Kcic front bid to buy club (32 Viewers)

Grendel said:

At last a voice of reason

Click to expand...

Have you read it ?

italiahorse said:

Have you read it ?

Click to expand...

Yes have you?

skybluetony176 said:

So what do you suggest we do to make it happen. I'm all ears.

Click to expand...

Drop the meaningless 5k attendance clause

skybluetony176 said:

Sounds like you gave up on the club a long time ago as you don't ask questions of the people damaging it despite questions being over a year old but expect the people making attempts to fix it give you a full power point presentation at a mmoments notice.

Have you thought of ways Michael can enhance his offer or are you still more interested in derailing any effort to get the club home?

Click to expand...

You really are a silly woman aren't you. skybluetoni.

letsallsingtogether said:

So everyone wants to be back at the Ricoh.
Wrong there are some on here that would hate it
You know who you are and I say bollox to the lot of you. I have done as much as I care too hope you enjoy the shit that will be left. So enjoy the shitfield experience while it lasts you have fucked the club forever.
RIP CCFC

Click to expand...

here comes the woe is me crew. Talking complete bollocks with his equally pathetic mate Italia backing him up. Get a fucking grip.

olderskyblue said:

Isn't this a potential step forward if SISU would actually meet to discuss it, and something people like NW have been advocating for ages?

Click to expand...

I'd rather it were done by either club or stadium management company... plus I also advocated full disclosure of offer, without comment... rather than a 'free rent' tagline So... it would be nice to know what this offer actually is. The 'offer' for the club does little to suggest it's anything other than a media stunt.

My problem here is if it ends up a media stunt with too many caveats to be a 'real' offer. My suspicions are also raised with its similarity to Hoffman's 'offer' that those equally responsible for the demise of our club are meddling in the background. Such a scenario doesn't bode well for the clean break that would be the ideal solution. It's also highly unlikely SISU and that pair would work with one another full-stop! I could see (just!) a scenario where Higgs, CCC, SISU etc. could patch up their differences; struggle more with Elliott and Hoffman tbh! If, however, they're nothing to do with this then great, a lot more hope for some kind of resolution, fantastic!

Given various timings and various media messages of the past, I'd like to be reassured myself. Wanting to be reassured does not a SISU lover make. The timing is also... unfortunate. Just before a JR result, not too long until a march celebrating fan unity. I can't get away from the nagging doubt this is an attempt to capture some headlines ahead of a JR result, and pre-emptively skew reaction to that... we shall see. That could just be my own cynicism shining through, but with CCFC, cynicism as default tends to be the most likely result more often than not. I'm also wondering if KCiC meet, say, Fisher and Seppala to discuss an offer in more detail, the conversation ends up going along the lines of 'do you agree SISU are no good for the club?' In other words, I'd suggest it's more likely SISU would be willing to sit down with ACL/CCC then they would KCiC!

So yes, I would like to know what this deal actually is. I'd also like to know the backers. And I'd also like to know 'why now?' Moreover, what's on offer after this deal. What I don't want is us cursed to repeat the circles. So... I'd like to know if it's a prelude to talks around a return to the Ricoh, what the scope of those talks are... or is it just a three year dealto mirror Northampton. Both those are reasonable, a three year deal then automatically tying into a longer one, not... Asking those questions doesn't make me opposed to the principle... much as asking SISU for reassurance about some of their practices doesn't automatically make the Trust anti-SISU by definition. I was always taught to ask questions if I didn't understand something or if I wanted to be reassured... once things were in the media, I was *definitely* taught to ask questions before taking at face value

Now... there are some on this site who maybe don't help, because they leap on the neutral question and try and skew it towards their own polemic (we'll call them the ACL plants, as the way they work doesn't do anything other than devalue a neutral question or two... by using them to be negative towards ACL, and thus discrediting the need for an actual answer!) but that doesn't automatically mean nothing is to be questioned. On the contrary, *everything* is to be questioned. Wouldn't it be frustrating if, having seen flickers of hope, we were back here this time next year because something hadn't been considered and ridden roughshod over! You, *you* may have the answer! You may be one of those businessmen! For that matter, you may be Elliott and/or Hoffman in which case hi

So... rather than see questions as a negative, isn't it better to consider them more as 'here's an idea we can run with, let's flesh it out a bit to see if it's a goer'? You may not give a damn about the detail, but what if there's something missing that could have easily been added without consequence that woul be *more* likely to get talks started?

And they're all easily answerable, and other manglings of the English Language.

Reassure me and I'll get behind it, undoubtedly. Just dismiss my doubts as those of someone who wants the club in Northampton and that loses someone automatically who's disposed to get behind something.

And yes, have ACL actually been consulted too? If not, what if SISU turned round and said alright, what happens then!

