Fisher on new stadium (6 Viewers)

[Rusty Trombone]

This formula price argument, surely it was setting the maximum price that had to be paid by the club/clubs owners, not the minimum. Higgs could agree to sell at a lower price, as in fact they did with SISU's original offer.

 

---

[chiefdave]

So you say that it would have been good business sense keeping hold of a stadium that wasn't being used where the people running the football club that it was built for preferred to play in Northampton and said they would never bring the club home?

According to CCC there was no financial issues for ACL as a result of us playing in Northampton so why not? They could of course have had Wasps playing there as tenants rather than outright selling the ground to them.

Give me one reason why Higgs would want to work with SISU after what has gone on.

Because the offer from SISU directly correlated with Higgs stated charitable objectives at the time the offer was made.

Formula price? Your usual one. The one never used.

I only mentioned formula price as shmmeee suggested we should have purchased based on that as it was our best chance to buy. A post I assume you agree with as you liked it and then posted arguments in support of the formula valuation so no it is not my usual one whatever that is supposed to mean, just responding to posts made by shmmee and yourself. Are you now agreeing that it is possible the formula price was above market value and SISU were correct in not buying at that price?

 

[steveecov]

Sisu do money supposedly. Other peoples.

They DON'T do football.

 

[Astute]

According to CCC there was no financial issues for ACL as a result of us playing in Northampton so why not? They could of course have had Wasps playing there as tenants rather than outright selling the ground to them.



Because the offer from SISU directly correlated with Higgs stated charitable objectives at the time the offer was made.



I only mentioned formula price as shmmeee suggested we should have purchased based on that as it was our best chance to buy. A post I assume you agree with as you liked it and then posted arguments in support of the formula valuation so no it is not my usual one whatever that is supposed to mean, just responding to posts made by shmmee and yourself. Are you now agreeing that it is possible the formula price was above market value and SISU were correct in not buying at that price?

Why would Wasps want to rent this far from where they should be playing? They shouldn't be in Coventry full stop. CCC wanted rid. Wasps wanted their own home.

You still have not said why Higgs would want to work with SISU. They certainly wouldn't trust them.

Yes I liked your post. I agreed with the majority of it. Nothing wrong there? But you are still mentioning the formula price but it was never asked for. Higgs gave our club 6.5m. 5.5m was asked for. 5.5m was agreed. And as you know the arena was devalued after this by us going to Northampton. 5.5m then......2.6m after no tenant and losses being made. This is why SISU didn't want to pay the 5.5m. They thought they would get it without the loan or well below what it was plus much less than the 5.5m. Major mistake. How unusual.

 

[chiefdave]

You still have not said why Higgs would want to work with SISU.

Because the offer from SISU directly correlated with Higgs stated charitable objectives at the time the offer was made.

 

[Astute]

But what about the not trusting them in the slightest? Would you become a partner with someone you didn't have the slightest trust in?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

SISU could not have bought the 50% from Higgs after Wasps came in, Higgs offered the chance to bid just to make sure there was no legal comeback if they didn't. Whoever held the other 50%, be it CCC or Wasps at that stage, would have vetoed the sale. That's why it seems odd to me that SISU didn't offer massively more cash just to highlight the absurdity of being asked to bid.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

SISU could not have bought the 50% from Higgs after Wasps came in, Higgs offered the chance to bid just to make sure there was no legal comeback if they didn't. Whoever held the other 50%, be it CCC or Wasps at that stage, would have vetoed the sale. That's why it seems odd to me that SISU didn't offer massively more cash just to highlight the absurdity of being asked to bid.

Exactly how I saw it at the time, but people just kept on going about why it was rejected because of conditions.

 

[Godiva]

This formula price argument, surely it was setting the maximum price that had to be paid by the club/clubs owners, not the minimum. Higgs could agree to sell at a lower price, as in fact they did with SISU's original offer.

The formula was part of the negotiation when Higgs bought the shares from CCFC. It was put in to set a fixed price depending on the period Higgs had the shares and save future haggling when the club wanted them back. It was basically the 'investment' plus interest. Not just a maximum price, but the price.

Yes, Higgs could agree a lower price, but that was not the intention with the formula, pretty much the opposite.

As it happened the formula was never used - not in 2012 during sisu's failed bid to buy into the Ricoh and not last year when Wasps was more successful.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The formula was part of the negotiation when Higgs bought the shares from CCFC. It was put in to set a fixed price depending on the period Higgs had the shares and save future haggling when the club wanted them back. It was basically the 'investment' plus interest. Not just a maximum price, but the price.

