium, let alone a comprehensive one. I'd be right behind your idea, fwiw, a brownfield site in the city would be a great solution. I think for that to happen things would have to substantially change at both the council and the club though. Here's hoping.

skybluetony176 · Sep 18, 2015

duffer said:
And again, I find myself in agreement here. Worrying. I wonder if the missus has secretly upped my dosage without telling me.

Like pretty much everyone here, I have very serious doubts that SISU have any genuine plan for a stadium, let alone a comprehensive one. I'd be right behind your idea, fwiw, a brownfield site in the city would be a great solution. I think for that to happen things would have to substantially change at both the council and the club though. Here's hoping.

More likely she's dropped the dose so now you can see sense. Check back over my posting history, you'll probably find you agree with me on everything now

rupert_bear · Sep 18, 2015

There have been a number of brown field sites seemingly available in recent years, the old GEC site at Copsewood, two Courtaulds sites, one being cleared now I reckon if SISU were serious and had approached CCC with proper plans and proposals for ground, retail and housing it would have been difficult to rebuff

Deleted member 5849 · Sep 18, 2015

rupert_bear said:
There have been a number of brown field sites seemingly available in recent years, the old GEC site at Copsewood, two Courtaulds sites, one being cleared now I reckon if SISU were serious and had approached CCC with proper plans and proposals for ground, retail and housing it would have been difficult to rebuff

The local plan needs changing however, to include it. That would facilitate the permission. Of course the club can apply regardless, but while the priority within the local plan are things other than a sports ground, it makes planning permission so much less likely.

shmmeee · Sep 18, 2015

So, is there no land big enough in Cov or is it that the land that is is earmarked for other stuff?

What happened to the Warwick site?

Deleted member 5849 · Sep 18, 2015

shmmeee said:
So, is there no land big enough in Cov or is it that the land that is is earmarked for other stuff?

What happened to the Warwick site?

As far as I'm aware, it's a mix of both... although tbh as all answers from all parties are just shrugged off with a 'well it won't happen' we don't really get clarity from those with the ability to change things.

Warwick site (assuming you mean uni and not town!) would have issues of its own (including cross-council co-operation and the joys that brings) but, again, tbh it seems the only way out of this mess I can see, if there's collaboration there.

Likely? Doubtful. But when Birmingham Uni and UWE (albeit with snags, it seems) are keen to move into such sports/leisure builds, no reason Warwick couldn't too.

December Stadium Deadline (21 Viewers)

CCFC Finance Director

CCFC Finance Director

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency