Fans Forum (10 Viewers)

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

valiant15 said:
Ccfc4l, dont worry about it fella, youll be ok because you're staunchly anti Coventry council,youll never get a ban from nick and co for that. I got a ban because I slagged of the disciples beloved tim fisher. We can't have these nasty folks doing things like that on a football forum can we, after all its not as if they treat us like shit is it. Strangely enough it let's me log in now and again,not that id bother posting much now anyway. They might as well rename this site the rabid anti council talk or gmk2.

Don and co, dont let that slimy bastard fisher pull the wool over your eyes. There never will be a new ground, hopefully when they lose the judicial review they'll piss off back to the sewer they crawled out from.

Valiant I don't believe there will be a new stadium. However it is good to meet them directly to form an opinion. Sometimes the key bits are in what someone doesn't say as oppose to what they actually say.

Plus one of my biggest criticisms of them was they never speak to the Joe Blogs fan.
Now they are so I can't complain about that one. It was a very much anytime any place approach so I have respect for that.

Schmee, Nick was taking the piss. As I have never used that phrase with him. All I asked was how are these meeting taking place and why is nobody telling us about what was said afterwards. Hopefully from seeing this thread he now realises that by talking about does not lead to a load of abuse and people appreciate it

Nick · May 29, 2014

valiant15 said:
Ccfc4l, dont worry about it fella, youll be ok because you're staunchly anti Coventry council,youll never get a ban from nick and co for that. I got a ban because I slagged of the disciples beloved tim fisher. We can't have these nasty folks doing things like that on a football forum can we, after all its not as if they treat us like shit is it. Strangely enough it let's me log in now and again,not that id bother posting much now anyway. They might as well rename this site the rabid anti council talk or gmk2.

Don and co, dont let that slimy bastard fisher pull the wool over your eyes. There never will be a new ground, hopefully when they lose the judicial review they'll piss off back to the sewer they crawled out from.

You got a ban because you were threatening people, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy eh? Your made up stuff sounds better doesn't it?

Pretty safe to say if people got banned for slagging off fisher not many would be on here.

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

valiant15 said:
Ccfc4l, dont worry about it fella, youll be ok because you're staunchly anti Coventry council,youll never get a ban from nick and co for that. I got a ban because I slagged of the disciples beloved tim fisher. We can't have these nasty folks doing things like that on a football forum can we, after all its not as if they treat us like shit is it. Strangely enough it let's me log in now and again,not that id bother posting much now anyway. They might as well rename this site the rabid anti council talk or gmk2.

Don and co, dont let that slimy bastard fisher pull the wool over your eyes. There never will be a new ground, hopefully when they lose the judicial review they'll piss off back to the sewer they crawled out from.

Valiant I don't believe there will be a new stadium. However it is good too meet them directly to form an opinion. Sometimes the key bits are in what someone doesn't say as oppose to what they actually say.

Plus one of my biggest criticisms of them was they never speak to the Joe Blogs fan.
Now they are so I can't complain about that one. It was a very much anytime any place approach so I have respect for that.

Schmee, Nick was taking the piss. As I have never used that phrase with him. All I asked was how are these meeting taking place and why is nobody telling us about what was said afterwards. Hopefully from seeing this thread he now realises that by talking about does not lead to a load of abuse and people appreciate it

Nick · May 29, 2014

dongonzalos said:
Valiant I don't believe there will be a new stadium. However it is good too meet them directly to form an opinion. Sometimes the key bits are in what someone doesn't say as oppose to what they actually say.

Plus one of my biggest criticisms of them was they never speak to the Joe Blogs fan.
Now they are so I can't complain about that one. It was a very much anytime any place approach so I have respect for that.

Schmee, Nick was taking the piss. As I have never used that phrase with him. All I asked was how are these meeting taking place and why is nobody telling us about what was said afterwards. Hopefully from seeing this thread he now realises that by talking about does not lead to a load of abuse and people appreciate it

Yes, I was hoping that most people would realise it was tongue in cheek....

ajsccfc · May 29, 2014

Good to see you cracked on with it and got a meeting set up don, nice work.

oldskyblue58 · May 29, 2014

dongonzalos said:
Went to the CTK meeting with JS,TF and ML.

