RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Can people tell me how they'd feel about a ground in Beduff??
Franchise - Relocation (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Yorkshire SB
- Start date
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
FTFY.
The deafening silence is the biggest fuckup here. Last we heard was Fisher badger bothering and issues at Brandon and neither of that came from the club.
If they refuse to engage in PR, they can't complain when people go off the deep end.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Great. Thanks. If only there was such a thing as time travel; and you could scoot back 20 or 30 years, and tell folk that in 2016 we'd be playing third tier football to 1K fans at Warwick University, they'd be delighted with the clarification of our destiny
It's somewhat different to Warwick isn't it!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
As a North Coventry resident I'd be happy enough, would be interesting to build it in the shadow of the Ricoh though.
(I'm assuming this is a post about where the Ricoh is, missing the point that by definition Coventry is the area CCC has juristiction over. If not I apologise.)
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It's where the whole thing is... subjective anyway.
Ricoh's as non Coventry as in Coventry is able to be... but it's still Coventry.
Warwick University (to me
) is Coventry, but to others probably not... Warwick is not Coventry Elastic stretching that's all redundant until, unless and if anything happens anyway.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Would Bedworth be to far out for you MMM??
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
Anywhere that was in or around the immediate vicinity of Coventry would be fine by me. It would then be about the facilities, transport and parking whether or not it was truly appealing.
Places such as Brandon for example I've always considered Coventry and the speedway team has been there for eons of course and nobody has ever objected to having to follow them at Brandon have they?
I remember when the Ricoh was being mentioned there were unhappy folk about how far out it was on the perimeter of Coventry almost? Come on it's all semantics and not worth arguing over until someone suddenly produces a plan with intent. That I fear will never happen, as I truly believe eventually the marrying of the Sky Blues and the Ricoh Arena is the obvious and most sensible solution for the City of Coventry and the football club (whoever may own the club at that time) and regardless of what people feel about SISU and ACL/Council they do need to sit down in a darkened room and thrash something out soon. For ACL/Council they just need to find enough within themselves to make something attractive enough to reel SISU back in for the short term and consider the future long after SISU have departed. SISU on the other hand need to respect the long suffering supporters of the football club they have hijacked away in Northampton and make it their business to get back in Coventry pronto if an opportunity presented itself regardless of the past historical disagreements with ACL/Council. As football club owners the FL should be telling them there is also a moral obligation to owning a football club in the structure of the English professional leagues and not just a business case.
It beggars belief does it not that we are all fighting between each other, when all we want is a football club to support in Coventry that has been around for 130 years and the disagreeing parties in all this have the power to make that happen. If effective voices are to be heard in bringing an end to this disgraceful situation, then pressure needs to be directed at all sides in this dispute. Once each side realise they are on their own, neither garnering public support then we might see more urgent responses.
Places such as Brandon for example I've always considered Coventry and the speedway team has been there for eons of course and nobody has ever objected to having to follow them at Brandon have they?
I remember when the Ricoh was being mentioned there were unhappy folk about how far out it was on the perimeter of Coventry almost? Come on it's all semantics and not worth arguing over until someone suddenly produces a plan with intent. That I fear will never happen, as I truly believe eventually the marrying of the Sky Blues and the Ricoh Arena is the obvious and most sensible solution for the City of Coventry and the football club (whoever may own the club at that time) and regardless of what people feel about SISU and ACL/Council they do need to sit down in a darkened room and thrash something out soon. For ACL/Council they just need to find enough within themselves to make something attractive enough to reel SISU back in for the short term and consider the future long after SISU have departed. SISU on the other hand need to respect the long suffering supporters of the football club they have hijacked away in Northampton and make it their business to get back in Coventry pronto if an opportunity presented itself regardless of the past historical disagreements with ACL/Council. As football club owners the FL should be telling them there is also a moral obligation to owning a football club in the structure of the English professional leagues and not just a business case.
It beggars belief does it not that we are all fighting between each other, when all we want is a football club to support in Coventry that has been around for 130 years and the disagreeing parties in all this have the power to make that happen. If effective voices are to be heard in bringing an end to this disgraceful situation, then pressure needs to be directed at all sides in this dispute. Once each side realise they are on their own, neither garnering public support then we might see more urgent responses.
You do realise Paxman that although ACL/CCC have played a part in this debacle that this deflection of blame by SISU is nothing but incredible. Once confronted the Ricoh authorities have bent over backwards to appease the hedge fund. Club losses attributed to rent and missed out on F& B profits totalled to about 1/8 th of losses listed in the accounts for a number of years.
I wouldn't absolve the management company of all blame at all but SISU have done a fine PR job on some people in shifting that blame for their incompetence and very shady tiered layer of financial misnomers.
I wouldn't absolve the management company of all blame at all but SISU have done a fine PR job on some people in shifting that blame for their incompetence and very shady tiered layer of financial misnomers.
jesus-wept
New Member
Well I think franchising is well within the over all sisu plan OR a sale at what they see as a decent price, heaven knows what that could be. Unless those who are apparently interested PHIV or this Byng bloke and his Chinamen grab the nettle and grab it quick I believe franchising will happen. Think about it. SISU have done and got away with the hard bit and left the city of Coventry, followed by a few fans lets say about a 1000. From that point relocating isn't very hard, going a few miles (10) further away no big deal compared to the 35 from Cov to Northampton and if they are receiving FL assistance from some of the committee or board it could happen. The problem as I see it there isn't enough high profile objections other than our own MPs and MEP who else is there ?. The local press just knit pick no and again, local media journo's not prepared to rock the boat. The only true objections and pointed questions come from websites such as this and then that is diluted by some.
Last edited:
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
I do and agree with you. But there still has to be a way forward found and that is inevitable imo. Throw up whatever you want but it won't change history and the future must be brought more into focus.
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
No franchising the club to another location is a no no and won't and can't happen. This talk is scaremongering at best. The FL have allowed a major city to take it's club into a ground sharing on a temporary basis only. Even the FL would be crazy as SISU if they sanctioned anything else. They will insist on a return to Coventry. Now if it was say Yeovil then the FL may not react with the same insistence but Coventry is a major city and as such very different to the FL.
But SISU only see one route and that is ultimately to distress ACL and take over the Ricoh, that surely is something that all concerned with the current management company will fight tooth and nail to avoid. So we have stalemate and SISU in response will take it out on the majority of fans by their actions and eventually the strength of the team. They will torment and antagonize until either they get their own way or give up and liquidate the club.
I don't think the FL will give a flying fuck at a rolling donut as long as fixtures are fulfilled, they've already shown this is all they care about !
jesus-wept
New Member
You forget sisu own the football club and if as they seem to have already done say to the football league let us play there or we close the club down what do you think the leagues response will be.
hill83
Well-Known Member
The majority of this is speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. It's founded on sound theory and I'm not saying it won't happen. But to state it as fact like you do is bullshit.
And that's my main reason for posting on here. Too many people spout their opinion as fact. It needs balance.
Last edited:
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
Still think you are hung up in the past if you still believe SISU are still trying to stress ACL? ACL remember have stated numerously they can operate without the football club so that bust that theory being successful. The truth is SISU did start down that road but events altered course for all parties concerned.
There is no denying SISU (the football club) need some sort of incomes streams from the Ricoh in order to make a viable return to the Ricoh. that can't be argued with. I don't suggest ownership to this current custodian of our football club but do see that a deal to satisfy them can be made available if the parties concerned really want to...
There is no denying SISU (the football club) need some sort of incomes streams from the Ricoh in order to make a viable return to the Ricoh. that can't be argued with. I don't suggest ownership to this current custodian of our football club but do see that a deal to satisfy them can be made available if the parties concerned really want to...
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
That's the thing though, a deal to make the club sustainable was agreed with Higgs, Sisu walked away in the hope of a better deal.
No they didn't. Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I'm looking for the quote that hung around virtually uncommented that all was going well in negotiations with Higgs, the club then had a meeting with the council, and after that the club's demeanour changed.
Can't find it just yet annoyingly, so until I do I'll refrain from comment...
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/21127-CET-Deal-struck-for-half-of-the-stadium-with-Higgs-Trust
http://www.skybluetrust.co.uk/index...7-full-version-of-qaa-to-acl-and-ccfc?start=2
Fisher says they couldn't agree on rent, that's not what he claims (or the accounts claim) stops us from being sustainable.
What do the links prove? TF has stated several times that there was a deal to purchase a 50% stake in the Arena, also claiming there was a signed agreement, and that the deal was ultimiately scuppered by the council. I have yet to see a denial or rebuttal from the other side. If it is not true, let them say it is and let's see the evidence.
jesus-wept
New Member
Tim Fisher conceded at the recent forums that he was puzzled Onya Imre didn't take up the option he had to buy part of the Arena when the opportunity was there.
To be clear, this is what TF said (still waiting for the denial from the council):
"We made an incredibly generous offer. ACL’s bankers were willing to support the offer which would have stopped them from foreclosing on ACL and which would have left ACL debt free, while the council’s deal has not. For reasons which are beyond us, the council then spent £14m of public money to take over as ACL’s bankers and, hence, terminated discussions."
"A deal was on the table in December last year – reached without expensive advisers – which would have provided a viable commercial solution for ACL and the club, but ACL declined it and went on to launch a series of legal measures using two law firms."
"In an attempt to put both the club and ACL on a sound financial footing we had a series of meetings in 2012 aimed at resolving the financial difficulties facing both parties.
"As part of this, we reached agreement with the council to buy out the ACL debt in return for a half share in the stadium business and extension of ACL’s lease to 125 years, which means it remain 100 per cent council-owned – we would just access the revenues, which is crucial. This deal was documented, signed by all parties and then reneged on by the council. The council made the problem even worse by then using public funds, something that is now subject to the judicial review proceedings."
"We need to be very clear that this is not about ownership of the freehold in the stadium which would have continued to be held by the council, with the club taking back the 50 per cent interest in head-leaseholder ACL which it was always intended to have."
"We made an incredibly generous offer. ACL’s bankers were willing to support the offer which would have stopped them from foreclosing on ACL and which would have left ACL debt free, while the council’s deal has not. For reasons which are beyond us, the council then spent £14m of public money to take over as ACL’s bankers and, hence, terminated discussions."
"A deal was on the table in December last year – reached without expensive advisers – which would have provided a viable commercial solution for ACL and the club, but ACL declined it and went on to launch a series of legal measures using two law firms."
"In an attempt to put both the club and ACL on a sound financial footing we had a series of meetings in 2012 aimed at resolving the financial difficulties facing both parties.
"As part of this, we reached agreement with the council to buy out the ACL debt in return for a half share in the stadium business and extension of ACL’s lease to 125 years, which means it remain 100 per cent council-owned – we would just access the revenues, which is crucial. This deal was documented, signed by all parties and then reneged on by the council. The council made the problem even worse by then using public funds, something that is now subject to the judicial review proceedings."
"We need to be very clear that this is not about ownership of the freehold in the stadium which would have continued to be held by the council, with the club taking back the 50 per cent interest in head-leaseholder ACL which it was always intended to have."
Paxman II
Well-Known Member
More people here should read this. I'm not suggesting it makes SISU an innocent party but it sure levels the playing field a little so we have some less biased perspective.
As I said earlier both sides are responsible in so many ways and they have the power to stop it and get a deal done.
Yorkshire SB
Well-Known Member
Appreciate that Nene park is financially viable and available, but I don't think it makes a franchise anymore realistic. Wimbledon were getting attendances of about 4000, had no stadium and itv (on)digital had just reneged on the lucrative football league tv deal. This meant they would lose about £5 million per year, and these were not planned loses it was just struck upon them. The club would have ceast to exist, but they moved to mk. Still appalling, but different circumstances.
We have a huge fan base, but we also have a world class stadium (albeit it doesn't belong to us, but it's there and ready).
If the club move to nene park then they establish themselves as a lower league club, there is no potential there, no chance of PL football and no real money to be made. To me it makes no sense, a return to the Coventry 'area' has to happen one way or the other, regardless of whether the football league enforce it or not.
We have a huge fan base, but we also have a world class stadium (albeit it doesn't belong to us, but it's there and ready).
If the club move to nene park then they establish themselves as a lower league club, there is no potential there, no chance of PL football and no real money to be made. To me it makes no sense, a return to the Coventry 'area' has to happen one way or the other, regardless of whether the football league enforce it or not.
davebart
Active Member
Now where have I heard that expression before????
Sorry, but don't believe a word of it.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
just to add to that, there was always more than a good chance that what was left of "Wimbledon" was going to replace the fans it lost by picking up new fans from Milton Keynes it is a big place and had no established football team.
i don't know if you have ever been to Nene Park but its in the middle of no-where and there is no potential new fan base, for shitsu it would be commercial suicide and that should hopefully be enough to stop the sky blues ever moving there on a permanent basis.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
i'm with you there, if shitsu had a signed agreement you can bet your bottom dollar that would have been "leaked" by now
Have I missed all the other documents they've leaked, then?
As far as I can see, the leaking seems to be coming from 'the other side'.
I'd describe my current position as disliking all parties involved pretty much equally bit I've got to say, the amount of one-eyed partisanship I see on this site is making me question where I should apportion blame.
I'm really interested to know on what basis you blame ACL. It was Shitzu who failed to pay the due rent, It was Shitzu who failed to file the accounts when they were due and it was Shitzu who moved your club to Northampton.
On the basis that annoying people like you support them blindly.