Joy Seppala meeting at Ryton Report (1 Viewer)

[kingharvest]

Sorry its a bit late, and now that Les Reid has the exclusive....i imagine a professional journo will be able to do a far better job than i have. Still, i said i'd type them up so here they are.

I met with Joy Seppala and Tim Fisher on Monday. We met for about 45 minutes to an hour. We talked about the Ricoh, Sixfields, the proposed new stadium, communication, and the future. As I said in my original post yesterday, she came across very genuine and honest and extremely likeable. I get the feeling she treated it as an ordinary investment at first, trusting Onye and Ray Ranson to make it work. When it didn't she got involved and realised that the whole business was unviable - rent deal, wages, etc. So major transformation had to happen, total restructuring of the business and a major culture change got underway to try and move the club away from what she called 'comfortable coventry'. The club, in her opinion, had no control over their future due to the rent deal with the Ricoh and that had to change.

If the meeting had happened just after SISU had bought the club, i'd be feeling positive about the future – the fact remains it didn’t, we’re 6 years on and we are where we are. In spite of the level of investment they’ve made, whether its £40m, £60m or £6m – we were a mid-table championship side when they took over, playing in Coventry and now we’re in League 1 playing in Northampton – in my opinion, they cannot avoid taking a level of responsibility for that.

What is clear is that Joy Seppala is very private. I personally hope this is the start of her engaging with more fans, she met 3 of different ages on the day I met her. I don’t know if the others are sixfields attendees or not, when I was contacted they didn’t know I’d been to six fields (Colchester game) and Tim Fisher thought I was staying away.

Both Tim Fisher and Joy Seppala expressed their openness to meet again and continue to communicate. I think it’s important that now we as fans have made some sort of breakthrough that we build on it and continue to ensure that our views are heard. I know a lot of you don’t feel I’m the right person to make your views heard given I’ve been a sixfields attendee, but I would just say that I want exactly the same as you all do in terms of getting the club back to Coventry as quick as possible. I also think she should engage with those who don't attend sixfields and urged her to do so.

Ricoh

The message that came through from Joy was that they wouldn’t rule out a deal to return to the Ricoh, but that it would have to be on the right terms and in the best interest of the club. She felt that the club had taken a beating from the council, not just since SISU have been there, but for years before that.

Sixfields

They are totally and utterly aware of how the fans feel. They don’t want this. They don’t want to be in Northampton but as they’ve aid before, they felt they had no option.

Staying at Sixfields for 5 years is financially viable. They have agreed to fund the shortfall. I asked about the impact it might have on the playing squad (T/O…60%...etc). Tim said all clubs have to adapt to FFP and that as our budget reduces so will everyone else’s. Players who were on big contracts before are no longer being offered big contracts when they move.

New Stadium

They are still in talks on 4 sites. They were going to focus on one but were advised by Rotherham chairman to have a few options because of planning regs. They have had discussions with councils and are desperate to get to a position where they can give the fans something concrete. In terms of timescales, this is normal. Shrewsbury’s new ground was built in 12 months, so they aren’t concerned and don’t feel the process is dragging or that the timeframe is unrealistic. A stadium where we own the revenue potential is part of the long term vision. The club couldn’t survive as it was; it was genuinely on the brink. The council have said they will never sell to SISU so they feel they have no other option available to them. They want the fans involved in the design of the ground – in terms of how it feels to try and make it feel like home – something they’re conscious that the Ricoh has never been for a lot of fans.

The team being used to design the ground, CBRE, also wanted to sponsor the club. Instead they have given the money to charities hence the Grace academy being on the shirts for 3 months. They’ll be sponsors for the season and it may be that different charities appear on the shirt in the future. They’ve also agreed to sponsor the youth team for 12 months.

Communication

I told them that communication is still awful, and they acknowledge they’ve been hammered in terms of PR. They feel that a lot of what they’ve said has been twisted and they are going to publish a lot more on the website from now on to ensure the messages are clear. I urged them to go public with their vision for the club and to start trying to engage more fans, including those who don’t attend sixfields.

