Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
If someone is foolish enough to give them the money, and they are foolish enough to build it, then they will own it all. It will lose them, or their investors a fortune, but they will own it.
wont they own the lot when they build the stadium ?
If someone is foolish enough to give them the money, and they are foolish enough to build it, then they will own it all. It will lose them, or their investors a fortune, but they will own it.
I want our club back in Coventry, it doesn't have to be the Ricoh, and with Sisu in charge it probably won't be - hence the need for the new stadium.Everyone but RFC on here wants our club back at the Ricoh.
The weasel, he knows full well that the club boycotting the stadium is impacting the valuation of ACL - one year on and he's trying to make out that the stadium and ACL isn't worth a bean.
Did anyone ever confirm that the barely-literate letter posted up here was indeed from his hand? If so, the combination of his disingenuous Machiavellian comments and poor education paint a picture of a pretty poor example of a human being IMO.
I want our club back in Coventry, it doesn't have to be the Ricoh, and with Sisu in charge it probably won't be - hence the need for the new stadium.
Be careful what you say. Come out with what you see as the truth and it is seen by some as SISU bashing.
Labo is on a big drive to get the fans on his side and to paint the Ricoh as valueless. Just as they tried to show the Higgs share as valueless in court. But the judge saw straight through it. He also noted that Deering had a selective memory and only knew facts that might help SISU. Whenever there was a hard question to answer she knew nothing.
Everyone but RFC on here wants our club back at the Ricoh. Yet if you see the plan of attack from SISU failing you are seen as being anti CCFC. What a load of crap. If you see the plan of attack from SISU and what looks like could easily happen in the near future being of a detrimental effect to our club you are seen as being anti CCFC. This is also a load of crap.
Yes we need to unite our club and the arena that was built for our club. But we also need to be careful in what way it is done. What have SISU ever done to gain our trust? Don't everyone shout their truthful replies at the same timeWe all know that they are in it to make money. They are not in it for what is best for CCFC. They are not in it for what is best for us supporters. I think we can honestly and truthfully say this is a fact from what has gone on previously.
What we need to remember is that at the moment we have a stadium that can become our permanent home. It should be our home now. Who saw it coming that we would move away before it was announced? Yes our club does need to be united with the arena, but it needs to be done so it stays that way. Not held under a different name. Not wondering how much rent our club will have to find. Not wondering if our club would be liquidated once they get hold of the arena and surrounded land or even our club offloaded once they get it. Some say this won't happen. The problem is it might. If it could be shown that they could be united and our club is safe I will be behind it 100%. But until then I will be very cautious. Only a fool would jump into bed with SISU with their eyes closed.
not a fan of labo, he makes things worse usually.
but in this case he is spot on, it shows that council do not want to do a deal, it would not matter who the clubs owners were.
So are you saying that SISU have done their best to get this mess sorted out and CCC have done nothing?
not a fan of labo, he makes things worse usually.
but in this case he is spot on, it shows that council do not want to do a deal, it would not matter who the clubs owners were.
Interesting analogy.
Christie will probably be sold at a price set by an independent valuation ... tribunal will decide the fee.
course i am not.
but perfect example of how crazy you are to assume anyone who thinks council are to blame too must be a sisu lover.
Who called you a SISU lover?
I just asked you a question about the post you made. You were blaming CCC for the situation. You are also saying they will always be at fault. But there is evidence to show the opposite of what you said.
i said they should make the valuation public, the reason they are in no rush to is because they do not want to sell imo
before sisu took over there were always soundbytes coming from council about reluctance to sell.
Lmfao !!!
They had it all the time !!
Why haven't Sisu made this document public then ???
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
No. The crux of the matter is whether CCC acted unlawfully. That must be decided on the Information available at the time of the loan. SISU's commisioned valuation was at a later date and is invalid for that ( JR. ) purpose. It could therefore be released now. SISU own the valuation. This JR has prevented any negotiation with CCC. When it is over I hope you will hold SISU to account for the damage caused to CCFC and the sheer waste of time and money this senseless pursuit of a JR decision has cost.
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
It doesn't need to be made public for SISU to make a bid based on its contents. They have been saying they can't place a bid as they don't know the value yet they have their own report showing the value so why have they not submitted a bid? If their report says its only worth £1 then put in an official bid for £1. If and when the council reject that bid the onus is on the council to explain why they have rejected a bid made at market value.
This JR has prevented any negotiation with CCC.
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
There you go, Rob Stevens, working closely with SISU to bash the council & ACL, it doesn't sound to me like he is supporting the football club or acting in their best interests. Just trying to help SISU grab the Arena & surrounding land.
No it hasn't. It would be perfectly sensible to make dropping all or part of the JR part of the conditions for negotiating.
How do I know this? Because that is exactly what a third party has been trying to do. There have also been offers for talks from Sisu which have been turned down by the council.
For the freehold yes. Unencumbered. We know about it. Nothing else though.
You're wrong. More recently.
I don't think purposely misrepresenting my actions or views are particularly helpful but I will refer the learned gentleman to an answer I made a few minutes ago in another thread
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...han-we-realise?p=704108&viewfull=1#post704108
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?