'Highfield Two' (3 Viewers)

[Bennets Afro]

WFC as you say the lease is with ltd and fisher has no lease to play at Ricoh as holdings so in that sense fisher shouldn't be spouting about a £1.2m rent. He is in charge of holdings and if he wants his team to play at the Ricoh should enter into negotiations with ACL via holdings

 

---

[RegTheDonk]

Hi guys - just to let you know, I've emailed our chief executive Stefan Gamble to oppose the suggestion of a WFC ground share with CCFC. I'd urge others from both clubs to do likewise:

"Dear Stefan

I read with great concern ......

Yours etc"

Thanks for your solidarity with City fans Saddler. Its very noble of you and much appreciated - though I doubt Mr Gamble and the rest of the Walsall board would want to turn down a healthy bit of wedge by us using the Banks' when WFC aren't playing. Its all bloody money these days, unfortunately.

 

[Otis]

Hi guys - just to let you know, I've emailed our chief executive Stefan Gamble to oppose the suggestion of a WFC ground share with CCFC. I'd urge others from both clubs to do likewise:

"Dear Stefan

I read with great concern the article in today's Coventry Telegraph, which states that sources close to Coventry City Football Club have revealed the club is in negotiations to ground share at the Banks's Stadium from next season for up to three years.

As a Walsall fan of over 25 years, I would like to make clear my absolute opposition to this proposal and would strongly urge the club to do likewise. The way that the owners of Coventry City have run up unmanageable levels of debt, reneged on agreed rental agreements and forced CCFC Ltd into administration is the complete antithesis of everything Walsall FC stands for. And all this while continuing to fund a playing budget that dwarfs what Walsall can afford.

I think it is vitally important that Walsall publicly reiterates its long-held view that football clubs should live within their means, rejects any suggestion of a ground share with Coventry City and expresses its support for long-suffering Coventry fans who want a club in their own community, for their community, run sensibly by owners that care. I believe that the sooner a statement is issued the better for all concerned.

Over the last two years there has been much progress at Walsall that has brought admiring glances from across the football community. Cosying up to the most despised and unscrupulous owners in the Football League would undo all that good work and goodwill, costing the club far more than it would gain financially from a ground share arrangement.

Yours etc"

Excellent email.

 

[James Smith]

Incorrect! they had the opportunity to purchase the Higgs share in ACL - which owns a 50 year lease on the Arena, Not the freehold!

imp:

They've always had the option to purchase the charity share, it's just that after starting to talk to the charity they walked away from the negotiations not the charity(1). And who's to say that the council wouldn't give us another long lease for the stadium complex when the ACL lease runs out at a low rent because they see the club as a benefit to the area and the city.

(1) http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...e-with-Tim-Fisher-tonight?p=372844#post372844

 

[grego_gee]

You speak as though rent received equals pure profit, which as you must be aware is utter rubbish.
How about the financial cost of servicing the debt that ACL had to take up to finance the Ricoh when CCFC went bust and could not proceed with building the stadium. How about salaries and wages and maintenance etc. etc. etc.?
You must know that your comment is a false statement and that the 6 million paid in rent was used 100% to service debt and costs or improve the facilities.
I wish you people trying to support SISU would present the whole truth instead of picking little bits and then misusing them to make false points.

Bullshit blinkered propaganda, there is nothing incorrect in my statement!

imp:

 

[rupert_bear]

Nice to see support like this from an opposing fan, i hope this e-mailed is sent to the Telegraph who might be interested now they have come off the fence

 

[James Smith]

Bullshit blinkered propaganda, there is nothing incorrect in my statement!

imp:

So how many tenants automatically get part of the property they're renting just because they pay (or not in this case) their rent?

 

[mattylad]

To be honest "highfield road 2" is absolutely spot on.

They have picked a great name and have managed to get the attendance in there as well !

that will be a project name and will soon be gone once sponsorship is agreed.... no one should be taken in by the naming nonsense

 

[James Smith]

that will be a project name and will soon be gone once sponsorship is agreed.... no one should be taken in by the naming nonsense

Or indeed the White Elephant stadium at all.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

So how many tenants automatically get part of the property they're renting just because they pay (or not in this case) their rent?

And if tenants want to own their property but it's not for sale, they move elsewhere.

 

[James Smith]

And if tenants want to own their property but it's not for sale, they move elsewhere.