JS is well spoken not to sure why she has an issue with public meetings. She is confident clear and looks the part.
The message they were trying to convey was the Ricoh is not an option.
However when hit directly with the question would you come to the negotiating table there was resounding hesitation and no instant or definitive no.
My gut feeling says Ricoh is still Plan A and they are manoeuvring to get back to where they were before the council refinanced the loan. Once there the negotiations will take place again.
The JR can do this.

They provided no rational argument for why they can't publicly make an offer for ACL.
Or why they can't publicly make a temporary rent offer matching what they pay at Northampton.

For me the only sensible explanation for not making an offer for ACL is they want to see what happens with the JR first as they can inherit an even stronger negotiating position. Also by not making the temporary rent offer. It's shows they don't want to give ACL a penny. Nothing else makes sense a temporary rent deal would be better financially for them and would secure a long term fan base. If it was rejected they would have the public on their side.
Lets get on with this JR and then see the calls be made.

Thanks for the update Don

Few questions if you don't mind
1) Did JS TF & ML all seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet?
2) your analysis seems to be based on SISU winning the JR what if they do not? Isnt their position weaker in that case?
3) how does the JR which ever way it goes necessarily bring anyone to the negotiating table? The same problems in unravelling it all would still remain, if the intention by CCC/Charity was there to do that at all.
4) Was anything said about the £590k due to ACL?
5) was anything said about how a new stadium might be financed?

to Lord_Nampil. What was actually said about the agreement between CCC and Charity to buy the shares off Higgs at a price equal to what the Club would pay? Where have details of this agreement come from?

Thanks

_brian_ · May 29, 2014

Nick said:
Yes, I was hoping that most people would realise it was tongue in cheek....

Probably tongue in Fisher's cheek with you, Nick!!! LOL! Only joking, mate! Hope I haven't stepped over the line with that one! Just having a bit of 'bants'!!!

duffer · May 29, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
Thanks for the update Don

Few questions if you don't mind
1) Did JS TF & ML all seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet?
2) your analysis seems to be based on SISU winning the JR what if they do not? Isnt their position weaker in that case?
3) how does the JR which ever way it goes necessarily bring anyone to the negotiating table? The same problems in unravelling it all would still remain, if the intention by CCC/Charity was there to do that at all.
4) Was anything said about the £590k due to ACL?
5) was anything said about how a new stadium might be financed?

to Lord_Nampil. What was actually said about the agreement between CCC and Charity to buy the shares off Higgs at a price equal to what the Club would pay? Where have details of this agreement come from?

Thanks

Somewhere, OSB, in all of the trial docs, I think there's mention that ACL is set up so that if one side wants to sell it shares to a third party it must provide the other side with the first option to purchase them at the same price. I don't recall it was suggested anywhere that the Council were going to take this option.

Is that what this Lord Nampil's point was, perhaps?

Lord_Nampil · May 29, 2014

duffer said:
Somewhere, OSB, in all of the trial docs, I think there's mention that ACL is set up so that if one side wants to sell it shares to a third party it must provide the other side with the first option to purchase them at the same price. I don't recall it was suggested anywhere that the Council were going to take this option.

Is that what this Lord Nampil's point was, perhaps?

It was something that came out which needs mire investigation into it, to clear everything up to be fair that could be wat they were talking about duffer, let me do some dig ginning and I'll get bk, I'm guessing Don has his view as well...

duffer · May 29, 2014

Lord_Nampil said:
It was something that came out which needs mire investigation into it, to clear everything up to be fair that could be wat they were talking about duffer, let me do some dig ginning and I'll get bk, I'm guessing Don has his view as well...

No problem LN, and apologies I wasn't trying to catch you out, I'm grateful for the feedback. It was the only thing I can recall which mentioned this in the court case stuff, which is why I mentioned it.

Houdi · May 29, 2014

dongonzalos said:
Went to the CTK meeting with JS,TF and ML.

JS is well spoken not to sure why she has an issue with public meetings. She is confident clear and looks the part.
The message they were trying to convey was the Ricoh is not an option.
However when hit directly with the question would you come to the negotiating table there was resounding hesitation and no instant or definitive no.
My gut feeling says Ricoh is still Plan A and they are manoeuvring to get back to where they were before the council refinanced the loan. Once there the negotiations will take place again.
The JR can do this.

They provided no rational argument for why they can't publicly make an offer for ACL.
Or why they can't publicly make a temporary rent offer matching what they pay at Northampton.