Afraid the position remains the same as it was this morning. I keep saying no offence to anyone, but opinions and double-guessing counts for absolutely nought. All that matters is sisu's response. If no news is good news, then hopefully sisu are actively considering the offer and will respond asap and positively.

Agreed, Norman.

Why on earth can't we know who the backers are at the very least? If it's who I think it is then this deal can fuck right off, if it's someone new, hmm, maybe we can talk.

limoncello said:

Agreed, Norman.

Why on earth can't we know who the backers are at the very least? If it's who I think it is then this deal can fuck right off, if it's someone new, hmm, maybe we can talk.

Click to expand...

Charles Bronson, Gary Glitter and the estate of Ted Bundy.

covmark said:

here comes the woe is me crew. Talking complete bollocks with his equally pathetic mate Italia backing him up. Get a fucking grip.

Click to expand...

You'll need to explain what's wrong with our thoughts. Saying its bollocks without saying why seems a little ignorant to me.
Can you put together a few sentences ?

italiahorse said:

You'll need to explain what's wrong with our thoughts. Saying its bollocks without saying why seems a little ignorant to me.
Can you put together a few sentences ?

Click to expand...

You have never made one constructive post on here. Most of us think you are an idiot. Carry on though - it is amusing for us in these difficult times.

Deleted member 5849 said:

Charles Bronson, Gary Glitter and the estate of Ted Bundy.

Click to expand...

If it was a crowdfunded Bundy, photobombed by a flashmob descending on a hipster coffee house, I'd deffo be in. As would Michael. SOCIAL MEDIA!!!

limoncello said:

Agreed, Norman.

Why on earth can't we know who the backers are at the very least? If it's who I think it is then this deal can fuck right off, if it's someone new, hmm, maybe we can talk.

Click to expand...

Can we see who sisu backers are? not a chance

So pleasle tell me why they should say who

Grendel said:

You have never made one constructive post on here. Most of us think you are an idiot. Carry on though - it is amusing for us in these difficult times.

Click to expand...

Most of us being you and ?
Don't you answer it let's see who else backs your silly statement.
I've just made a constructive post and you can't answer it.
Who's the idiot here?

cloughie said:

Can we see who sisu backers are? not a chance

So pleasle tell me why they should say who

Click to expand...

Maybe because we don't want a repeat of the Sisu scenario?

italiahorse said:

You'll need to explain what's wrong with our thoughts. Saying its bollocks without saying why seems a little ignorant to me.
Can you put together a few sentences ?

Click to expand...

a) Everyone wants the club back at the Ricoh.

b) The people who go to sixfields are not to blame for our situation.

There you go, btw have you set another date for the cessation of your support?

covmark said:

a) Everyone wants the club back at the Ricoh.

b) The people who go to sixfields are not to blame for our situation.

There you go, btw have you set another date for the cessation of your support?

Click to expand...

Attendance or support ?
I will always support. Attendance at away matches is not planned next for season at the moment unless we are back at the Ricoh.
Might go to the Arsenal match

italiahorse said:

Attendance or support ?
I will always support. Attendance at away matches is not planned next for season at the moment unless we are back at the Ricoh.
Might go to the Arsenal match

Click to expand...

points a and b, you agree or disagree? My last comment was more of a throw away attempt at mild humour.

covmark said:

points a and b, you agree or disagree? My last comment was more of a throw away attempt at mild humour.

Click to expand...

A. Yes ... Even rfc
B. No ... But IMHO they are rubber stamping SISU play for the Ricoh.

Micheal states still no reply.

Micheal I know you are stating in every post our opinion matters nothing and I agree btw but by not hearing back from sisu there is a reason why? They are not interested. They think the offer is worthless. Sorry. I do applaud the offer though and more like this should be done for sure.

cloughie said:

Can we see who sisu backers are? not a chance

So pleasle tell me why they should say who

Click to expand...

To guarantee we don't have son of SISU.

covmark said:

here comes the woe is me crew. Talking complete bollocks with his equally pathetic mate Italia backing him up. Get a fucking grip.

Click to expand...

Another keyboard warrior youn spout your shit on here but nobody knows who you are and YOU can say somebody is talking bollocks you're having a laugh you c**t

Very interesting that there are no Sisu supporters on here !!!
But this positive offer to get us back to the Ricoh which you would think every fan would be behind. Has got the usual suspects & sixfielders knickers in a twist !

Deleted member 5849 said:

To guarantee we don't have son of SISU.

Click to expand...

May be a gut feeling but I don't think there has been a worse owner than SISU. ......... Ever

sky blue john said:

Very interesting that there are no Sisu supporters on here !!!
But this positive offer to get us back to the Ricoh which you would think every fan would be behind. Has got the usual suspects & sixfielders knickers in a twist !

Click to expand...