Academy

PWKH was approached by the club to get the academy back to Alan Higgs and he wanted to make it happen as well. They are all glad that the academy is going to be back there and it’s vital for the future of the club that we retain our status.

The Future

Joy is firmly focussed on the future and not the past. The club has been in a sorry state for 12 years and has had to go through a total transformational period to adjust to mismanagement. This includes both the business side and the football side. The last two football decisions they’ve made, Mark Robins and now Steven Pressley, have been based on the vision they have for the club. It is a long term vision where the club creates a culture and ethos around things such as the style of football, the integration of young players, etc. So that when anybody leaves, someone can come in and fit into that culture. We compared it to Swansea and how they are in a position where a manager can come in and the style of play doesn’t change, because it’s what’s expected.

Pressley is totally committed, he believes in Joy’s vision and is being given everything they can give him to help him.

That’s about it. I don’t think there is anything major, but it is a step in the right direction.

 

---

[mark82]

Thanks KH. My main concerns on the new stadium are location and capacity. Did they give any assurances on those at all? Any clue on where 4 sites were.

They may not like Coventry Council but we are Coventry City not Warwickshire, Rugby, Solihull or any other.

 

[duffer]

Thanks KH - your attendance or not at Sixfields shouldn't influence what people think about what you've got to say. We've all got to make our own choices.

With regard to JS and TF, personally I don't trust them and I think there's stuff they've said there that could be challenged. Either way though, I appreciate your reporting of the meeting.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

That’s about it. I don’t think there is anything major, but it is a step in the right direction.

Yeah unfortunately it doesn't offer any substance, beyond advice from the Rotherham chairman to have more than one site.

Interesting, however, that they have gone as far as speaking to the Rotherham chairman, and acting on his advice. So they should be "desperate to get to a position where they can give the fans something concrete"! As soon as they do that, they'll start to turn public opinion towards them, help (some) buy into a reality of a new ground. As it stands, how is that possible?!?

 

[Cheshire Sky Blue]

Well done KingH. A good update and appreciated by most of us I would imagine. Its strange and I am fighting the fact, but I just do not believe her. I am trying, but I just can not. In my eyes, both she and Fisher are just so discredited that I am afraid I am coming to the conclusion that I must have moved on. I will never go to Northampton, I believe that the RICOH is there, in Coventry and irrespective of its design its our home and we should make it such.

 

[Steve.B50]

Many thanks for the report back.
It would be interesting to hear what the other supporters had to say and I agree she should meet some of those who do not go to Sixfields.
Personally I think your the ideal sort of person to regularly meet with JS as you sound like a genuine type of person.
Maybe you should ask to meet without TF being present next time, to see if she reacts differently?

Please keep us updated.

 

[Ccfc1979]

Communication has been and is awful! Ranson rarely spoke in the early days and the way they've dealt with everything since and Fisher's patronising and smarmy tones during the worst decision the club ever had to make mean they're 'vision' may as well be written on Joyless' fridge door.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Personally I think your the ideal sort of person to regularly meet with JS as you sound like a genuine type of person.

Yeah FWIW, and not knowing kingharvest beyond his posts here, but he does seem open to all positions, able to take on board all positions, and attempt to report what's said, and make clear where it's his slant so yes agreed, think he's a fine choice to meet such people.

 

[jas365]

Thanks for the update, just a couple of points I would raise:

1) The reason Shrewsburys ground took 12 months to build is because it's 4 sheds (also like Sixfields). Do we really want our new permanent home to be like this?

2) I'm sure JS would love to move back to the Ricoh on her terms, but her terms would include acquiring the stadium for next to nothing, never gonna happen........

 

[Nick]

Thanks for the write up.

It does sound promising, it makes me wonder why she chose to speak to people in the SCG rather than the Trust etc? Maybe there is a better range of opinions with the different people from the SCG.

