Is 'CovBackToRicoh' really a 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' Campaign? (1 Viewer)

GaryPendrysEyes · Oct 20, 2013

This new 'CovBackToRicoh' campaign seems to have some fundamental issues....

1. It seems from it's material/tweets that despite claiming to want to 'pressure all sides' this is purely an anti-ACL/CCC group
2. It seems to implicitly rule out any 'rent option' even though that may 'get us back to the Ricoh', a contradiction in terms
3. It has very heavy focus (1/2 of the petition) on the issue of selling the Ricoh to owners.

So is it presenting itself as something it is not to gain broader support?

Should it change it's name to 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' ??

Nick · Oct 20, 2013

Who is running it?

Ripbuster · Oct 20, 2013

I don't tweet ,hate facebook and all things similar..The bloke promoting/talking about this on CWR sounded like he was neutral to me.

Nick · Oct 20, 2013

I still don't see the need for more splinter groups

Voice_of_Reason · Oct 20, 2013

GaryPendrysEyes said:
This new 'CovBackToRicoh' campaign seems to have some fundamental issues....

1. It seems from it's material/tweets that despite claiming to want to 'pressure all sides' this is purely an anti-ACL/CCC group
2. It seems to implicitly rule out any 'rent option' even though that may 'get us back to the Ricoh', a contradiction in terms
3. It has very heavy focus (1/2 of the petition) on the issue of selling the Ricoh to owners.

So is it presenting itself as something it is not to gain broader support?

Should it change it's name to 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' ??

I hate to say it, but I think this may be the only way out. If SISU don't own the Ricoh we are stuck with them and their tin-pot plans to build a new stadium and also stuck in Northampton for 5 years plus. I can't see any other alternative regretfully. I am not a SISU lover, the opposite in fact, but I think this is the only way we will get the Sky Blues back in Coventry. SISU won't sell, they will stubbornly stick with their hair brained plans regardless of us life -long supporters. If anyone can think of any other way and it's constructive, let's hear what it is.

ohitsaidwalker king power · Oct 20, 2013

Nick said:
I still don't see the need for more splinter groups

I dont see the need to be playing in Northampton either- but there you have it... disgraceful.
:blue:

Otis · Oct 20, 2013

Coventry City back to Coventry HAS to be the campaign, whoever is in charge.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 20, 2013

Otis said:
Coventry City back to Coventry HAS to be the campaign, whoever is in charge.

Indeed.

Have to say the chap on the radio came across very well (and very balanced!) last night.

My main concern would be we seem to have more campaign groups than players if we're not careful!

Cheshire Sky Blue · Oct 20, 2013

GaryPendrysEyes said:
This new 'CovBackToRicoh' campaign seems to have some fundamental issues....

1. It seems from it's material/tweets that despite claiming to want to 'pressure all sides' this is purely an anti-ACL/CCC group
2. It seems to implicitly rule out any 'rent option' even though that may 'get us back to the Ricoh', a contradiction in terms
3. It has very heavy focus (1/2 of the petition) on the issue of selling the Ricoh to owners.

So is it presenting itself as something it is not to gain broader support?

Should it change it's name to 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' ??

I think that the intention was to take a neutral position but it is coming across as pro SISU. I was for SISU buying into the arena 18-24 months ago. Today I am really against SISU owning it, or even part. This is entirely as a result of I don't trust them, I don't like how they operate, I hate they despicable way they have treated the fans. It is this last point about how they have treated the fans that has made me so resolutely against SISU.
I think that the guys planning the protest outside the Council house are well meaning but misguided. Just wait for the SISU PR to weave 'The fans support us in our fight with the people who caused our 10 point deduction'.
I am going to try to get to Cov for 13.00 Tuesday. But for a don't sell to SISU campaign.

jesus-wept · Oct 20, 2013

Those advocating selling the Ricoh to Sepalla and there are admittedly more now and increasing should stand back and look at the whole picture. Okay for me a fan it's what happens on the field of play that concerns me most, but also it isn't oh bugger it let Sepalla have it so we can enjoy our good form at the Ricoh. There are still issues our owners need to address for instance why have sisu still not submitted accounts meaning the football club still in embargo, what assurances are there that should they get their hands on the Ricoh we will automatically return there, there is a belief that may not happen as easy as that. Protest at the Council House Tuesday is fine, anything that may help end this saga is okay by me but it will take all parties to get progress.

