Is 'CovBackToRicoh' really a 'LetSisuHaveTheRicoh' Campaign? (2 Viewers)

Jack Griffin said:

I think SISU's JR is stymieing any such public offer. Hopefully ACL & CCC will make a few public statements to clarify the position once it is chucked out of court, but I can't see them saying anything till after Nov 28th.

Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. SISU know that the lawyers have advised the Council to say nothing because of the judicial review and therefore are cleverly using the time to mount an aggressive PR exercise (evident by them ramping up press, interviews and personal calls/meetings with fans) knowing the Council can't respond. Sadly, judging calls I have had from friends, this has had some limited success with a few thinking about turning (just a few and just thinking but that is bad enough). I beg people to wait for the outcome of the review when I hope the Council's hands will be untied (or the shackles at least loosened a bit). I have been told that there is someone waiting in the wings who is prepared to stare Seppalla out until he gets the club!! We can only hope that this is true and that it happens quickly because there is no way SISU will ever get the Ricoh - and I agree with that.

assuming as some think that selling SISU the site at a low value to allow them to sell on at a profit is an escape route for SISU why wouldn't the Council sell direct to the third party itself?

Would the councillors be at risk of personal cost from a legal challenge for sale below market value ?

What would SISU add to it that would greatly increase the current value That makes it more valuable in their hands not CCC/ACL?

CCFC would not form part of the site valuation but its rental covenant would. CCFC makes no profits has few assets and consistent losses with large debts (£10m to ARVO alone) so actually adds no worth but is likely to be in a seperate company anyway.

The Council would have to produce a sound business case that stacks up financially not emotionally...... is there one?

oldskyblue58 said:

assuming as some think that selling SISU the site at a low value to allow them to sell on at a profit is an escape route for SISU why wouldn't the Council sell direct to the third party itself?

Click to expand...

It's a question I would like answered for one!

Certain councillors have made clear in the past that their share of the 'Ricoh' is not for sale, full stop. This seems madness to me, why not allow the football club to own the football ground?!?

Whether the council as a whole's position is that, whether those councillors still hold that position is something that ought to be asked.

oldskyblue58 said:

What would SISU add to it that would greatly increase the current value That makes it more valuable in their hands not CCC/ACL?

Click to expand...

In short, the football team. Isn't that the whole point, without CCFC The Ricoh is far less valuable. Any Sisu valuation would value it with current leases/tennants not the football club surely? The value they add is CCFC.

Or have I missed something?

shmmeee said:

In short, the football team. Isn't that the whole point, without CCFC The Ricoh is far less valuable. Any Sisu valuation would value it with current leases/tennants not the football club surely? The value they add is CCFC.

Click to expand...

Yep.

Although a possible way out has always been that this whole charade focusses peoples' minds that selling the ground should be considered. if so, even if not sold direct to SISU, it might raise the price of the football club from nothing to something.

Whether sufficiently is another matter, and if selling separately I'd love to see the legal bill to ensure both actually got sold, and to the same body(!)

Deleted member 5849 said:

Yep.

Although a possible way out has always been that this whole charade focusses peoples' minds that selling the ground should be considered. if so, even if not sold direct to SISU, it might raise the price of the football club from nothing to something.

Whether sufficiently is another matter, and if selling separately I'd love to see the legal bill to ensure both actually got sold, and to the same body(!)

Click to expand...

So perhaps something like a council statement that they will sell to a new owner at a certain price? Not sure how that would play, and like you say the question of how to legally ensure both sides are happy with a third party and keep to any deal.

shmmeee said:

So perhaps something like a council statement that they will sell to a new owner at a certain price?

Click to expand...

But then we're back to all the nonsense that backed SISU into a corner, that the council appeared to be agitating for new owners.

I'd be happier with the neutral statement that they'd be open to all possibilities, and would be delighted to discuss any suggestions on ownership of the ground with the club if they wish to.

Being open to possibilities doesn't guarantee a sale after all, does it, or even rolling over.

And as an aside, the win/win is potentially SISU's payoff for acting as broker (rather than expensive legal fees), and moving the ground (and thus club) on to new owners?

shmmeee said:

So perhaps something like a council statement that they will sell to a new owner at a certain price? Not sure how that would play, and like you say the question of how to legally ensure both sides are happy with a third party and keep to any deal.

Click to expand...

If the council made such a statement it would not look particularly favourable on them and their defence of the JR.

shmmeee said:

In short, the football team. Isn't that the whole point, without CCFC The Ricoh is far less valuable. Any Sisu valuation would value it with current leases/tennants not the football club surely? The value they add is CCFC.

Or have I missed something?

Click to expand...

That depends on how successful the football team is surely?

It also depends on whether other sides of the stadium income grow and have better returns than the football club or not.

It depends if the football team continue to make losses or not

It depends if the football team is directly linked to the stadium or not

It depends on if the contribution to worth is negative or not

If the football team comes back is not successful and is an obstacle to other more profitable sources of income then does it add to worth?

we are talking about the value of the stadium not the worth to the city of Coventry - two very different things