They do need to buck their ideas up with PR.

Joy should make herself an account on here like Brody did...

 

[junglej13]

Did she mention anything about the playing side? Cov mad said that she had said we need 3 players and implied 1 deal was close (i think).

 

[kingharvest]

Nick - I don't think they were all members of the SCG.

Mark82 - no assurances on location. In terms of size they keep talking about this modular style ground and they mentioned the fact that you could start as low as you wanted. I'm sure Tim Fisher said in the past something around 18-20k might be a good place to start, as its very easy to build up. I wouldn't rule out a ground that is like shrewsbury's, in that we start with 4 seperate stands. I actually don't mind the shrewsbury ground, for a new ground it feels old. Plus if it was 20k it'd look different. might even get some tiers back and a west terrace!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I know it's slightly general, but did she mention why they'd agreed to fund the shortfall?

I don't mean in the immediate sense of Ricoh v Sixfields, I mean in terms of what rewards does she see from funding this immediate shortfall in CCFC for 5 years? What does that gain her and her company that makes that a preferable option to winding the club up?

 

[kingharvest]

Did she mention anything about the playing side? Cov mad said that she had said we need 3 players and implied 1 deal was close (i think).

I didn't ask about the playing side to be honest. I kind of feel like its a bit cheeky to ask about signings...maybe i should exploit them a bit more!

 

[kingharvest]

I know it's slightly general, but did she mention why they'd agreed to fund the shortfall?

I don't mean in the immediate sense of Ricoh v Sixfields, I mean in terms of what rewards does she see from funding this immediate shortfall in CCFC for 5 years? What does that gain her and her company that makes that a preferable option to winding the club up?

Its a good question, i wish i'd asked it! However the only reason anyone would continue to fund a loss making business is if the long term gain was still viable. She must believe that her investment can pay off, otherwise why cover the shortfall. That would be my reading of it, i'm sure better business brains than mine may be able to expand on that.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Its a good question, i wish i'd asked it! However the only reason anyone would continue to fund a loss making business is if the long term gain was still viable. She must believe that her investment can pay off, otherwise why cover the shortfall. That would be my reading of it, i'm sure better business brains than mine may be able to expand on that.

But this is the key question in a wider sense to me, if buying into a new ground etc.

I can accept there's a business logic to moving away from the Ricoh to break the monopoly of supply, get a better deal there... funding a shortfall makes sense there, it also makes sense in terms of that helps make the club more viable/saleable.

I struggle to see what gain a 5 year funding gap offers however. The above is a gamble that either works or it doesn't, and you wind the club up if it doesn't and say c'est la vie. Funding it for 5 years before then embraking on a new era is a very different thing however, and I struggle to see how that's better for ruthless business people than the immediate option of cut losses, wind club up, accept it's a gamble that's failed.

That's why I'd like to know the answer beyond the tired Ricoh v Sixfields stuff we get on here, and how the funding shortfall fits into a longer plan, if accepting what she says is true. If she can convince me of that she starts to convince me there may be truth in a new stadium plan.

 

[gspotgaz]

What does she look like...?

 

[skybluetony176]

What does she look like...?

and more importantly, would you

 

[skybluetony176]

being serious for a moment

did she mention anything about meeting Ann Lucas, given that they are probably the best 2 people to get anything resolved with regards to the Ricoh?

 

[Godiva]

But this is the key question in a wider sense to me, if buying into a new ground etc.

I can accept there's a business logic to moving away from the Ricoh to break the monopoly of supply, get a better deal there... funding a shortfall makes sense there, it also makes sense in terms of that helps make the club more viable/saleable.

I struggle to see what gain a 5 year funding gap offers however. The above is a gamble that either works or it doesn't, and you wind the club up if it doesn't and say c'est la vie. Funding it for 5 years before then embraking on a new era is a very different thing however, and I struggle to see how that's better for ruthless business people than the immediate option of cut losses, wind club up, accept it's a gamble that's failed.