Virtually every fan is behind it... But you seem to take an issue with the fact people have sensibly asked for some clarification. It's you that has 'got their knickers in a twist'

As I said previously - if the deal is as good as it is made out to be, then clarifying a few points will be harmless and also easy to do.

There's no need for people to be defensive over something that is clear, concise and well planned is there???

MichaelCCFC said:

Afraid the position remains the same as it was this morning. I keep saying no offence to anyone, but opinions and double-guessing counts for absolutely nought. All that matters is sisu's response. If no news is good news, then hopefully sisu are actively considering the offer and will respond asap and positively.

Click to expand...

Michael

I was willing to assume that the terms of the deal were indeed favourable to the club. The headline terms sound great but as Nick pointed out to me, without the conditions for when crowds exceed 5k we actually have no idea if it is a good deal or not.

Your repeated refusal to disclose those terms now makes me very suspicious that this is indeed just a publicity stunt designed to embarrass SISU. If your ambition is to actually achieve something then concealing the details and playing Machiavellian games is not the way to go about it.

I once got a banning threat on here for swearing "because kids might be reading it"

mrtrench said:

Michael

I was willing to assume that the terms of the deal were indeed favourable to the club. The headline terms sound great but as Nick pointed out to me, without the conditions for when crowds exceed 5k we actually have no idea if it is a good deal or not.

Your repeated refusal to disclose those terms now makes me very suspicious that this is indeed just a publicity stunt designed to embarrass SISU. If your ambition is to actually achieve something then concealing the details and playing Machiavellian games is not the way to go about it.

Click to expand...

Exactly - I have a feeling the 5,000 figure is there just because its twice the average at Sixfields to make a headline.

It would be good to hear if ACL have even agreed a deal at all.

AndreasB said:

I once got a banning threat on here for swearing "because kids might be reading it"

Click to expand...

Kids are now posting on here - on an ever increasing basis.

Grendel said:

You said it was a no brainer - say its £1.3 million a year - might fill your councils greedy belly but not good deal.

Click to expand...

Why say £1.3mM Why not say £1.3B? If you're going to blow smoke up everyones arse you may as well make it as spectacular.

At the very least it will be based on the last offer through the FL which I'm sure even you have the brains to realise.

You showed your true colours with your last line "fill the councils greedy belly". You don't want the club back so long as the council have an involvement. Aside from the fact that the council don't take a dividend from ACL same as the Higgs so it won't be filling anyone's belly, every penny gets reinvested back into the project. But you know this also.

So now you've exposed yourself as a non ccfc fan, why are you trolling this site? What is your purpose? It's not for ccfc.

My thoughts are that as usual this thread has waivered away from it's intent with much name calling and arguing. For what it's worth I think that SISU should respond having FULLY EXPLORED the offer in detail and then explain why, or why not, the offer is worthy of further negotiation. Not one person on here is fully qualified to either back the offer or dismiss it.

Grendel said:

Kids are now posting on here - on an ever increasing basis.

Click to expand...

skybluetony176 said:

Why say £1.3mM Why not say £1.3B? If you're going to blow smoke up everyones arse you may as well make it as spectacular.

At the very least it will be based on the last offer through the FL which I'm sure even you have the brains to realise.

You showed your true colours with your last line "fill the councils greedy belly". You don't want the club back so long as the council have an involvement. Aside from the fact that the council don't take a dividend from ACL same as the Higgs so it won't be filling anyone's belly, every penny gets reinvested back into the project. But you know this also.

So now you've exposed yourself as a non ccfc fan, why are you trolling this site? What is your purpose? It's not for ccfc.

Click to expand...

Case in point.

MichaelCCFC said:

Afraid the position remains the same as it was this morning. I keep saying no offence to anyone, but opinions and double-guessing counts for absolutely nought. All that matters is sisu's response. If no news is good news, then hopefully sisu are actively considering the offer and will respond asap and positively.

Click to expand...

Some very simple clarification would stop all this nonsense.

A (totally correct) constant criticism of the clubs owners is lack of clarity / point scoring / manipulation with their public statements and the fact that this treats fans with little respect. This is starting to feel the same.

We have had more than enough false hope raised throughout this debacle. If this is genuine and game changing then show us why and force SISU to explain exactly why they will not accept in context.

Grendel said:

Case in point.

Click to expand...

The troll can't even dispute that the council don't take profit from the ricoh so the troll resorts to more trolling.

Prove me wrong. Back up your claim that it will mean that the council will fill their greedy belly and then explain why the club shouldn't return while the council are involved in the Ricoh.

Before completely writing off the offer from Michael to Sisu I would wait until Sisu respond to it.

I am not sure what Sisu will see in this offer personally.

But lets hope that for whatever reason they accept the deal and go back to the Ricoh, I think it might be in their minds as we have had many inconsistent statements from personel at the Club abnd also considering the JR.