Yes, Higgs could agree a lower price, but that was not the intention with the formula, pretty much the opposite.

As it happened the formula was never used - not in 2012 during sisu's failed bid to buy into the Ricoh and not last year when Wasps was more successful.

Yep, like I said. Higgs could agree to sell at a lower price.

 

[duffer]

And now they are. With an owner who the council feel is more secure and who has committed more to the community than CCFC.

You talk as if it was all about money. CCFC threw away the chance to buy it, not only by tearing up the "formula" agreement, but also by poisoning the well with the council. It was just ham fisted negotiation that blew up in their face. No great conspiracy, just bad business sense and a whole vineyard of sour grapes. Even at the last ditch they couldn't be bothered to try and put a reasonable offer in for the other 50%. Much like you all they cared about was the headline figure, ignoring the other wants of the other stakeholders. It's a clash of cultures IMO and as the new guys in town the onus was always on Sisu to "As in Coventry do what the Coventrians do", not barge around like you're untouchable then get a smackdown from the judiciary.

The tactics were wrong, the language was wrong and the pig headed refusal to do anything but sling mud and law suits around was wrong. Under that barrage, with a responsibility to the tax payers and a far more important job to do that fluff Seppala's ego, what the council did wasn't just reasonable, it was responsible governance.

The taxpayer is most definitely not away from this mess. If the Wasps thing doesn't work out then guess what happens to the £14m mortgage that the council holds? Who pays it? You're an intelligent bloke, why would you propound such rubbish.

And Wasps have 'committed more to the community than CCFC'? I'm sorry but that's utter bollocks. A few thousand free tickets, the odd visit to a school and a bit of PR for the local rag isn't a commitment to the community. CCFC have been here over 100 years, there's a bit of catching up for London Wasps to do there. And last time I looked CCFC still mattered more to the community than Wasps, and this deal was done without any real concern to their future or that of CRFC, another team established in the community since 1874.

Responsible governance my arse too. They bailed out a losing company (ACL) to the tune of £14.4m, and then to get themselves out of a hole entirely of their own creation sold it to another company that loses money, Wasps. Two big risks for the price of one. You must have a very different definition of "responsible" to me.

This wasn't about getting the best for the community, this was either about getting out of an awkward situation and then spinning it as something else. For the council, it really was all about money - otherwise the better option would surely have been to sit tight and give time to build trust with the 'local' team, y'know like they said just before they sold to the team from London.

 

[Astute]

Is the loan safer with Wasps or would it be safer with SISU?


Wasps will pay if they can make a go at it. SISU only seem to like paying legal bills they run up.

Agree with most of the rest though.

 

[chiefdave]

Is the loan safer with Wasps or would it be safer with SISU?

I would suggest that in the event of ACL being sold a condition of the sale, to either Wasps or SISU, should have been immediate repayment of the loan. If, as we were told in the JR, other lenders are happy to give finance on a similar basis why not make use of that and remove the risk to the taxpayer. I wouldn't have wanted SISU owing the council millions and I don't want Wasps owing them millions either.

 

[torchomatic]

A hell of a statement even coming from you. I think you may need a reminder:

http://www.sbitc.org/about-us/history/ (this team has been around since 1883)

http://www.wasps.co.uk/community (this team has been here for four months)

And now they are. With an owner who the council feel is more secure and who has committed more to the community than CCFC.

 

[Astute]

I would suggest that in the event of ACL being sold a condition of the sale, to either Wasps or SISU, should have been immediate repayment of the loan. If, as we were told in the JR, other lenders are happy to give finance on a similar basis why not make use of that and remove the risk to the taxpayer. I wouldn't have wanted SISU owing the council millions and I don't want Wasps owing them millions either.

I was thinking more of them liking litigation more than paying their legal bonded bills. And leaving legal expenses for all sides involved.

 

[chiefdave]

I was thinking more of them liking litigation more than paying their legal bonded bills. And leaving legal expenses for all sides involved.

But if you make the loan repayment part of the sale you remove that options. So instead of paying £6m whoever purchased ACL paid £20m and cleared the loan. If they then needed to replace that finance with a third party that's their own problem and doesn't involve the council or taxpayers money. To be honest if SISU screw over a bank to get out of paying a loan back it causes me much less concern than if they screw over local taxpayers.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

A hell of a statement even coming from you. I think you may need a reminder: http://www.sbitc.org/about-us/history/ (this team has been around since 1883) http://www.wasps.co.uk/community (this team has been here for four months)

I think what he means is....see past the "Football team" and the "Rugby team" and look at the owners of those teams. SISU has been the epitomy of the crappiest of crap owners and done zip, nada, zilch, nowt. for the people of Coventry, whereas in their 4 months of ownership of the Ricoh Wasps owners have gone all out with the "do goodery" I'm like you in one way...I wish Wasps weren't here, but I certainly don't want SISU here even more so.

 

[Grendel]

I think what he means is....see past the "Football team" and the "Rugby team" and look at the owners of those teams. SISU has been the epitomy of the crappiest of crap owners and done zip, nada, zilch, nowt. for the people of Coventry, whereas in their 4 months of ownership of the Ricoh Wasps owners have gone all out with the "do goodery" I'm like you in one way...I wish Wasps weren't here, but I certainly don't want SISU here even more so.

Wasps have a dire credit history and have at times been on the brink of being bankrupt.

They have made false promises to the fans.

"Do goodery" is pap. They are trying to manipulate their latest temporary audience before no doubt they move again.

 

[Grendel]

Also what on earth was Lucas babbling on about on the radio earlier?

She was clearly at some conference saying lots of business will be looking at Coventry as a substitute for London and a big selling point is that Coventry has "big burly rugby players"

 

[torchomatic]

But what have they done for the community apart from give a few tickets to schools since December? Is that the "do goodery" you're talking about?

Look at what SBitC do. They've done fantastic work and continue to do so even with SISU at the helm of our club.

I don't want SISU or Wasps here either, but he Shmmeee needs to stop talking rubbish. Wasps have done nothing for Coventry apart from giving a few tickets to school kids. As I said he really needs to read up on SBitC and see what good work they do. To dismiss them so easily in favour of Wasps is a shitty thing to do.

I think what he means is....see past the "Football team" and the "Rugby team" and look at the owners of those teams. SISU has been the epitomy of the crappiest of crap owners and done zip, nada, zilch, nowt. for the people of Coventry, whereas in their 4 months of ownership of the Ricoh Wasps owners have gone all out with the "do goodery" I'm like you in one way...I wish Wasps weren't here, but I certainly don't want SISU here even more so.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Grendel....."They have made false promises to the fans."....................................................................................Read what you've written Grendel old chap!....remind you of anyone?

 

[Hobo]

But what have they done for the community apart from give a few tickets to schools since December? Is that the "do goodery" you're talking about?

Look at what SBitC do. They've done fantastic work and continue to do so even with SISU at the helm of our club.

I don't want SISU or Wasps here either, but he Shmmeee needs to stop talking rubbish. Wasps have done nothing for Coventry apart from giving a few tickets to school kids. As I said he really needs to read up on SBitC and see what good work they do. To dismiss them so easily in favour of Wasps is a shitty thing to do.

SBitC are a registered charity, not sure what SISU put into it to be fair? I know Dave Busst and others put a lot into it. It flys under the flag of CCFC, but I think it is totally separate funding wise from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?

 

[Godiva]

Grendel....."They have made false promises to the fans."....................................................................................Read what you've written Grendel old chap!....remind you of anyone?

Hurry, look away!

 

[Grendel]

Grendel....."They have made false promises to the fans."....................................................................................Read what you've written Grendel old chap!....remind you of anyone?

Yes they are as bad as sisu.

That's my point.

Schmeee - who seems to be competing with Dongle in the "who can talk more gibberish on a forum than RFC" competition thinks they are coventrys very own unicef.

 

[torchomatic]

I know they are. My son has done many football courses with them. However, they are affiliated with the football club and are the community face of the club. and for someone to suggest that Wasps have done more for the community than CCFC is absolute rubbish. Obviously, I don't expect you to agree.

I know a lot of people ignore stuff on the website (the CT rarely report on "good news") but over the last few months there have been many examples of CCFC (not just SBitC so we're not hair splitting) visiting primary schools, visiting University hospital, organising health checks, etc. It's not difficult for Shmmeee or anyone else to check these things out. I think he and many others just like to forget that. They forget the good work done by the Club. It's easier just to shout (and type) SISU OUT, etc.

So, again. Wasps done more for the community? Bull. Shit.

