pusbccfc
Well-Known Member
Annoyingly he knows an awful lot.
Eviction notice (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter jordan210
- Start date
Annoyingly he knows an awful lot.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
About nothing
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
He’s just not telling anyone what he knows.
I’m ITK too, more to come, you heard it here first.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Not unless I tell them first. I’m also in the know, not the pretend know that you pretend to be in, the actual know that I’m in.
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
Things getting serious, I can see Mike having to have a rethink.
AOM
Well-Known Member
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Got to be time for some serious organised demonstrations from the fanbase now hasn't it? Outside the council, at the games.. feck it even down sports direct
I do feel like we sit by way to long where other teams fanbases kick up more visible fuss.
Alkhen
Well-Known Member
I mean even that is more of a fuss than we as a fan base have managed in recent memory. Barely a murmur of decent since the Northampton exile.
I get it, we are all worn out by it but it really feels like now is the tipping point.
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
I'm not really sure what people are seeing that i'm not here in terms of sisu being some kind of victim.
From a timeline perspective:
- FG offer a license agreement that mirrors current agreement (by that I interpret the meaning to be same term, same costs same everything...so until 2031), prior to buying the stadium
- SISU refuse to sign this. On one hand you might say you understand this if they had genuine ambitions to get the stadium, on the other you say why not just sign it and then if you get it then it's void.
- FG get the stadium
- [This bit is murkier in terms of timings etc] SISU apparently also have additional requests/counter offer with regards to the agreement which obviously requires more time to hash out.
- FG offer a new deal until the end of this season (i'm interpreting the comms as meaning same costs etc just until end of the season)
- SISU reject this
- FG issue an eviction notice
Sounds to me that SISU have tried to negotiate even more preferential terms than the current deal that they had and FG said okay if you want to talk sign the current one until the end of the season, and SISU have said no. FG have said fuck off then.
Sounds like SISU are being twats?
From a timeline perspective:
- FG offer a license agreement that mirrors current agreement (by that I interpret the meaning to be same term, same costs same everything...so until 2031), prior to buying the stadium
- SISU refuse to sign this. On one hand you might say you understand this if they had genuine ambitions to get the stadium, on the other you say why not just sign it and then if you get it then it's void.
- FG get the stadium
- [This bit is murkier in terms of timings etc] SISU apparently also have additional requests/counter offer with regards to the agreement which obviously requires more time to hash out.
- FG offer a new deal until the end of this season (i'm interpreting the comms as meaning same costs etc just until end of the season)
- SISU reject this
- FG issue an eviction notice
Sounds to me that SISU have tried to negotiate even more preferential terms than the current deal that they had and FG said okay if you want to talk sign the current one until the end of the season, and SISU have said no. FG have said fuck off then.
Sounds like SISU are being twats?
Kubrick
Well-Known Member
More conjecture and quack analysis. How we got here…
£1.2m got Frasers exclusively, it bought off the administrators Rajnesh Mittal and Andrew Sheridan. Simon Passfield (representing the Arena companies) told the court in writing that the administrators had received four offers for the Arena. Passfield warned “liquidation would be ‘terminal’ for the companies and said if administrators were not appointed then the council might forfeit the stadium lease and employees would be made redundant”. Simon Robins (representing Frasers) told the court that unless the Arena was placed in administration, Frasers would withdraw. Robins went as far as plainly threatening that it was “not an attempt in any way to hold this court to ransom”. Judge Prentis could have taken up Robins offer/threat, but acted responsibly and decided Frasers prepackaged £17m bid for the group of companies if placed in administration was “the only, on this evidence, viable prospect for this group not entering immediate insolvent liquidation”.
As an outcome of those events, there isn’t any goodwill whatsoever between Frasers and our owners, and eviction shouldn’t come as a surprise. SISU sought to delay Frasers pre agreed deal by announcing a takeover by King less than 24 hours before the hearing. Judge Prentis said that there wasn’t “enough substance” in what King’s lawyer had said in court “to allay even the immediate fears over how this group can continue to trade”.
And don’t expect the EFL to decide that there’s “enough substance” in King’s takeover of the club either. Judge Prentis saw straight through it. And as an outcome, don’t expect the EFL to have any sympathy with our owners when we’re unable to fulfill our fixtures.
£1.2m got Frasers exclusively, it bought off the administrators Rajnesh Mittal and Andrew Sheridan. Simon Passfield (representing the Arena companies) told the court in writing that the administrators had received four offers for the Arena. Passfield warned “liquidation would be ‘terminal’ for the companies and said if administrators were not appointed then the council might forfeit the stadium lease and employees would be made redundant”. Simon Robins (representing Frasers) told the court that unless the Arena was placed in administration, Frasers would withdraw. Robins went as far as plainly threatening that it was “not an attempt in any way to hold this court to ransom”. Judge Prentis could have taken up Robins offer/threat, but acted responsibly and decided Frasers prepackaged £17m bid for the group of companies if placed in administration was “the only, on this evidence, viable prospect for this group not entering immediate insolvent liquidation”.
As an outcome of those events, there isn’t any goodwill whatsoever between Frasers and our owners, and eviction shouldn’t come as a surprise. SISU sought to delay Frasers pre agreed deal by announcing a takeover by King less than 24 hours before the hearing. Judge Prentis said that there wasn’t “enough substance” in what King’s lawyer had said in court “to allay even the immediate fears over how this group can continue to trade”.
And don’t expect the EFL to decide that there’s “enough substance” in King’s takeover of the club either. Judge Prentis saw straight through it. And as an outcome, don’t expect the EFL to have any sympathy with our owners when we’re unable to fulfill our fixtures.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
No he thinks he does and is willing to say it as no one gives a shit or holds him accountable for the absolute bollox he spouts
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
What are we against and who and why and what do we want?Got to be time for some serious organised demonstrations from the fanbase now hasn't it? Outside the council, at the games.. feck it even down sports direct
I do feel like we sit by way to long where other teams fanbases kick up more visible fuss.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Suppose it may be best to know what the facts are before handing out blame
As always us fans are affected by decisions we had no hand in
Also ccfc are affected by parties outside of their control
Even in the scenario above it’s a leap and an aggressive one to jump to an eviction notice isn’t it?????!
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Case in point look at the comments on the covid thread. Evidence available and yet many, including our government looked at Italy and thought nah should be fine
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
He’s a hard nosed businessman and it’d be great to have those sort of people owning the club blah blah blah.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
They need to extrapolate that and I get we an abused partner in this scenario where we’ve had it so bad in terms of investment and ownership that anyone looks better but an owner that acquires the club after initially serving an eviction notice scares the shit out of me
One very easy question for fg in all this would be what conversations have taken place? If fg are refusing to talk about this then one can see why you may not sign an agreement.
It’s all bollox anyway I want reasonable mature adults talking and resolving problems and challenges. Not refusing to sign and eviction notices being thrown about. I think it’s a good sign again that ccfc / owners haven’t come out and done a tit for tat statement. Real grown ups are trying to solve the situation
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Was it about Palestine?
Sounds to me like the club assumed the current deal would continue and would have been entirely comfortable with that. What's so outrageous about that?
Tried to.negotiate more preferential terms? That's just conjecture. There is no basis for that. The club have stated there have been no negotiations.
Frasers tore up the deal we had, have offered a worse one, and now have issued an eviction notice. Why ar people so keen to blame Coventry City for everything?
Balli001
Well-Known Member
The judge says there wasn't substance in our stadium bid, he didn't mention the takeover and why would he? As for the takeover itself i wasn't aware you had seen enough of the details to make a judgement personally. Do enlighten us.
Balli001
Well-Known Member
What if the negotiations involved more access to matchday related things like hospitality areas etc, ground maintenance and pitch guarantees and generally a better experience. Not asking for a lot at all just a better deal. If we accepted the same deal we would be stuck not knowing if our pitch would be good for 8 years for a start.
As it stands we have no idea what they asked to change for example could be as low level as going back to the home changing room etc.
hill83
Well-Known Member
That's already been earmarked as Mikes Swig Cave unfortunately.
She has offered to help the Trust!
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I’m sure I read something that one of the demands was to use the home changing room - I’d imagine some of the requests weren’t too dissimilar to what got proposed on the thread on here.
Which to be fair shouldn't be reason to tare everything up and start again.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Whilst Frasers don't say it was more preferential terms they were trying to renegotiate, it'd be a bit odd if their requests raised were for worse terms...
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
What with?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It is, of course, possible for both to be true. SISU play silly buggers to try and stop a sale and hope price goes down when competition backs out, club don't sign deal mirroring what they already had... Frasers behave like shits by serving eviction notice.
It is possible for both to show a lack of care and concern for the club.
It is possible for both to show a lack of care and concern for the club.
fatso
Well-Known Member
Errrr ...... Sisu?
You have Sisu in 1 corner and Mike Ashley in another, and CCC lurking in the background
Is anyone seriously suprised that things have gone tits up so quickly?
But that’s the deal SISU previously signed up to for 10 years ?! If they weren’t happy with it then why sign up for such a long time originally ? Or if it was such as bad deal in retrospect, why not start building their mythical new stadium (because maybe it’s bullshit ?! Or at least has been to date) or, even, crazy as it sounds, try to buy the stadium for market value when it was available ?!
I’m no big Ashley fan as an individual but until I hear anything to the contrary, this appears to be on SISU/King (wherever the fuck he is). They should just do one
ps that’s not a rant at you Balli, just our pathetic, whiny owners who don’t take any responsibility for their actions. They’ve moved us out of the city twice and had opportunities to play the game fair and get hold of the stadium….each time messing it up in an attempt to force a cheap sale to themselves (typical hedge fund style)
Balli001
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Again, it's not my area,so this might be naive but... I'd have thought, given the likes of King were studying the original deal and considering it to still be valid, and the club consider the original deal something they were happy to continue under, then the thing to do would have been to sign the mirror deal (if Frasers are being honest of course, and it genuinely was the same as that which had gone before), build relationships, and make your requests from a position of actually having a deal in place, rather than having to start from scratch.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yeah you’d think you’d be looking to get the relationship off to a good start by being accommodating for that kind of stuff.
Bizarrely some are all too ready to attack the club and side with an outside entity at any opportunity.
Speedie's Head
Well-Known Member
Ashley has shown his true colours in his attitutude to football in general by this eviction. He couldn't care less for the game or the fans. I hope he's banned for life from owning a football club anywhere.