Nick
Administrator
Very strange.
So a lease was worse than us not buying it at the start and Wasps taking over was one of the best things to happen since you had supported the club?
Are you just on a wind up?
Both but the lease was the bigger deal for me actually.
Don't get me wrong. Not saying it is in any way likely just that the longer everyone cries BS and doesn't get behind it the longer SISU can use it to stall things. If everyone got behind it then the details you mention like how it would be paid for and what our status would be could be pressed for very quickly.It's been stated CCFC will not be funding the potential development at the Butts CD
No they didn't "The Board of Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) announces that it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against Coventry City Football Club (CCFC)."No, SISU started the process by putting the club into admin,
But you're saying we should only go after the Ricoh and discard all other options. In that scenario Wasps can charge us whatever they like. What happens if all our eggs are in the Ricoh basket and they say we won't accept less than £1m a year?I said a sustainable future which clearly wouldn't be at £2m.
Not disputing that. Just making the point that you can't disregard all comments by ACL / CCC / Higgs as a negotiation tactic and then not do the same with statements from the other side.It wasn't just Fishers comments though. The comments came from the top dog of SISU herself. Exactly who are you supposed to believe?
This has to be a joke.I cracked a bottle of champagne when the JR 1 verdiect came in during late May 2014, then put my card behind the bar down the pub when the Wasps deal came in. Genuinely the best things that have happened in the years I've been supporting the City.
How is it ridiculous. Oucho is saying that we should ignore any other potential options in our future and stay at the Ricoh. In that scenario we have to accept any offer Wasps make. If they are short every year on their bond payments do you not think there is a chance the rent and / or costs get bumped up so we make up the shortfall for them?Why do people (like you) make ridiculous statements like that?
Said it already but that's a rod that they've made for their own back. "They" have said so much of which little has never happened or been proven to be complete BS (how many rounds of FOI's went in that proved without doubt that what they were saying was happening behind the scene's wasn't? I've lost count.) regardless of how much and how often it's been repeated. Can't blame anyone else for that but "they".
Not disputing that. Just making the point that you can't disregard all comments by ACL / CCC / Higgs as a negotiation tactic and then not do the same with statements from the other side.
I noticed in the minutes tha TF never once mentioned the second site outside the city that he had identified if the Butts deal fell through. Maybe he forgot it was there. Or maybe it never existed in the first place.
The massing exercises and financial modelling shows it works and we have two potential institutional investors interested in the development. This scheme would be good for Coventry City as a club, Coventry as a City and the community – providing inward investment.
I noticed in the minutes tha TF never once mentioned the second site outside the city that he had identified if the Butts deal fell through. Maybe he forgot it was there. Or maybe it never existed in the first place.
It never existed. I do agree with one point oucho makes a long term rent with best possible deal would actually be an asset to the club and secures let's say a 20-25 year deal a real future and we can stop messing around with where we are playing every year. We can concentrate on football perhaps then.
New owners or current owners we can't keep renting off wasps for 2 years every 2 years for the rest of time.
Is that an asset that would make somebody want to jump at buying CCFC?
Would think in that aspect it would be better for 2 years, then if somebody new comes in they can either go to Wasps and negotiate their own deal or look at new stadium options rather than being stuck for 20 years.
Yes I get that Nick. It was just my opinion. Not factual but in my opinion 20 years is not that long but secures the first team fixtures and club. Football can then be talked about and progress on the pitch rather than Westminster debates and where are we playing next year? It's embarrassing and depressing. Ricoh is already built it has our names on the seats (for now) biggest stadium in league 1. Lots of positives you have to admit?
Why would the 20 years put off new owners? If new owners want to build their own stadium it won't be built and ready in 4 years probably so why not just put a clause in a 25 year deal with wasps that you can break within 3 years.
That certainly doesn't gel with the Initial soundbites.Badgers.
One thing I didn't particular like was the:
He didn't say good for Cov Rugby, might be nitpicking over something not likely to happen but if it did I'd want it to be good for them too and help them grow and progress.
No they didn't "The Board of Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) announces that it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against Coventry City Football Club (CCFC)."
But you're saying we should only go after the Ricoh and discard all other options. In that scenario Wasps can charge us whatever they like. What happens if all our eggs are in the Ricoh basket and they say we won't accept less than £1m a year?
Not disputing that. Just making the point that you can't disregard all comments by ACL / CCC / Higgs as a negotiation tactic and then not do the same with statements from the other side.
This has to be a joke.
How is it ridiculous. Oucho is saying that we should ignore any other potential options in our future and stay at the Ricoh. In that scenario we have to accept any offer Wasps make. If they are short every year on their bond payments do you not think there is a chance the rent and / or costs get bumped up so we make up the shortfall for them?
Care to answer the question of whether it's ok to wriggle out of a deal you've signef up to just because it doesn't suit you any more? It was disgusting shameful behaviour. Made me ashamefmd to be a CCFC fan.Very strange.
So a lease was worse than us not buying it at the start and Wasps taking over was one of the best things to happen since you had supported the club?
Are you just on a wind up?
Dave you seem like a nice and smart bloke unlike many of those on here but i do want to take you doen the pub and explain it all to you. SBT isn't the best forum for that.No they didn't "The Board of Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) announces that it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against Coventry City Football Club (CCFC)."
But you're saying we should only go after the Ricoh and discard all other options. In that scenario Wasps can charge us whatever they like. What happens if all our eggs are in the Ricoh basket and they say we won't accept less than £1m a year?
Not disputing that. Just making the point that you can't disregard all comments by ACL / CCC / Higgs as a negotiation tactic and then not do the same with statements from the other side.
This has to be a joke.
How is it ridiculous. Oucho is saying that we should ignore any other potential options in our future and stay at the Ricoh. In that scenario we have to accept any offer Wasps make. If they are short every year on their bond payments do you not think there is a chance the rent and / or costs get bumped up so we make up the shortfall for them?
So what happens if the deal is unsustainable? Let me guess, they bought the club it's their fault.Care to answer the question of whether it's ok to wriggle out of a deal you've signef up to just because it doesn't suit you any more? It was disgusting shameful behaviour. Made me ashamefmd to be a CCFC fan.
Apparently not.Didn't acl agree to a rent holiday?
So what happens if the deal is unsustainable? Let me guess, they bought the club it's their fault.
Why didn't they just extend the lease for acl, that would mean acl is safer and they wouldn't be so dependant on the rent?
The lease needed to go, would be strange that it would be ok to be locked in for years because past owners agreed it no matter if it was silly.
Who would be so offended by the lease being broken and would be so happy about wasps moving here?
I realise this post was in response to Frankly but I think you are a little mistaken. I have experience in Town Planning and Chartered Surveying but not architecture. I have friends who are quantity surveyors and have no architecture experience, and I know a building surveyor who has no real architecture experience. It depends what type of Surveyor you are talking about. Some do, some don't, it isn't a given though.
Nope, you're a tool!
If new owners said that they could build so much on such a small plot that has access problems for a start the first thing that would come to mind would be that they had given Fisher a job.Ironically, if sisu left and this was the first statement made by a fans consortium, it would be championed as the way forward and us looking to give the club a future.
As it's from Tim, it's all just words
More like damned if they speak bullshit. And that is all we seem to get from them.Damned if they speak , damned if they dont?
No they didn't "The Board of Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) announces that it has made an application to the High Court in London to request that it make an administration order against Coventry City Football Club (CCFC)."
But you're saying we should only go after the Ricoh and discard all other options. In that scenario Wasps can charge us whatever they like. What happens if all our eggs are in the Ricoh basket and they say we won't accept less than £1m a year?
Not disputing that. Just making the point that you can't disregard all comments by ACL / CCC / Higgs as a negotiation tactic and then not do the same with statements from the other side.
This has to be a joke.
How is it ridiculous. Oucho is saying that we should ignore any other potential options in our future and stay at the Ricoh. In that scenario we have to accept any offer Wasps make. If they are short every year on their bond payments do you not think there is a chance the rent and / or costs get bumped up so we make up the shortfall for them?
Think we can all agree that the breaking of the Ricoh lease was a planned event with a known legal process and known outcome....... administration. Personally I think it was a clever plan and I haven't seen anything in it that was illegal, it was use of the legal process
However that process to break the lease did not start with ACL petitioning for administration, that was just a step in the planned series of events. The plan started much earlier I would suggest when ARVO lent Otium £2m and took a charge over the assets of CCFC ltd & CCFC H Ltd. So separating the assets from liabilities and ultimately leaving ARVO in control of any administration
That ACL applied to court on 3 steps of the plan for the full amount of rent due would indicate they had not agreed to a rental holiday. The fact that everyone was surprised including ACL that the only thing left in CCFC Ltd was the lease indicates who controlled the plan.
That's assuming we'll own it. If it's still owned by CRFC for instance we can't sell it.
It saddens me that there are grown adults, intelligent-sounded people like yourself who are not morally outraged by SISU's forcible breaking of the lease through Phoenixing tactics, and who wouldn't celebrate when they were foiled in their objectives by the council whipping the rug from under them by selling to Wasps. It was so richly deserved, it was delicious.Very strange.
So a lease was worse than us not buying it at the start and Wasps taking over was one of the best things to happen since you had supported the club?
Are you just on a wind up?
People have considered it already from the few crumbs that Sisu have thrown down. There a few fat pigeons on here.So potentially there could be a way forward for the club where it can thrive in the future by leaving the Ricoh but you wouldn't even want to consider that?
It saddens me that there are grown adults, intelligent-sounded people like yourself who are not morally outraged by SISU's forcible breaking of the lease through Phoenixing tactics, and who wouldn't celebrate when they were foiled in their objectives by the council whipping the rug from under them by selling to Wasps. It was so richly deserved, it was delicious.
Happy with league one then ?As unlikely as it is, I'd love us to own/part own the BPA with CRFC. The Ricoh has been an unmitigated disaster from us from before day 1, with so many parties culpable. Staying at the Ricoh, we're forever intrinsically linked to a franchised rugby club.
I'd much rather we moved elsewhere within the City, even if it means downgrading in size (12k with the option to build up to 25k would be fine with me). We need to start again, no ties to Wasps, ACL, CCC etc and build again bottom up. Fresh start.
If that's at a re-developed smaller stadium in Coventry, I'm bang up for it.
I'd rather our landlords were someone with a connection to Coventry, rather than some parasite, franchised operation who have no affinity to their own fan base by moving permanently circa 100 miles. Wasps have absolutely no interest in us whatsoever other than using our presence at the Ricoh to increase their revenues in order to assist in paying off their bonds debt.
Happy with league one then ?
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?