But the leasehold was for sale it's just that SISU screwed it up. Commercial property is normally leased I'm told not owned by the tenant, the shop where I work is leased.

 

[lifelongcityfan]

many thanks for stefans email adress...now mailed him.

 

[psgm1]

Well if it is the Butt's they are considering (stadiua nearer the city centre than the ricoh), then I will definitely be able to do something PRACTICAL about that! I have very very close links to people high up at cov rugby, and I can tell you from decades of experience the people at cov rugby will not sell the club to a football team! It's only recently that the sport moved away from its amateur routes. These guys play their sport for fun. They will be just as much opposed to a move away than I am (cannot speak for the trust they have been silent on whether or not they will actively object to a move away!)

cannot think of any expanses of land big enough to build a stadium nearer to the centre than the ricoh, and capitol projects like this have to get governmental approval,so not a chance in a million years it will happen. Just look how difficult the government is finding it to build the HS2 and that is a GOVERNMENTAL project. There were problems and delays building the ricoh, because of the impact it would have on traffic and rules regarding space for parking (this is why the parking is so difficult around the Ricoh btw). So the very concept of building ANOTHER huge building within the city limits, with a 32k staium ALREADY in its boundaries. It is just a total non-starter.

But if it DOES prove they are trying to buy the Butts, It will be over my dead body!

 

[grego_gee]

They had the chance to buy at least the charity stake in ACL and walked away after agreeing a heads of terms. They could have started negotiations from the start of their ownership and then could have bought the Council stake later on. But they didn't and started us on the road to destruction. Might have cost them less than building the White Elephant stadium as well.

Yes they had a option to buy the Higgs share in ACL, but ACL only owns a 50 year lease not the freehold. The council (in whatever company name they hold it) have never indicated any intention to sell the freehold. It is only an opinion and a crystal ball that says its a road to destruction. You may or may not be correct on that!.

imp:

 

[lifelongcityfan]

NW... just in case you hadnt noticed this is a football club we are talking about here, not a row of terraced houses!!

 

[grego_gee]

So how many tenants automatically get part of the property they're renting just because they pay (or not in this case) their rent?

What did I say?

imp:

 

[WFC]

Thanks for your solidarity with City fans Saddler. Its very noble of you and much appreciated - though I doubt Mr Gamble and the rest of the Walsall board would want to turn down a healthy bit of wedge by us using the Banks' when WFC aren't playing. Its all bloody money these days, unfortunately.

Whilst the pull of the money would be strong, if you were aware of the goings on at Walsall over the last few years you'd see it's not as simple as this. If they do such a deal Walsall could possibly loose a lot more money than they would make. It has taken our CEO a huge amount of work to start to turn around relations with fans and start to build some trust and start to build attendance again, he risks everything if he does this deal. The unfortunate part is he could be forced to by our owner, it would be foolish of him, but that has never stopped him before. Whilst the fans relationship with the club has improved hugely thanks to the CEO, the relationship between fans and the owner could best be described as a temporary cease fire that could flare at any moment over something like this. He doesn't even dare set foot in his own stadium whilst a match is going on.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

But the leasehold was for sale it's just that SISU screwed it up. Commercial property is normally leased I'm told not owned by the tenant, the shop where I work is leased.

The entire leasehold has never been for sale, it's a relatively short lease anyway, and I'd wager none of it is not for sale now.

If they don't like the deal, the natural thing to do would be to find somewhere else.

The option is there if ACL don't want them to find somewhere else, to offer them a deal that makes them re-assess. If ACL can't financially do that fine, I appreciate that, they should make sure they say the doors to the Ricoh are now closed to the club, and find a deal that can work for them.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

The entire leasehold has never been for sale, it's a relatively short lease anyway, and I'd wager none of it is not for sale now.

If they don't like the deal, the natural thing to do would be to find somewhere else.

The option is there if ACL don't want them to find somewhere else, to offer them a deal that makes them re-assess. If ACL can't financially do that fine, I appreciate that, they should make sure they say the doors to the Ricoh are now closed to the club, and find a deal that can work for them.

Only just logged on, haven't read the full thread, but....are you actually backing this?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[procdoc]

Only just logged on, haven't read the full thread, but....are you actually backing this?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Anyone who does back this in my eyes isn't a real sky blues fan. I don't care who that offends or upsets. That is how strongly I am opposed to SISU. I can't get my head round anyone who defends their despicable actions, it makes them just as bad

 

[lifelongcityfan]

Interesting how NW always seems to side with SISU!!

 

[Noggin]

If they don't like the deal, the natural thing to do would be to find somewhere else.

If there was somewhere that fitted our needs and cost less than Ricoh that would be the natural thing to do but there isn't.

If you could build somewhere that fitted our needs and was more financially viable than staying at the Ricoh that would also be a natural thing to do, but you can't.

ACL clearly need or at least really want the club so offered a massively improved deal, the club absolutely positively need the Ricoh so should have accepted it, instead they are planning something that is in no way viable, costs a massive ammount, dramatically lowers revenue, almost ensures at least one relegation, alienates everyone and perhaps even kills the club, fucking bravo Tim Fisher.

 

[lifelongcityfan]

SISU have not been straight with anyone on anything from the moment they took over, anyone who believes they are going to be straight with the fans must be crazy.
The Club will never flourish whilst they are in charge.

 

[Otis]

Interesting how NW always seems to side with SISU!!

Don't know why you jump to that conclusion. I mean, it's not as if he's only been a member on here since April is it.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Don't know why you jump to that conclusion. I mean, it's not as if he's only been a member on here since April is it.

When you join makes you more fit to talk about things then others does it?

Come on let's not start this purile nonsense again eh and let people actually have their opinions.

 

[James Smith]

The entire leasehold has never been for sale, it's a relatively short lease anyway, and I'd wager none of it is not for sale now.

So are you saying that the Council wouldn't ever sell or have sold their share of ACL to our club* if they had put a bid in?

I think councillor Maton didn't agree that the freehold should be sold, but ACL isn't the freehold and as I said, I'm sure that a new lease could be arranged with our club* at a reasonable rate when the current one is nearing the end.

*assuming this is either with a new owner at the helm or that SISU hadn't played silly buggers with the rent boycott and nearly everyone didn't hate them.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

So you are backing this? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

 

[TheParsonsHose]

Don't know why you jump to that conclusion. I mean, it's not as if he's only been a member on here since April is it.

Are you suggesting his source IP is from Ryton?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

So you are backing this? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

I didn't say that either.

 

[James Smith]

I didn't say that either.

So what are you saying?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I'm saying what I said above.

 

[bigfatronssba]

<p>

Yes they had a option to buy the Higgs share in ACL, but ACL only owns a 50 year lease not the freehold. The council (in whatever company name they hold it) have never indicated any intention to sell the freehold. It is only an opinion and a crystal ball that says its a road to destruction. You may or may not be correct on that!.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><img src="images/smilies/hat.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Pimp" smilieid="48" class="inlineimg" />

Owning the freehold isn't necessary.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

.

Haven't forgotten you by the way, just have to go and walk Hector before I reply

 

[Houdi]

Well if it is the Butt's they are considering (stadiua nearer the city centre than the ricoh), then I will definitely be able to do something PRACTICAL about that! I have very very close links to people high up at cov rugby, and I can tell you from decades of experience the people at cov rugby will not sell the club to a football team! It's only recently that the sport moved away from its amateur routes. These guys play their sport for fun. They will be just as much opposed to a move away than I am (cannot speak for the trust they have been silent on whether or not they will actively object to a move away!)

cannot think of any expanses of land big enough to build a stadium nearer to the centre than the ricoh, and capitol projects like this have to get governmental approval,so not a chance in a million years it will happen. Just look how difficult the government is finding it to build the HS2 and that is a GOVERNMENTAL project. There were problems and delays building the ricoh, because of the impact it would have on traffic and rules regarding space for parking (this is why the parking is so difficult around the Ricoh btw). So the very concept of building ANOTHER huge building within the city limits, with a 32k staium ALREADY in its boundaries. It is just a total non-starter.

But if it DOES prove they are trying to buy the Butts, It will be over my dead body!

Well if you read the initial article it talks of building a new stadium outside of the administative boundries of Coventry,so unless the City of Coventry has shrunk to 'village' size I doubt if they will be moving to the Butts.

 

[Noggin]

Haven't forgotten you by the way, just have to go and walk Hector before I reply

I wasn't suggesting you were Tim Fisher if you thought I was mate, the fucking Bravo Tim fisher was just aimed at him and me blaming him for his decisions. Sorry If it wasn't clear.

Edit- and the mate is friendly not sarcastic, gotta hate communicating by text.