That's why I'd like to know the answer beyond the tired Ricoh v Sixfields stuff we get on here, and how the funding shortfall fits into a longer plan, if accepting what she says is true. If she can convince me of that she starts to convince me there may be truth in a new stadium plan.

Think of sisu as a fund management company. It's not their own money they invest, so as long as they can find investors money to spend all is good.
Sisu make their money on the basis of the asset portefolio they manage. The bigger that asset pool is the more they get paid. So building a new stadium for other peoples money increses the asset pool and sisu's pay check.

Moving back to the ricoh without owning ACL or the freehold doesn't increase the asset value and sisu's paycheck.

 

[ecky]

sorry dont trust a word they say.........

 

[RegTheDonk]

Cheers for that KH, must have been difficult in the short time you were with her, so much has gone on it would be impossible to cover everything. Can't say I trust either of them, but we have to start somewhere otherwise we will never get anything resolved. SISU, ACL, CCC, the lot of them need to start afresh, so perhaps we ought to do the same here.

If you get to see her again, the two things I would ask would be:

1) While they obviously say they will build the new ground, would they consider a short term lease at the Ricoh while that is being built? time to put personal feelings aside and draw a line under whats gone on with ACL - even if the council won't sell, money wise they would make a lot more on the gate than in Northampton and it would show the fans that they are also putting them first. Not doing this obviously gives the impression of distressing ACL.

2) Also, she hinted before that they would sell up if the right offer came along. Is this a possibility? What would they accept? Doubt they would tell us a figure, but could they not have dialogue with some of the other parties who bid for Limited, or indicated they would have bid if the administrator had got his act together?

Thanks for letting us know what went on :claping hands:

 

[hill83]

sorry dont trust a word they say.........

Cheers for that

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Think of sisu as a fund management company. It's not their own money they invest, so as long as they can find investors money to spend all is good.
Sisu make their money on the basis of the asset portefolio they manage. The bigger that asset pool is the more they get paid. So building a new stadium for other peoples money increses the asset pool and sisu's pay check.

Moving back to the ricoh without owning ACL or the freehold doesn't increase the asset value and sisu's paycheck.

OK, I'm out my comfort zone, but I can see the logic. Just.

In which case why mortgage Ryton in the past to cover funding shortfalls as surely Ryton is one of those assets in the portfolio, and why wasn't this stadium as asset a priority earlier?

And also if this is what they'd do (I can see why it might be rational) why does it look like they've been caught on the hop with plans for a new stadium, and instead of being desperate for something concrete to show fans, why nothing concrete to show fans?

 

[Godiva]

OK, I'm out my comfort zone, but I can see the logic. Just.

In which case why mortgage Ryton to cover funding shortfalls as surely Ryton is one of those assets in the portfolio, and why wasn't this stadium as asset a priority earlier?

And also if this is what they'd do (I can see why it might be rational) why does it look like they've been caught on the hop with plans for a new stadium, and instead of being desperate for something concrete to show fans, why nothing concrete to show fans?

Funding shortfalls is a cash flow issue, not actually an asset issue (I do know cash is an asset).
When getting new investors or more money from existing investors, they will have to present a business plan and show expected return of the investments. In sisu's case that will require something different to the existing ccfc business. That may be building a new stadium and show how that will generate a profit for new investors or make the current business case stronger for present investors. Or it can include a return to the ricoh as owner of either the freehold or ACL. In both cases the asset base will increase ... and so will sisu's paycheck.

 

[shmmeee]

That's the problem, if te new stadium isn't just a ploy why no plans earlier? And if it was and now it isn't why not just bite the bullet and rent the Ricoh in the short term. At worst it would give ACL 3-5 years to find an alternate use so surely better for both sides?

I'd also want to see the assumptions they're making about the future given they've got it so massively wrong in the past. Open dialogue with the fans prevents all of this. Not (with all due respect) cherry picking posters and journalists who you can a) give a tailored response that pleases that person and b) review their opinions before the meeting.

