He gave details in the last SCG meeting minutes. I don't see why you would be so against it. If tomorrow the trust, CCC, CT and anyone else involved said we're 100% behind a move to the Butts lets get on with it then in a relatively short space of time SISU would have to get the plans out in public and a planning application put in.What details?? If your second sentence above is right then there is no basis for the club's supposed sincerity in seriously planning to move to the BPA?
That lease needed to be ripped upYes. Sisu's most unforgivable sin was unilaterally and shamelessly tearing up the lease.
No, it needed to be renegotiated in good faith. SISU's high handed approach where they essentially declared the council owed them a free ground essentially caused all the bad feeling and antagonism that got us to where we are today.That lease needed to be ripped up
He gave details in the last SCG meeting minutes. I don't see why you would be so against it. If tomorrow the trust, CCC, CT and anyone else involved said we're 100% behind a move to the Butts lets get on with it then in a relatively short space of time SISU would have to get the plans out in public and a planning application put in.
Fail to do that and it would be impossible for them to claim to anyone that they had any intention of moving to a new ground.
So you have no moral qualms about CCFC signing up to a 50 year deal in exchange for stadium ownership and completion of the project
No, it needed to be renegotiated in good faith. SISU's high handed approach where they essentially declared the council owed them a free ground essentially caused all the bad feeling and antagonism that got us to where we are today.
So you have no moral qualms about CCFC signing up to a 50 year deal in exchange for stadium ownership and completion of the project, then reneging on their half of the deal when it suited them, THEN demanding the stadium as of right? You're a nasty piece of work if you can sympathise with that.
Stop posting on the thread about it thenIf only, I just so mistrust Tim & SISU that I don't find it worthwhile dreaming about it. Realistically I think Cov will develop something smaller, around 5K with residential, hotel & retail units to assist their commercial activities and SISU will not be involved. What is actually happening won't become clear till a planning application is made.
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?Because I don't want us to leave the Ricoh, I don't want us to move to the Butts!!!!!!
Didn't mutton say the rent was non negotiable?
Nasty piece of work? Really? Christ you are a bit sensitive.
Who has demanded a stadium for free?
I don't see the attachment to the ricoh.
I just want us to focus solely on the far more obvious option which is to find a sustainable future at the Ricoh without the massive cost of building a new ground.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?
1 - everyone says that during a negotiation. It's called taking a position. There was no doubt that an agreement could have been made amicably for a revised rent deal. Remember, the council offered a variable level of rent depending on which league we played in, ut our pre-SISU directors said no on the arrogant assumption that we'd go up, not down, so the fixed rent would be to our long term advantage. Plus CCFC screwed up its own business model which ensured two relegations, and the status at the Ricoh was only ever one contributory factor to this. As far as the council were concerned, the signed a deal , and a deal is a deal. Then CCFC screwed their business up and expected automatic sympathy and support from a council with no obligation to provide it (and which was suddenly hit by the need to cut spending generally).
2 - I find it abosletely disgusting at anyone with at least half a brain could defend what can only be described as the abuse of the admin process, in what could be written up as the textbook of "how to screw over your landlord for your own shark-like purposes". Some of the scumbags on Rogue Traders would be ashamed by SISU's blatant phoenixing scam. You can't justify that in your own heart just because CCFC benefitted in the end. You have to see the bigger picture.
3 - SISU said the stadium was worthless and offered to take it over from Higgs for a charitable donation.
4 - The Ricoh is our home and getting the club to stay there will represent final victory over SISU.
Interesting, so on that basis you must believe ACL shouldn't have started the process of putting the club into administration based on a comment from Fisher. Equally CCC should never have assumed SISU didn't want to purchase the Ricoh based on Fishers comments.everyone says that during a negotiation. It's called taking a position.
Brilliant, so Wasps say £2m a year or you're out and we just agree.I just want us to focus solely on the far more obvious option which is to find a sustainable future at the Ricoh without the massive cost of building a new ground.
Yes, it's victory over sisu.Brilliant, so Wasps say £2m a year or you're out and we just agree.
It's been stated CCFC will not be funding the potential development at the Butts CDHe gave details in the last SCG meeting minutes. I don't see why you would be so against it. If tomorrow the trust, CCC, CT and anyone else involved said we're 100% behind a move to the Butts lets get on with it then in a relatively short space of time SISU would have to get the plans out in public and a planning application put in.
Fail to do that and it would be impossible for them to claim to anyone that they had any intention of moving to a new ground.
No, SISU started the process by putting the club into admin, to control the admin process and slip out of what they were contractually and legally obliged to pay. CCC brought a windup petition to the courts because they wanted to get paid what they were contractually due to be paid. Seems fair enough to me. SISU had no right to stop paying the rent.Interesting, so on that basis you must believe ACL shouldn't have started the process of putting the club into administration based on a comment from Fisher. Equally CCC should never have assumed SISU didn't want to purchase the Ricoh based on Fishers comments.
I said a sustainable future which clearly wouldn't be at £2m.Brilliant, so Wasps say £2m a year or you're out and we just agree.
Didn't acl agree to a rent holiday?No, SISU started the process by putting the club into admin, to control the admin process and slip out of what they were contractually and legally obliged to pay. CCC brought a windup petition to the courts because they wanted to get paid what they were contractually due to be paid. Seems fair enough to me. SISU had no right to stop paying the rent.
I do not see how SISU building a new stadium at BPA could be the cause of SISU fucking off. Not saying you're wrong mate don't see the logic to that one!
Yes. Sisu's most unforgivable sin was unilaterally and shamelessly tearing up the lease.
Interesting, so on that basis you must believe ACL shouldn't have started the process of putting the club into administration based on a comment from Fisher. Equally CCC should never have assumed SISU didn't want to purchase the Ricoh based on Fishers comments.
Exactly who are you supposed to believe? No one would seem to be the answer.
Why is the ricoh our home? Getting the club to stay there doesn't mean victory over sisu, that's weird.
Was the admin process illegal?
Who turned down the sliding rent?
Wasn't the charitable donation for the higgs share they said was worthless about the same as what wasps paid?
Are you on here defending the council then? The ones that invest in arms and bully and victimise charities?
Very weird you feel so strongly about the thought of the council getting screwed over but cry out to stay at the ricoh because you think it screws sisu over.
Something tangible to sell. What would an investor buy now?
Brilliant, so Wasps say £2m a year or you're out and we just agree.
That's assuming we'll own it. If it's still owned by CRFC for instance we can't sell it.
When is a valid lease not a valid lease? When you screw up your business so badly you can't afford to uphold your half of the deal any more?I would have thought the most unforgiveable sin was not buying the ground, not ripping up the shitty lease.
1 - Why is the Ricoh our home? We play our home games there and have done since 2005 except when your mates took us to Northampton to try to bankrupt ACL.
2 - no but it was highly unethical. IMO the kind of practices used by SISU should be illegal. They walked scott free out a 50 year deal. As if it was in some way not a valid deal. That's unacceptable
3 - CCFC directors did
4 - we know Wasps made a superior offer to that of SISU's, whose offer came with added conditions, so CCC in their rights to accept the Wasps deal
5 - the council as far as I an see haven't done anything wrong in relation to the Ricoh saga. You need to get over it and accept this.
6 - your final statement is a correct summary of my views. SISU deserve exactly what is coming to them. 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. Absolutely loved seeing these arseholes getting the results that their tactics deserve. Fuck off SISU.
I live in hope.
When is a valid lease? When you screw up your business so badly you can't afford to uphold your half of the deal any more?
The long term lease would give security of tenure which is a huge asset. Much more so than the extra debt created by building a new stadium when we have a 32k ground sitting right there begging to be used. If it costs 20m to build the new ground, how many years of rent to Wasps would it take for the newbuild to be a better plan?That's assuming we'll own it. If it's still owned by CRFC for instance we can't sell it.
Sorry do you agree or not that the worst sin was not buying the ground, or are you more genuinely upset that we tore up the lease?
Both but the lease was the bigger deal for me actually.Sorry do you agree or not that the worst sin was not buying the ground, or are you more genuinely upset that we tore up the lease?
Both but the lease was the bigger deal for me actually.
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?