For me the only sensible explanation for not making an offer for ACL is they want to see what happens with the JR first as they can inherit an even stronger negotiating position. Also by not making the temporary rent offer. It's shows they don't want to give ACL a penny. Nothing else makes sense a temporary rent deal would be better financially for them and would secure a long term fan base. If it was rejected they would have the public on their side.
Lets get on with this JR and then see the calls be made.

I find all this utterly bizarre. That JS would take a 4 hour round trip to attend a small gathering of fans in a small local centre. A women who in 6/7 years has remained determinedly anonymous, suddenly seems anxious to talk to people she has never shown any interest in whatever. A presumably very busy high powered business lady whose life normally revolves around daily meetings with lawyers,barristers and accountants. And for what? What new information did we garner.Plan A is still the new stadium,:facepalm: yet still nothing on location,timing or how it makes any credible financial sense. More meaningless platitudes, telling us absolutely nothing new. So what is the purpose ?, apart from increasing desperation maybe.

Nick · May 29, 2014

_brian_ said:
Probably tongue in Fisher's cheek with you, Nick!!! LOL! Only joking, mate! Hope I haven't stepped over the line with that one! Just having a bit of 'bants'!!!

More than the tongue

lewys33 · May 29, 2014

So come on Don ....... The big question everyone is dying to ask here is .........

Would you?

Monners · May 29, 2014

I would say the purpose of Ms Seppala suddenly showing up could be PR, or she plans to attend the JR case. I am not knocking the efforts of those who attended by the way, and will reserve judgement - we really have reached the point of (almost) no return in my view - just hoping a return to the Ricoh is being seriously considered.

skybluetony176 · May 29, 2014

When will you fools who keep harping on about the financial viability of a new stadium cotton on?

EVERY football finance "expert" agree's that a club must own its own stadium. Not 1, not a few, not some, not the majority. EVERY!

What i want to know is A) when did EVERY expert on any subject last agree in unison on anything? Who asked EVERY expert on behalf of the club? Can we have a list of EVERY expert of football finace, i'm sure there is a few questions we would like to ask them ourselves. And finaly did they ask EVERY football finance expert on the sustainability of moving a club 35miles from home and dropping your home attendance by 80%?

It's all spin ahead of the JR.

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
Thanks for the update Don

Few questions if you don't mind
1) Did JS TF & ML all seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet?

At this meeting yes

2) your analysis seems to be based on SISU winning the JR what if they do not? Isnt their position weaker in that case?

I think if they win it and the judge does the remedy they want. It's back to where they were. If they lose it the club are still in Northampton which puts them in a slightly better negotiating position than before.

3) how does the JR which ever way it goes necessarily bring anyone to the negotiating table? The same problems in unravelling it all would still remain, if the intention by CCC/Charity was there to do that at all.

I think businessmen are cold hearted people who will strike when the time is right for them. If they win the JR surely that us the perfect time for them to negotiate (this is my opinion not theirs)

4) Was anything said about the £590k due to ACL?

Nobody asked that question

5) was anything said about how a new stadium might be financed?

No when a question went down that route someone else would interject and take it off track, (the audience not SISU reps)

to Lord_Nampil. What was actually said about the agreement between CCC and Charity to buy the shares off Higgs at a price equal to what the Club would pay? Where have details of this agreement come from?

It was mentioned that the council on top of having a veto could have matched any offer SISU did and would be the preferred bidder.

Thanks

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

duffer said:
Somewhere, OSB, in all of the trial docs, I think there's mention that ACL is set up so that if one side wants to sell it shares to a third party it must provide the other side with the first option to purchase them at the same price. I don't recall it was suggested anywhere that the Council were going to take this option.

Is that what this Lord Nampil's point was, perhaps?

Yes.......

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

lewys33 said:
So come on Don ....... The big question everyone is dying to ask here is .........

Would you?

All I will say is Joy is a very glamours lady

SkyBlueScottie · May 29, 2014

Lord_Nampil said:
I was there as well, Wat did you think of the councils agreement with Higgs regarding matching any offer the club makes for the 50% share in ACL....

Well thats very interesting...

Certainly shows that our council do not want the club back at the stadium unless its with a new owner who is prepared to bend over when the council demands it.

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

SkyBlueScottie said:
Well thats very interesting...

Certainly shows that our council do not want the club back at the stadium unless its with a new owner who is prepared to bend over when the council demands it.

How exactly does that show that?