When in an open forum successive Sisu boards, including the current one, have come across amateurish and awkward. Because they were amateurish and awkward.

We are their biggest asset by far. We know the customer inside out, we know how decisions will play in the media and ultimately as much as the shouts idiots dominate some outlets the majority as a whole are sensible about the long term future of the club.

Still, one person is better than no people and one journalist is better than no journalists. So for that I applaud her.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

That may be building a new stadium and show how that will generate a profit for new investors or make the current business case stronger for present investors.

But we're back to the why fund losses for five years, and build that ground though. Personally I'd have thought wind the club up as a bad job and, if determined to own a football club, buy one that already owns its ground would have been the way forward (and cheaper!)

 

[Deleted member 5849]

That's the problem, if te new stadium isn't just a ploy why no plans earlier? And if it was and now it isn't why not just bite the bullet and rent the Ricoh in the short term. At worst it would give ACL 3-5 years to find an alternate use so surely better for both sides?

Well again we're back to the lack of opportunity for them to do so. (or not, yes yes yes I know, we've been there done that however so... moving on)

I dunno, maybe the opportunity is now there for them to do so however, maybe there is a glimmer of light and maybe ACL's response to the trust, and these little snifflings from the club are a prelude to at least seeing if that is possible now.

I'd agree I can't see why it'd hurt any side really... although playing devil's advocate, if you were ACL and needed to sell the Ricoh as multi use, maybe you wouldn't want it tied to the football club in any form without a longer secutiy of tenure, as it limits peoples' perceptions of it to a football stadium, so limits their opportunities to find other uses.

 

[Godiva]

But we're back to the why fund losses for five years, and build that ground though. Personally I'd have thought wind the club up as a bad job and, if determined to own a football club, buy one that already owns its ground would have been the way forward (and cheaper!)

I don't think that losses are that great - certainly not in the £6m pa bracket when they took over and during Ranson/Elliott/Hoffmans regime. And that shorfall would be part of the total investment scheme presented to new or current investors.
Going back to the ricoh as a tenant and be dependant on both promotion and gate figures is much more financial unpredictable and even reliant to an extent on the current failed business case. It's not really an option for the club, and it will not guarantee sisu a bigger provision.

 

[Godiva]

That's the problem, if te new stadium isn't just a ploy why no plans earlier? And if it was and now it isn't why not just bite the bullet and rent the Ricoh in the short term. At worst it would give ACL 3-5 years to find an alternate use so surely better for both sides?

Didn't OSB say that FL required any lease to be at least 10 year. (Except emergency cases, which going back to ricoh wouldn't be)?

 

[italiahorse]

To be honest they should have draft stadium plans already for discussion. A vision for the fans ?

Are they waiting to get the land and then starting the design?

They should already at least know the capacity and have costings in place. The fact that none of these are mentioned leads me to take an educated guess that they are bullshitting us.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Didn't OSB say that FL required any lease to be at least 10 year. (Except emergency cases, which going back to ricoh wouldn't be)?

if the league are happy for us to be 3-5 years in Northampton, yet urge all sides to talk to get us back sooner, am sure they'd jump at a 3-5 year deal agreed in Coventry instead!

 

[ccfcway]

I stopped being interested in her bollocks after..... "we have taken advise from ROTHERHAM"

 

[AJB1983]

So none of the statements they've put out themselves have ever twisted things to make acl or the council look bad?
Pots and kettles.
Don't trust her.
The new stadium won't happen because they want the Ricoh but can't get it.
Otherwise building a new shed stadium is counterproductive and will merely saddle CCFC with more millions of debt for decades to come

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I stopped being interested in her bollocks after..... "we have taken advise from ROTHERHAM"

Given Rotherham moved out after a dispute with their landlords, and moved back relatively quickly to a new ground, I'd say they're the ideal club to take advice from!

It's a lot more reassuring they take advice from them, than Sam Hammam and Pete Winkelman!