SBitC are a registered charity, not sure what SISU put into it to be fair? I know Dave Busst and others put a lot into it. It flys under the flag of CCFC, but I think it is totally separate from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Torchy.....I don't give a f**k about Wasps. I hate SISU with a vengeance. BUT!...purely for balance...Wasps didn't haggle over the price for the Ricoh...They paid what was the "Going price"(Price ACL/Higgs wanted) with no riders unlike SISU. Love 'em or hate 'em Wasps did everything right. SISU however........

 

[Grendel]

@ Torchy.....I don't give a f**k about Wasps. I hate SISU with a vengeance. BUT!...purely for balance...Wasps didn't haggle over the price for the Ricoh...They paid what was the "Going price"(Price ACL/Higgs wanted) with no riders unlike SISU. Love 'em or hate 'em Wasps did everything right. SISU however........

How do you know they didn't haggle - Was the meeting streamed live to your house?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Grendel.....We all know they didn't haggle because ACL/Higgs said "Wasps have paid the amount wanted and have made no conditions"....Don't tell me you can't read like the rest of us can? Or can you come up with another one of your gems..."Estimating Facts" that they did haggle?

 

[dongonzalos]

Yes they are as bad as sisu.

That's my point.

Schmeee - who seems to be competing with Dongle in the "who can talk more gibberish on a forum than RFC" competition thinks they are coventrys very own unicef.

Even I know when I am beaten hands down on that front. You and RFC are like Real Madrid and Bayen Munich. Plus you spout similar diatribe to be fair.

I am a mere Napoli. I know my limits

 

[torchomatic]

Don't disagree with your feelings over Wasps and SISU, I feel the same believe it or not. I can't comment on the price of the Ricoh as we don't know the ins and outs thanks to that "confidentiality" thing that CCC like to throw around.

Anyway, I was comparing work in the community by Wasps and CCFC, which I note you ignored in favour of the statement below.

@ Torchy.....I don't give a f**k about Wasps. I hate SISU with a vengeance. BUT!...purely for balance...Wasps didn't haggle over the price for the Ricoh...They paid what was the "Going price"(Price ACL/Higgs wanted) with no riders unlike SISU. Love 'em or hate 'em Wasps did everything right. SISU however........

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Torchy....Sorry I didn't relpy but thought what Hobo said would suffice.....Hobo....SBitC are a registered charity, not sure what SISU put into it to be fair? I know Dave Busst and others put a lot into it. It flys under the flag of CCFC, but I think it is totally separate funding wise from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?..............................Especially the bit where Busst says..."but I think it is totally separate funding wise from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?

 

[Grendel]

Even I know when I am beaten hands down on that front. You and RFC are like Real Madrid and Bayen Munich. Plus you spout similar diatribe to be fair.

I am a mere Napoli. I know my limits

Well let's explore one of your ideas then.

Wasps sell at a profit half the company so they can pay of half the loan.

how? ACl are liable for the loan and not wasps so explain how that one works. All that happens is the sharehders are still liable.

Also who makes the strategic decision making. Please run that one by me. Are you saying that Richardson will actually relinquish strategic direction to be a joint process? After a few months of ownership, really?

 

[torchomatic]

Yes, they are. However, I also stated the things that the CLUB had done since just before Christmas. Hell, I don't suppose it matters. No one on here cares.

@ Torchy....Sorry I didn't relpy but thought what Hobo said would suffice.....Hobo....SBitC are a registered charity, not sure what SISU put into it to be fair? I know Dave Busst and others put a lot into it. It flys under the flag of CCFC, but I think it is totally separate funding wise from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?..............................Especially the bit where Busst says..."but I think it is totally separate funding wise from what I remember Dave Busst saying once on the radio?

 

[Grendel]

@ Grendel.....We all know they didn't haggle because ACL/Higgs said "Wasps have paid the amount wanted and have made no conditions"....Don't tell me you can't read like the rest of us can? Or can you come up with another one of your gems..."Estimating Facts" that they did haggle?

Is this from the same people who said that they would need to rebuild trust with ccFC before looking at ownership while at the same time having already sold up?

They don't tell the truth do they? So if a murderer pleads innocent he walks does he?

Oh dear.

 

[Gazolba]

That was all pretty obvious. How could CCFC ever own a stadium? We are far batter off staying at the Ricoh and developing a mutually-beneficial relationship with Wasps.