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

I think it should be made clear there was an option for the council to so that. No one said they did. Also they had an option of a veto but it never got that far

Bennets Afro · May 29, 2014

I attended last night. Nothing new really apart from what Lord Nampil says. The council always had the power of veto, but they also had some clause (not in the contract) that enabled them to match any offers for the higgs 50%. I forgot what therm used was. The club only recently found out about this.
Nothing was said OSB about the £590k. We had about 1.5 hours and they announced after an hour that JS had to leave to catch a train so a lot of questions wasn't answered.
One thing they said about the JR is it isn't going to get us back to the Ricoh win/ lose. Just all the facts about what has gone on will be out there for people to decide and hopefully put pressure on the council to do a deal.
I'm not convinced about a new stadium but we do need to be back at the Ricoh next season as I don't think the club will survive another 2/3 years at sixfields

Bennets Afro · May 29, 2014

Also JS was in Cov as she had spent time with pressley in the afternoon and also SG from the stadium group. Not sure if there was a full meeting with everyone

The Gentleman · May 29, 2014

dongonzalos said:
All I will say is Joy is a very glamours lady

Dallas, Dynasty or Peggy from Eastenders............

covcity4life · May 29, 2014

The Gentleman said:
You mean for far less, otherwise you are asking for a ban too.

hahahah i well and truly messed that one up.

skybluetony176 · May 29, 2014

Just picking up on Bennets Afro's post.

How can something be a clause if its not in the contract?

Bennets Afro · May 29, 2014

skybluetony176 said:
Just picking up on Bennets Afro's post.

How can something be a clause if its not in the contract?

I think it was a contract between the higgs and the council and not in the option for the club to buy the higgs share.

Monners · May 29, 2014

skybluetony176 said:
Just picking up on Bennets Afro's post.

How can something be a clause if its not in the contract?

Could it be an amendment to the original contract?

Buster · May 29, 2014

"The JR isnt going to get us back to the Ricoh "
"A return to the Ricoh is not an option"
Did no one think to ask them why they have twice pushed for a Judicial Review or do we now just ignore these dubious soundbites

Buster · May 29, 2014

Dongo, your main posts have reiterated the question of the viability of a new stadium . Did it not come up ?

shmmeee · May 29, 2014

Bennets Afro said:
I attended last night. Nothing new really apart from what Lord Nampil says. The council always had the power of veto, but they also had some clause (not in the contract) that enabled them to match any offers for the higgs 50%. I forgot what therm used was. The club only recently found out about this.
Nothing was said OSB about the £590k. We had about 1.5 hours and they announced after an hour that JS had to leave to catch a train so a lot of questions wasn't answered.
One thing they said about the JR is it isn't going to get us back to the Ricoh win/ lose. Just all the facts about what has gone on will be out there for people to decide and hopefully put pressure on the council to do a deal.
I'm not convinced about a new stadium but we do need to be back at the Ricoh next season as I don't think the club will survive another 2/3 years at sixfields

First refusal?

Sounds pretty standard in a partnership, but IANAL.

shmmeee · May 29, 2014

So what can be gleaned form these countless hours of Gold Star Superfan Forums is absolutely nothing of merit, no questions answered, no closer to knowing WTF is happening with the ground. No closer to any sign of investment in the team or the fanbase. No sign of anything other than a chance for a lot of allegations to be put across in a private arena, with the knowledge that they will be repeated well away from the clutches of lawyers 5 minutes later. No clarity on the old GS switcharoo. Basically nothing the fans want answered, just more talking points Sisu want put across?

Meanwhile, I hear Joe Murphy's off to Huddersfield. So at least the owners of our club haven't got anything important they're missing for this farce.

skybluetony176 · May 29, 2014

shmmeee said:
First refusal?

Sounds pretty standard in a partnership, but IANAL.

You mean that well healed where our clubs concerned phrase "it's standard business practice".

covcity4life · May 29, 2014

stop being so bias shmeegal

dongonzalos · May 29, 2014

Buster said:
Dongo, your main posts have reiterated the question of the viability of a new stadium . Did it not come up ?

It did mate When I met TF in a one on one. His explanation was the mark up value of the surrounding land and developing retail on that.

In the larger group meeting last night unfortunately. As the questioning went down that direction someone else would jump in and take it off in another direction. So I never got a group answer to that one unfortunately.
It was taken off track by JS TF or ML but by other people shouting questions.

Fans Forum (10 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency