Nick
Administrator
Like a massive bail out?
As the trust weren't negotiating a commercial agreement I doubt it.
I don't know, Nick. Best ask the Tust that one. However, if CA had insisted that the meeting was minuted, he would have his information in writing. If CSF had refused to minute the meeting it would have been a PR own goal.Are there minutes out from when the sky Blue Trust met them then?
I don't know, Nick. Best ask the Tust that one. However, if CA had insisted that the meeting was minuted, he would have his information in writing. If CSF had refused to minute the meeting it would have
Where on earth is the logic to closing it? It's partly funded by the FA and the generation of revenue from it far outweighs the cost for them to run it.
You really need to get your head out of Wasps' backside.
Has it? I do not think you have the figures to judge that accurately, all recent transfer activity has been 'undisclosed'.
There is also a significant risk factor, what if you have a few years when you do not produce a saleable player, then it is simply a drain that badly effects cash flow.
I obviously haven't been paying attention, Nick. I don't remember this. All this "he said, she said" stuff confuses me mightily.Trust come out and say they were mistaken
This has been explained adequately, its about cashflow & risk. Where are the figures confirming your assertion "generation of revenue from it far outweighs the cost for them to run it" I do not believe they are available, you certainly cannot work it out from the published accounts.
If you check back where I originally said this you will see OSB seemed to think my comment made some sort of sense.
Nick - just for the record the Trust met and/or spoke to Chris Anderson (CCFC), Nick Eastwood and David Armstrong (Wasps), Paul Breed (CSF) . We have also spoken to Joe Elliott for some historic background to Higgs etc and FL for clarification over Cat 2 etc. None of these were minuted as they were not negotiations just fact finding missions. We have never put out any PR statements about the meetings - the only confusion that you seem so hung up about was a tweet from CJ during the Trust AGM that has been misinterpreted. The situation is and remains in my view, with all the available information I have garnered that there is no reason why CCFC couldn't retain a Cat 2 academy but it will not all be at the Higgs site as there will be a loss of some pitches and the building of the swimming pool will mean some lost office/classroom space. However these lost facilities can be housed elsewhere - an academy does not have to be all on one site. As I have said time and time again the only way the club will retain its academy is for all the parties to work together, bring in new partners such as Warwick Uni etc and then present a joint proposal to the FL about what they will do. All this bollocks about PR etc, not going to meetings, wanting everything in writing is just that bollocks. If the club really wants an academy then CA has to talk to CSF and Wasps and others to get it done, digging his heels in about wanting something in writing is puzzling and is simply stalling or deflecting and isn't getting the job done. All these entrentched stances from all parties are doing is making co-operation less and less likely and the demise of the Academy more and more certain. To be honest it seems to me that the way this is all going it willonly end one way - a dead academy and another raft of courtcases. Another great result for our club. If the will was there it could be saved - is the will really there?
Nick - just for the record the Trust met and/or spoke to Chris Anderson (CCFC), Nick Eastwood and David Armstrong (Wasps), Paul Breed (CSF) . We have also spoken to Joe Elliott for some historic background to Higgs etc and FL for clarification over Cat 2 etc. None of these were minuted as they were not negotiations just fact finding missions. We have never put out any PR statements about the meetings - the only confusion that you seem so hung up about was a tweet from CJ during the Trust AGM that has been misinterpreted. The situation is and remains in my view, with all the available information I have garnered that there is no reason why CCFC couldn't retain a Cat 2 academy but it will not all be at the Higgs site as there will be a loss of some pitches and the building of the swimming pool will mean some lost office/classroom space. However these lost facilities can be housed elsewhere - an academy does not have to be all on one site. As I have said time and time again the only way the club will retain its academy is for all the parties to work together, bring in new partners such as Warwick Uni etc and then present a joint proposal to the FL about what they will do. All this bollocks about PR etc, not going to meetings, wanting everything in writing is just that bollocks. If the club really wants an academy then CA has to talk to CSF and Wasps and others to get it done, digging his heels in about wanting something in writing is puzzling and is simply stalling or deflecting and isn't getting the job done. All these entrentched stances from all parties are doing is making co-operation less and less likely and the demise of the Academy more and more certain. To be honest it seems to me that the way this is all going it willonly end one way - a dead academy and another raft of courtcases. Another great result for our club. If the will was there it could be saved - is the will really there?
Nick - just for the record the Trust met and/or spoke to Chris Anderson (CCFC), Nick Eastwood and David Armstrong (Wasps), Paul Breed (CSF) . We have also spoken to Joe Elliott for some historic background to Higgs etc and FL for clarification over Cat 2 etc. None of these were minuted as they were not negotiations just fact finding missions. We have never put out any PR statements about the meetings - the only confusion that you seem so hung up about was a tweet from CJ during the Trust AGM that has been misinterpreted. The situation is and remains in my view, with all the available information I have garnered that there is no reason why CCFC couldn't retain a Cat 2 academy but it will not all be at the Higgs site as there will be a loss of some pitches and the building of the swimming pool will mean some lost office/classroom space. However these lost facilities can be housed elsewhere - an academy does not have to be all on one site. As I have said time and time again the only way the club will retain its academy is for all the parties to work together, bring in new partners such as Warwick Uni etc and then present a joint proposal to the FL about what they will do. All this bollocks about PR etc, not going to meetings, wanting everything in writing is just that bollocks. If the club really wants an academy then CA has to talk to CSF and Wasps and others to get it done, digging his heels in about wanting something in writing is puzzling and is simply stalling or deflecting and isn't getting the job done. All these entrentched stances from all parties are doing is making co-operation less and less likely and the demise of the Academy more and more certain. To be honest it seems to me that the way this is all going it willonly end one way - a dead academy and another raft of courtcases. Another great result for our club. If the will was there it could be saved - is the will really there?
Pretty much, just calling out ccfc on everything again.Why of the 17 sites looked at did they have to pick the one that a) needed to be ripped apart and b) was the base for a previously existing academy.
Perhaps that's the kind of question that needs to be asked. With respect it looks like you've just paid lip service.
Pretty much, just calling out ccfc on everything again.Why of the 17 sites looked at did they have to pick the one that a) needed to be ripped apart and b) was the base for a previously existing academy.
Perhaps that's the kind of question that needs to be asked. With respect it looks like you've just paid lip service.
Any idea why the refusal for them to put things in writing?
You only seem to mention ccfc as pr also?
On phone so sorry for short reply to longer one
Your reply does seem like again the trust is just calling on ccfc, why not ask why they won't write anything down?
No it's just common sense to look beyond wasps and csf saying their door is open in every statement...You are just playing the silly playground game, if parties are willing to resolve the matter they can all sit down and talk as anyone with an ounce of common sense knows.
Said the other day the objection and the Reid articles have no planning substance and are simply PR pieces in my opinion. They are aimed at the fans really, the decision makers will largely ignore the content because it doesn't deal with planning issues. But like I said it isn't the Wasps development that is killing the Academy (not helping though) - its gross mis-management and 50m bath
Just as it is common sense to look beyond CA throwing up obstacles to talksNo it's just common sense to look beyond wasps and csf saying their door is open in every statement...
They wouldn't miss a chance to have Anderson's pants down.
The naivity, mixed with blind hatred, mixed with playing the media and this is the result... Wasps pissing themselves again
Is that so that he can close the academy and Blame csf? Whilst it could be right, that also doesn't make any sense at all.Just as it is common sense to look beyond CA throwing up obstacles to talks
At every opportunity.
Why ?Is that so that he can close the academy and Blame csf? Whilst it could be right, that also doesn't make any sense at all.
Why would Anderson demand it in writing and be adament about that, if he wanted to close it down? Unless he has a death wish?Why ?
Pretty much, just calling out ccfc on everything again.
Same as when they moved here and Jan was going on saying how great their match was while calling city fans selfish.
Did notice that.. Very random.The CET think i am to blame as i am a key figure in the trust - lol
OrWhy would Anderson demand it in writing and be adament about that, if he wanted to close it down? Unless he has a death wish?
How does that make any sense? They could just put something in writing and blow him away couldn't they?
There's no logic to it, it's probably a rumour somebody had started. Wouldn't surprise me if pwkh was up to his old tricks.
If he wanted to back out, it would be him refusing to do anything in writing wouldn't it?
Or
Wasps put it in writing ( how can they know what we need ) and send it to CA , he
Looks it over and says it's not enough. And all the while the clock is running down
On our time there.
I've never understood why they can't get round a table and talk maybe involve an
Independent arbitrator (EFL maybe) and make the necessary compromises.
But they won't, because they don't want it.
If they don't need ccfc, why would they get people to sign up to a fans forum for example?I very much doubt that CCFC comes very high in the Wasps board room thought process to be honest. They don't have to consider CCFC much at all
Wasps own the Ricoh and CCFC actually contribute not very much net income to that. CCFC have no alternative but to be there and on Wasps terms
Wasps have a plan for AHC that is likely to really get going after Thursday, it really does not bother them whether CCFC are there or not. There is a potential to earn a little from them by hiring out the kicking barn.
They are focussed on every area of their business but CCFC will not be a priority. They don't have to care about CCFC and their directors, they will deal with them but on their own terms
The worst thing for CCFC right now is that Wasps can sit back and do nothing at all. Its not a matter of creating PR in fact it suits Wasps to be as quiet as possible just make the odd conciliatory noise. It isn't a matter of Wasps need CCFC for anything. It isn't a matter of driving CCFC in to the ground, they don't care, and the actions of others started that drive a long time ago and it has picked up speed in the last few years.
CCFC need, and as hard as it is to accept have no choice but to go cap in hand if they want a ground to play in and an indoor pitch
CSF because they have an alternative can take a hard line too. They have to make their sites at least break even. Whilst there were no Wasps then CCFC were the only game in town but there was no long term commitment (possibly on both sides). Now there is and it hasn't come first from CCFC
CCFC are not in a position where people are actively going against them, its gone past that. Those people can do nothing from here on in, unless CCFC decides partnership not confrontation and demands is the way to go. But we have got to the point where that partnership will not be on CCFC terms.
As for the ritual bashing of the Trust - if you don't like what they come back with or that they make mistakes get off your arses get involved and do something constructive
What god damn sad crap state of affairs they have all (anyone involved of the years) made of our club............. and worst of all it is a declining number that actually care
Nick carry on getting hung up on PR, there is at least as much coming out of CCFC in various forms. Frankly not bothered about PR wars, most of which very few people will remember a week after it is put out. It has gone way past useful to any party involved.
The Trust are amateur fish trying to swim in a pond full of sharks with certain people throwing stones at them at any opportunity. Like I said if people don't like it go do better, you don't even have to do it through the Trust
In the meantime how do CCFC get to move things forward given that currently no one will speak to them. Bugger all the froth and swill going around, the club needs solutions or faces a very bleak future. How do they get decision makers to see CCFC's worth and potential in Coventry.
If Wasps and CSF and CCC are sitting back and doing nothing, that means CCFC has to be proactive or accept the bleak future.
Like it not Wasps, CCC, CSF hold possible solutions, how do CCFC change the situation to access those, because its quite clear they have no alternatives of their own. Don't care about SISU, they wont go before they are ready, but unless something forces a change I seriously doubt the future of the club I love
The trust is not fit for purpose. The way they welcomed Wasps with open arms after being so against Northampton puts them up there with Italia and his hypocrisy. I don't get the whole Wasps have no problem/don't care about CCFC. They do, massively. We are there biggest obstacle to success and establishing themselves in the city. Football is a more popular sport. If CCFC are successful, less people will be interested in Wasps. Either supporting them as fans or commercial sponsorship etc. We are competition. Established competition. Why do you think the council and everyone else are bending over backwards to accomodate Wasps? They have to be a success for the council etc not to be challenged. I can't believe we have a fan base who will not support the club regardless because of the people that own them. Manchester United fans are not massively keen on the Glazers but if the Manchester council tried shoehorning them out of stadium and academy to house Manchester City, you could bet your bottom dollar there would be outrage, even their London fans might make an appearance.
That is the problem, they don't see worth or potential, they see threat. They see competition. If decision makers had any affinity to the club, the Ricoh wouldn't have been sold like it was and we wouldn't be having this conversation about the academy. The decision makers are deliberatly damaging the club, CCC and Higgs and CSF. It's not getting hung up on PR, said decision makers are using it to disguise their attempts to rid the club, either entirely or to a point where it is no longer a threat. If CCFC lose their academy, potential young footballers may turn to rugby, in turn providing more youngsters for Wasps. This is a concerted effort by said decision makers. The other problem is people buy it and it's working.
Except Wasps help maintain a glass ceiling to the financial potential of CCFC by owning the Ricoh and by now controlling the AHC so limiting any sustained success for CCFC.
Financially most Rugby income comes from central distributions and sponsorship and thats reasonably secure and greater than CCFC present total turnover. Add to that ticket income but more than that 2/3rds of the income coming from non sporting activities.
Think they might have a handle on controlling the competition. That by the way is not me being happy about it or supporting anyone other than CCFC
Don't think Trust fit for purpose get involved and change it or set up something better
the threat is reducing by the day, and if Wasps can sit back and do nothing and it keeps reducing then they pretty much own it. CCFC has to deal with what is and change it and I see precious little that gives me confidence or the feeling my club is in safe hands either in the board room or higher up
Nick carry on getting hung up on PR, there is at least as much coming out of CCFC in various forms. Frankly not bothered about PR wars, most of which very few people will remember a week after it is put out. It has gone way past useful to any party involved.
The Trust are amateur fish trying to swim in a pond full of sharks with certain people throwing stones at them at any opportunity. Like I said if people don't like it go do better, you don't even have to do it through the Trust
In the meantime how do CCFC get to move things forward given that currently no one will speak to them. Bugger all the froth and swill going around, the club needs solutions or faces a very bleak future. How do they get decision makers to see CCFC's worth and potential in Coventry.
If Wasps and CSF and CCC are sitting back and doing nothing, that means CCFC has to be proactive or accept the bleak future.
Like it not Wasps, CCC, CSF hold possible solutions, how do CCFC change the situation to access those, because its quite clear they have no alternatives of their own. Don't care about SISU, they wont go before they are ready, but unless something forces a change I seriously doubt the future of the club I love
Yet you are persistently negative about the club. They may own the Ricoh but as said if we are successful, commercial money will increase. We will have more fans. Now those two sources may take away from Wasps. The Ricoh being associated with CCFC and not Wasps is not what they want, but it is what would happen if we got promoted this year. Someone set up something on Facebook and I'm sure people shot them down and said all efforts should be concentrated through one group? You were one who thought it should be one group? Now you suggest setting something else up?
Or in the corridors of CCC or CSF or Higgs. Let's all blame SISU though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?