I have an idea. Why doesn't CWR for instance organise another forum and invite all parties to attend, a sort of question and answers thing. By all parties obviously it would be people from the council, acl, if there's a difference, sisu/otium, again if there's a difference, local politicians and also interested others such as Heskell/Hoffman/Elliott and there's the mysterioius Byng and his Chinamen. I suspect though sisu wouldn't attend.

singers_pore · Oct 20, 2013

I genuinely think that if CCC sell the freehold to SISU then the club will be liquidated and the land/arena will be developed for an alternative use. Why on earth would SISU keep the club operating given that the club will never earn profits for them?

People need to ask themselves why on earth SISU are willing to lose so much money every week playing at Sixfields. It's because they want the arena and surrounding land. They couldn't care less about the club or fans as most football clubs don't make money, not even those in the premiership.

stupot07 · Oct 20, 2013

Otis said:
Coventry City back to Coventry HAS to be the campaign, whoever is in charge.

Definitely, and aimed at all sides.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

Cheshire Sky Blue · Oct 20, 2013

stupot07 said:
Definitely, and aimed at all sides.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors

It may be the aim, but be careful that you don't hit those that are most innocent.

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Well, you could say the "Keep Cov In Cov" campaign turned into an Anti-SISU campaign so the original message, despite it's noble intention, was diluted and distorted.

It doesn't need to be anti or pro anything. Just a vehicle to get us back at the Ricoh. We all want that. Don't we?

GaryPendrysEyes said:
This new 'CovBackToRicoh' campaign seems to have some fundamental issues....

1. It seems from it's material/tweets that despite claiming to want to 'pressure all sides' this is purely an anti-ACL/CCC group
2. It seems to implicitly rule out any 'rent option' even though that may 'get us back to the Ricoh', a contradiction in terms
3. It has very heavy focus (1/2 of the petition) on the issue of selling the Ricoh to owners.

So is it presenting itself as something it is not to gain broader support?

Should it change it's name to 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' ??

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Like who?

Cheshire Sky Blue said:
It may be the aim, but be careful that you don't hit those that are most innocent.

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
Well, you could say the "Keep Cov In Cov" campaign turned into an Anti-SISU campaign so the original message, despite it's noble intention, was diluted and distorted.

It doesn't need to be anti or pro anything. Just a vehicle to get us back at the Ricoh. We all want that. Don't we?

You're absolutely right, though you could argue that's the way that that section of the fanbase went. Personally, while I think Michael did an excellent job I'm glad it's gone now, we need unity. And for that reason I find this new group divisive and counter-productive. Their stated reason for existing (no-one is pressuring the council) is both factually inaccurate and ultimately pointless. Are we just asking CCC to hand the Ricoh over for nothing? If so I can't see any reasonable person supporting that, if that's not what we're asking for, then what the hell do we want from the Council?

As always, if we just want Cov in Cov, why no pressure on Sisu to accept a rental deal?

RPHunt · Oct 20, 2013

A few questions for the Cov back to Ricoh supporters:

SISU have said they are going to build a new ground, so why are you urging the council to give them the Ricoh?

Or are you saying you don't actually believe SISU's promise to build a new ground? If you don't believe that, then why on earth do you believe they can be trusted with the Ricoh?

Grendel · Oct 20, 2013

RPHunt said:
A few questions for the Cov back to Ricoh supporters:

SISU have said they are going to build a new ground, so why are you urging the council to give them the Ricoh?

Or are you saying you don't actually believe SISU's promise to build a new ground? If you don't believe that, then why on earth do you believe they can be trusted with the Ricoh?

I don't thing they can build a new ground in time for Tuesday evening do you?

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Interesting, I thought we were all in that camp? What do you want then?

RPHunt said:
A few questions for the Cov back to Ricoh supporters:

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

Grendel said:
I don't thing they can build a new ground in time for Tuesday evening do you?

But a protest on Monday will have them back by Tuesday?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 20, 2013

RPHunt said:
A few questions for the Cov back to Ricoh supporters:

SISU have said they are going to build a new ground, so why are you urging the council to give them the Ricoh?

Or are you saying you don't actually believe SISU's promise to build a new ground? If you don't believe that, then why on earth do you believe they can be trusted with the Ricoh?

Negotiating strategies don't work unless you offer an alternative to the monopoly...

It's exactly the same reason ACL make vague noises about bringing in a new team/alternative uses. How can you stand up for your own commercial interests if there is a position of strength with no retort from one side?

We really, really need to get away from this trend of literalism.

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

To be honest, I'm bored of that link already.

shmmeee said:
But a protest on Monday will have them back by Tuesday?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

BrisbaneBronco · Oct 20, 2013

RPHunt said:
A few questions for the Cov back to Ricoh supporters:

SISU have said they are going to build a new ground, so why are you urging the council to give them the Ricoh?

Or are you saying you don't actually believe SISU's promise to build a new ground? If you don't believe that, then why on earth do you believe they can be trusted with the Ricoh?

The way I see it is

If SISU were to build a new ground, then we will almost certainly be in Northampton for 3/5yrs
If CCC sold SISU the Ricoh, then we would be back in Coventry a lot sooner

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Yep. I don't think there is any real alternative if SISU don't want to sell and there's no evidence that is what they are likely to do.

BrisbaneBronco said:
The way I see it is

If SISU were to build a new ground, then we will almost certainly be in Northampton for 3/5yrs
If CCC sold SISU the Ricoh, then we would be back in Coventry a lot sooner

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Negotiating strategies don't work unless you offer an alternative to the monopoly...

It's exactly the same reason ACL make vague noises about bringing in a new team/alternative uses. How can you stand up for your own commercial interests if there is a position of strength with no retort from one side?

We really, really need to get away from this trend of literalism.

This is why I find the whole thing despicable. In theory neither side should be able to break the monopoly: The Ricoh bowl can only realistically be used for football and CCFC can only realistically play in Coventry. Sisu for me went over a line, a similar action from ACL would have been to lock the club out of the Ricoh and had that happened I'd expect the majority of fans to be anti-ACL right now. The problem is only one side actually gives a shit about the impact on supporters.

As always, what Sisu did may be "good business" but it goes against the spirit of the agreement and that gets most people's backs up.

In reality of course, Sisu need the club back as much as ACL do now, hence the sudden shift from "never again" to "well maybe on our terms" and the recent PR campaign from the likes of Reid to sell the Ricoh to Sisu at a knock down price.

The optimist in me says that should this current salvo fail then the next step is sensible negotiations. But then he also says we'll win the league each season, so maybe we shouldn't listen to him.

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

I certainly don't think SISU give a shit, but ACL? Really?

GaryPendrysEyes · Oct 20, 2013

To be honest I think this campaign is disingenuous. It claims to be 'balanced and aimed at all parties' but it is patently just anti-ACL/CCC.
It claims to focus on getting back to the Ricoh but implicitly rules out a rent option, which may offer just that (and at 150k is surely a basis for discussion)

If they are honest and open it is really about pressuring the Council to sell to Sisu- which is of course Sisu's agenda.

They should be honest about that and change their name to 'Sell Sisu The Ricoh' or like.

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
I certainly don't think SISU give a shit, but ACL? Really?

Like I say, if they were owned by Seppala I'd say that we would have been locked out the Ricoh the day we stopped paying the rent. The only reason we weren't is the the board of ACL genuinely didn't want to harm the club.

It's easy to slag them off, but the fact of the matter is that the likes of Mutton, Lucas, PWKH are actually City fans, and even if you don't believe that they are people with a lasting tie to the city who need the people of the city onside. It would be political suicide to kick your football team out of your city.

I know you have a different view, but surely you can agree that there are more CCFC fans in ACL/CCC/Higgs than in Sisu?

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Oh yes, I agree with that. And my "view" is that both sides are culpable not that "SISU are great".

shmmeee said:
I know you have a different view, but surely you can agree that there are more CCFC fans in ACL/CCC/Higgs than in Sisu?

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

Didn't read too many complaints from you about the "balanced" Keep Cov In Cov campaign.

GaryPendrysEyes said:
To be honest I think this campaign is disingenuous. It claims to be 'balanced and aimed at all parties' but it is patently just anti-ACL/CCC.
It claims to focus on getting back to the Ricoh but implicitly rules out a rent option, which may offer just that (and at 150k is surely a basis for discussion)

If they are honest and open it is really about pressuring the Council to sell to Sisu- which is of course Sisu's agenda.

They should be honest about that and change their name to 'Sell Sisu The Ricoh' or like.

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
Oh yes, I agree with that. And my "view" is that both sides are culpable not that "SISU are great".

I never said it was, just that we have different views. I too agree that both sides are culpable to some degree, however only one actually has the power to do anything about it now. There is now no link between ACL and CCFC, if it's to be reinstated then the ball is in CCFC's court.

Michael Gove isn't culpable for everything that is wrong with education at the moment, but he sure is the most pressing concern.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 20, 2013

shmmeee said:
This is why I find the whole thing despicable. In theory neither side should be able to break the monopoly: The Ricoh bowl can only realistically be used for football and CCFC can only realistically play in Coventry. Sisu for me went over a line, a similar action from ACL would have been to lock the club out of the Ricoh and had that happened I'd expect the majority of fans to be anti-ACL right now. The problem is only one side actually gives a shit about the impact on supporters.

Here's where we can go in circles however, and we've been there, done that. Personally, I struggle to take sides for one commercial enterprise against another, and let's be honest there's been an awful lot of decisions made for commercial reasons rather than cultural from both sides... as you'd expect, the way the whole infrstructure has been set up.

The optimist in me says that should this current salvo fail then the next step is sensible negotiations.

Possibly. The sooner both sides stop taking the opening gambits as final positions and actually show some flexibility, then we might start to move somewhere. *That's* why there should be pressure applied to both sides btw, so in a commercial world neither side ends up with the position of strength over the other, and neither side feels encouraged to play hardball at all costs, and take dopwn everything as collateral damage. That's also why we have to stop taking every statement made so bloody literally. Although of course it's not every is it? More the ones that fit a pre-conceived idea... whereas in a constantly shifting event, each position should be taken on its merits, and another reason why looking backwards is unhelpful when looking for future direction. We are where we are, that's Northampton, and there's more than one side that is needed to be on board for that to change. Even if any demonstration ends up saying 'yep, we agree with you' that's hardly a bad thing, is it?

I'd have rather this was done under the auspices of the Trust though. There *are* ways to not take sides one against the other, yet still draw attention to this. As it stands, we have yet another campaign group, yet another sparsely attended demo in all likelihood, yet another signal fewer people care than should be given out.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 20, 2013

shmmeee said:
I never said it was, just that we have different views. I too agree that both sides are culpable to some degree, however only one actually has the power to do anything about it now. There is now no link between ACL and CCFC, if it's to be reinstated then the ball is in CCFC's court.

But of course ACL do have the ability to offer something that enables the club to return to its rightful place.

There may be no link, but that doesn't and shouldn;t stop a campaign to forge a link.

torchomatic · Oct 20, 2013

I hate Michael Gove and his stupid rubbery face. Still, I'm not too keen on education full stop really and their "one-size-fits-all" approach to teaching children in primary schools.

Anyway, I feel BOTH sides have power to do something. If either of them will though is a different matter. We're just the poor sods stuck in the middle.

shmmeee said:
I never said it was, just that we have different views. I too agree that both sides are culpable to some degree, however only one actually has the power to do anything about it now. There is now no link between ACL and CCFC, if it's to be reinstated then the ball is in CCFC's court.

Michael Gove isn't culpable for everything that is wrong with education at the moment, but he sure is the most pressing concern.

shmmeee · Oct 20, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
But of course ACL do have the ability to offer something that enables the club to return to its rightful place.

There may be no link, but that doesn't and shouldn;t stop a campaign to forge a link.

But only Sisu have the ability to take that option up.

Without getting back into it, you could argue that ACL did/have offered something but that Sisu refuse to accept said offer.

It's just as valid a point to say that CCC should sell as it is to say Sisu should rent.

For me though, the fact that repeatedly Sisu representatives have flat out refused to talk when asked says it all for me. Lucas has written to Seppala, the Trust have written to Seppala, Seppala has ignored both. The Trust have contacted ACL/CCC and had talks (obviously Lucas already talks to ACL/CCC).

There comes a point where you have to admit only one side is willing to enter into negotiations here.

Is 'CovBackToRicoh' really a 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' Campaign? (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Administrator

New Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

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

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency