Locals boosting the crowd. (6 Viewers)

[Astute]

Well Kev Monks - who it seems now attends - is apparently, Spionkop:



I hope Astute and all the others who were grilling Grendel yesterday for going do the same to Spionkop.

Grilling him for going? You do love twisting things.

I even said fair play for him going if it is what he wants to do. My question was more about the way he has said all season that he will not go to Northampton. Always made such a big thing about that he would never go. The proof that he doesn't back SISU was that he would never go.

So does it mean that he backs SISU now he has gone and says he will go again?

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Do you think we should move back as owners of ACL to boost our business and FFP calculation - even under sisu management?
Or would you rather we stay at sixfields and risk sisu build a new stadium with much less potential?

If they want those income streams, which they had nothing to do with the development of, why dint they just buy them; as would be the case with any normal transaction? The unified incomes, as you cite, would be a real advantage against other teams. So, simply pay for them.

That, and long leasehold at reasonable rents; and we're back, aren't we?

But why the move to Sixfields, the JR, the farce of a new stadium? All to get what could be purchased?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

But why the move to Sixfields, the JR, the farce of a new stadium? All to get what could be purchased?

The uncomfortable truth is all that has seen more movement on what's on offer, and at what price, than we had before.

Unfortunately now it's kicked off it looks more and more like a black & white issue of either total victory or total defeat... but there *was* no movement before.

John Mutton, in fact, made a point of saying he would sell nothing to SISU.

I don't think we will be able to help while there is a hedge fund involved... We won't consider selling our shares to Sisu.

 

[duffer]

It's not strange - the Ricoh WOULD be the answer, but then the argument would be on what conditions.

I say:
There should be NO rental deal. ACL should be owned by SBS&L.
We should pursue CCC and Higgs to agree to start a process to sell their shares to SBS&L.

Higgs tried that - SISU left them with tens of thousands of pounds of costs. That court case is coming up in April.

In the meantime, SISU's court case against the Council is coming up in June.

On that basis, I think SISU may have to earn a bit of trust with the respective parties (and vice versa) before there's any scope for selling ACL. I certainly wouldn't push the council towards doing a deal at the moment, unless it's in the taxpayers' best interests.

My opinion, the best place to start is surely back at the Ricoh under the deal offered to SISU via the FL. There is absolutely no reason for not taking that deal, other than the attempt to distress ACL. That's where the pressure needs to be, on SISU - and with crowds of less than 2,000 and a new stadium as far away as it was when all this started, that's really where the pressure is, I believe.

 

[italiahorse]

I might buy a fake Ajax shirt off ebay with Kluivert on the back and wear it to the next game, that will really mess with people's minds.

That's not how you spell pervert

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The uncomfortable truth is all that has seen more movement on what's on offer, and at what price, than we had before.

Unfortunately now it's kicked off it looks more and more like a black & white issue of either total victory or total defeat... but there *was* no movement before.

John Mutton, in fact, made a point of saying he would sell nothing to SISU.

They should have played the game more cleverly then. Buy the Higgs shares and explain clearly to the electorate of Coventry how unsustainable the football club would be without full access to ACL's revenues. Then allow the weight of public opinion to pressurise the councillors.

Councils aren't inherently popular, are they? Everyone loves the football club. Played right, it would have been a case of pushing against an open door.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

They should have played the game more cleverly then. Buy the Higgs shares and explain clearly to the electorate of Coventry how unsustainable the football club woukd be without full access to ACL's revenues. Then allow the weight of public opinion to pressurise the councillors.

Councils aren't inherently popular, are they? Everyone loves the football club. Played right, it woukd have been a case of pushing against an open door.

Can't buy the shares without the co-operation of the council, and Mutton's attitude suggests that co-operation would not be forthcoming!

When the person you have to deal with is saying how he was chanting SISU Out with the best of them, it doesn't exactly suggest anything other than he's spoiling for a fight rather than reconciliation.

Which he got.

I posted a version of this... elsewhere, it's kind of appropriate now, maybe.

There are many many reasons to dislike SISU, many many reasons to have sympathy for CCC's position (less so ACL, they're a business the same as anything else).

But when the head of the council is wilfully obstructive, then you start to wonder...

When those local people, utter failures of the past, and a Texan property developer are then wined and dined around the property portfolio, when a CVA is rejected for utterly baffling reasons (note that Haskell, a man not rooted in the local politics and vested interests of the others whatever his own personal motivations, made a point of praising Appleton's professionalism, and the legality of the process), then you start to wonder.

And it's hard to have sympathy for owners who came in on the hope of a quick buck and then scarpering. It's hard not to acknowledge they did, after all, sign up to a ridiculous rent deal and, in fact, considered it a low priority for much of their time here. It's hard not to have the sneaking doubt of their motivations not being for the club's benefit now... it's hard not to think that, in return, a hard edged investment fund battles ideologically against the regulation of local government.

There are many, many reasons to want SISU out.

The political maneuverings and oblique politicking of others, however, is shameful. To push the club to the brink of oblivion because of vested interest is shameful, whoever does it. When *all* parties with an interest, detached or otherwise, in the club join in that march to oblivion and try and hasten it they should all hang their heads.

 

[Godiva]

But why the move to Sixfields, the JR, the farce of a new stadium? All to get what could be purchased?

My opinion, the best place to start is surely back at the Ricoh under the deal offered to SISU via the FL. There is absolutely no reason for not taking that deal, other than the attempt to distress ACL. That's where the pressure needs to be, on SISU - and with crowds of less than 2,000 and a new stadium as far away as it was when all this started, that's really where the pressure is, I believe.

Sisu are not going back as tenants - not even short term.
By playing at sixfields ACL will not be distressed. But surely the value of the company is less than if played there - so the price would in logic sense be lower with us at sixfields.

Sisu have already supported the club once this season (just before the January window) and is probably now just waiting for the result of the JR.
They are doing exactly what they want and I don't see any effect of any applied pressure, be it sisu-out-campaign, NOPM or KCIC.

We don't know who ARVO are exactly - they could easily be sisu or part-sisu for all we know. But they are prime contenders to take over if sisu should decide to leave. So sisu-out could lead to sisu-in.

So when considering how much more pressure can be put on sisu, think about what could happen if the pressure works. It could be a very empty victory. The worst thing that can happen is sisu building a low scale stadium without the revenue potential of ACL. In the long term that will root the club to the lower leagues pretty much forever.

They say they want to buy ACL and a very long lease on the basis of two independent valuation. CCC says no.
So if we the fans aim are serious about wanting the club back to the Ricoh and to have the FFP power to compete for places in Premier League, we need to look at CCC and have them change their mind.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Can't buy the shares without the co-operation of the council, and Mutton's attitude suggests that co-operation would not be forthcoming!

When the person you have to deal with is saying how he was chanting SISU Out with the best of them, it doesn't exactly suggest anything other than he's spoiling for a fight rather than reconciliation.

Which he got.

I posted a version of this... elsewhere, it's kind of appropriate now, maybe.

There are many many reasons to dislike SISU, many many reasons to have sympathy for CCC's position (less so ACL, they're a business the same as anything else).

But when the head of the council is wilfully obstructive, then you start to wonder...

When those local people, utter failures of the past, and a Texan property developer are then wined and dined around the property portfolio, when a CVA is rejected for utterly baffling reasons (note that Haskell, a man not rooted in the local politics and vested interests of the others whatever his own personal motivations, made a point of praising Appleton's professionalism, and the legality of the process), then you start to wonder.

And it's hard to have sympathy for owners who came in on the hope of a quick buck and then scarpering. It's hard not to acknowledge they did, after all, sign up to a ridiculous rent deal and, in fact, considered it a low priority for much of their time here. It's hard not to have the sneaking doubt of their motivations not being for the club's benefit now... it's hard not to think that, in return, a hard edged investment fund battles ideologically against the regulation of local government.

There are many, many reasons to want SISU out.

The political maneuverings and oblique politicking of others, however, is shameful. To push the club to the brink of oblivion because of vested interest is shameful, whoever does it. When *all* parties with an interest, detached or otherwise, in the club join in that march to oblivion and try and hasten it they should all hang their heads.

I have some sympathy with some of what you write. However, you have to wonder why anyone would bear so much animosity. From what I have seen, it woukd appear mighty hard to negotiate with SISU. Where's Fisher's average League One rent now?

Moreover, as above, Mutton was but one man; now deposed. There were mire democratic ways of circumnavigation. It appears, however, that any such subtlety was lost on SISU. With the football club the biggest loser

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Where's Fisher's average League One rent now?

Pushed beyond the happy compromise to a hellish position of all out victory, or utter defeat.

Moreover, as above, Mutton was but one man; now deposed. There were mire democratic ways of circumnavigation.

The fact that Robinson attempted to renegotiate the rent before SISU took over, to no avail, suggests that actually... there was no maneuverability. Perhaps it is indeed mighty hard to negotiate with SISU. Perhaps, also, it's mighty hard to negotiate with our council...

 

[Astute]

They say they want to buy ACL and a very long lease on the basis of two independent valuation. CCC says no.

Can you show us where you got that info from?

What they have said is they will only bring our club back to Coventry if they get the Freehold for a price that would be decided from either one or preferably two independent valuations. They also want all contracts paid off and nobody to have anything to do with the Ricoh but themselves. All of this would cost more than they are willing to pay. So it can't happen. Or do you think that the taxpayer should pay out so they get what they want?

 

[Astute]

Pushed beyond the happy compromise to a hellish position of all out victory, or utter defeat.


The fact that Robinson attempted to renegotiate the rent before SISU took over, to no avail, suggests that actually... there was no maneuverability. Perhaps it is indeed mighty hard to negotiate with SISU. Perhaps, also, it's mighty hard to negotiate with our council...

CCC have reduced the rent offer by more than we could have hoped for. And this is without negotiations with SISU as they won't negotiate or put an offer in.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Sisu are not going back as tenants - not even short term.

So, Fishers ' Average League One rent'. What was that then? Have they changed their negotiating position in your book, or was it always a disingenuous demand?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

CCC have reduced the rent offer by more than we could have hoped for.

...after the club has moved, there has been a sudden willingness to negotiate. Before, ACL dismissed the very notion of arbitration to solve the issue while the club were in favour, let's not forget.

However, there is also a rather disturbing willingness to negotiate through the media rather than face to face, also. Fortunately, this appears to have ceased recently, although a councillor's admission the club is a sideshow wrt the Ricoh shows how little regard the football club has also had in respect to its position in a football stadium.

It's wrong, downright wrong, that the club use the likes of the SCG to attempt to blacken the name of the Trust's chairman, and publish such things in an attempt to cause divide.

It's also wrong, downright wrong, when offers are presented that are not presented.

Somehow, one side gets much opprobrium for their attempts to manipulate... and quite rightly.

Bafflingly, the other side escape with barely a whisper when they do likewise, and everything is taken at face value without question by some.

It would be horrifically wrong to roll over, and just give up anything and everything to an investment fund, evil or otherwise. It would also be horrifically wrong to push to a position of all-out war.

 

[Grendel]

So, Fishers ' Average League One rent'. What was that then? Have they changed their negotiating position in your book, or was it always a disingenuous demand?

If the rent was fair and reasonable from the outset as was the construction of the revenue model there would never have been an issue.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

If the rent was fair and reasonable from the outset as was the construction of the revenue model there would never have been an issue.

If it wasn't fair why ooh why did they accept it in the first place ?

So did they not negotiate when the stadium was being built and did Sisu not accept it when they took over?

 

[dongonzalos]

Glad you are finally putting your own name to this ridiculous claim

 

[fernandopartridge]

If it wasn't fair why ooh why did they accept it in the first place ?

So did they not negotiate when the stadium was being built and did Sisu not accept it when they took over?

It's irrelevant. Just because they failed to renegotiate the rent in 2007 doesn't mean that their argument in 2012 that the rent was too high for a club (whose circumstances had changed to its own detriment) is any less valid.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

If the rent was fair and reasonable from the outset as was the construction of the revenue model there would never have been an issue.

That's not the point being discussed here. We're talking post 'rent strike' demands from SISU; how they may have changed, and the trust effect as them as reliable negotiating partner. Let us keep it simple, eh?

 

[Grendel]

It's irrelevant. Just because they failed to renegotiate the rent in 2007 doesn't mean that their argument in 2012 that the rent was too high for a club (whose circumstances had changed to its own detriment) is any less valid.

Exactly it is a lame and irrelevant argument.

 

[Spionkop]

Torchomatic is just being malicious. He started off a year or two back being a sensible poster. Something happened and he's got very bitter and twisted. As I've mentioned once or twice, in a query with Hills83 I think it was, I'm 67. I have never been Kev Monks in all those years. I understand Kev is a bit younger. I understand Kev is a decent bloke, but I've never been him. And I have never met him. I read he was ill. Hope he's feeling better.
Torchy is just having a swipe.
And no I've not been to Sixfields to watch City play. That will never ever happen. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. I was always told to do the right thing.
If Kev Monks goes I think he's wrong and I'm not going to apologise for saying so.
Torchy, you've let yourself down again.

 

[Grendel]

That's not the point being discussed here. We're talking post 'rent strike' demands from SISU; how they may have changed, and the trust effect as them as reliable negotiating partner. Let us keep it simple, eh?

I think the spiteful rejection of the CVA by ACL which robbed the club of a promotion opportunity may also make negotiation distinctly difficult don't you?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It's irrelevant. Just because they failed to renegotiate the rent in 2007 doesn't mean that their argument in 2012 that the rent was too high for a club (whose circumstances had changed to its own detriment) is any less valid.

They should have capped this off in Due Diligence, but to an extent I agree. Their claim looks most valid. Just their methods not

 

[Godiva]

Can you show us where you got that info from?

What they have said is they will only bring our club back to Coventry if they get the Freehold for a price that would be decided from either one or preferably two independent valuations. They also want all contracts paid off and nobody to have anything to do with the Ricoh but themselves. All of this would cost more than they are willing to pay. So it can't happen. Or do you think that the taxpayer should pay out so they get what they want?

In the latest SGC minutes ML explain a valuation would require full access to ACL's books. In a previous interview he has said 'a very long lease is practical the same as owning the freehold'.

That's the key points - all else are bargaining chips. They simply ask to buy ACL on the basis of an independent valuation combined with a very long lease (99yr or more).

• JS also raised the subject of an independent valuation of the Ricoh. ML said his personal opinion was that a reputable firm of chartered surveyors – or preferably two – should be appointed to perform an independent valuation of the Ricoh, with full access to any ACL records they required, and their findings should be made public. This would kill myths about the value of the Ricoh.
Read more at http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/...eting-270214-1385635.aspx#4OZ5hf6FifII3hLH.99
​

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I think the spiteful rejection of the CVA by ACL which robbed the club of a promotion opportunity may also make negotiation distinctly difficult don't you?

Another irrelevant point that's disassociated from the point being discussed. That's two attempts at taking this thread off topic in two posts. A record, even for you

 

[Godiva]

CCC have reduced the rent offer by more than we could have hoped for. And this is without negotiations with SISU as they won't negotiate or put an offer in.

I think they have reduced rent offers as a consequence of previous (failed) negotiations. But that's beside the point really.
Sisu will not let the club back before any agreement on a sale is finalized. The obvious reason is that moving the club back will increase the value of ACL. That would make ACL more expensive to buy.

And they can't put in any offer as there have been no valuation ... no due diligence.

 

[Grendel]

Another irrelevant point that's disassociated from the point being discussed. That's two attempts at taking this thread off topic in two posts. A record, even for you

No you just want one opinion - yours the two sides are incapable of communication die to a series of tit for tat actions. Godiva has indicated that the club has suggested a return is possible under a leasehold arrangement. ACL have made misleading claims about rental offers and have shown themselves to also be a difficult organisation to deal with.

They are as bad as each other

 

[Godiva]

So, Fishers ' Average League One rent'. What was that then? Have they changed their negotiating position in your book, or was it always a disingenuous demand?

That was spin!
And I think this is the third or fourth time I say that.

 

[Astute]

...after the club has moved, there has been a sudden willingness to negotiate. Before, ACL dismissed the very notion of arbitration to solve the issue while the club were in favour, let's not forget.

It would be horrifically wrong to roll over, and just give up anything and everything to an investment fund, evil or otherwise. It would also be horrifically wrong to push to a position of all-out war.

How did they try to negotiate a new rent payable before they stopped paying the rent?

How have CCC pushed for all out war?

SISU wanted a lower rent. They got offered a lower rent.

SISU wanted an even lower rent. They got offered an even lower rent.

Then it was all about the pie money. They got offered pie money.

It still wasn't good enough. SISU then said they would build a stadium. Plan A. Although they have since admitted plan B is plan A :thinking about:

They got offered rent free this season and only 100k the next two seasons. The SISU reply was ACL hadn't offered them the deal. Pushing the truth to the limit as the offer was made to them through the FL so the offer could be proved. IMHO the offer was done through the FL as SISU had said that part of the JR was for being forced out of the Ricoh.

All out war from CCC? SISU want them to pay off contracts and Higgs before selling the Ricoh cheaply to them. CCC have told them it can't be done. And from what we can gather it can't be done by law. Paying out to sell a property that already has a value with contracts in place. Maybe if CCC did treat it as all out war it would be finished by now. But they kept making better offers and leaving the door open. The door is still open for SISU.

 

[Astute]

No you just want one opinion - yours the two sides are incapable of communication die to a series of tit for tat actions. Godiva has indicated that the club has suggested a return is possible under a leasehold arrangement. ACL have made misleading claims about rental offers and have shown themselves to also be a difficult organisation to deal with.

They are as bad as each other

What are these misleading rental offers? I suppose you mean matchday expenses.

 

[Astute]

In the latest SGC minutes ML explain a valuation would require full access to ACL's books. In a previous interview he has said 'a very long lease is practical the same as owning the freehold'.

That's the key points - all else are bargaining chips. They simply ask to buy ACL on the basis of an independent valuation combined with a very long lease (99yr or more).

• JS also raised the subject of an independent valuation of the Ricoh. ML said his personal opinion was that a reputable firm of chartered surveyors – or preferably two – should be appointed to perform an independent valuation of the Ricoh, with full access to any ACL records they required, and their findings should be made public. This would kill myths about the value of the Ricoh.
Read more at http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/...eting-270214-1385635.aspx#4OZ5hf6FifII3hLH.99
​

Yes.......valuation for the freehold and nothing else. One of the main reasons why we are playing in Northampton. Why would they be wanting valuations done for a rental agreement?

Timothy did once say that a rental agreement could be agreed on. Covering his arse maybe for when they lose the JR and appeals as otherwise they would have to build that stadium.

 

[torchomatic]

Apologies to you for mistaking who I thought you were, I stupidly believed what someone said.

I won't apologise for highlighting your disgusting attitude towards those who attend Sixfields though.

Torchomatic is just being malicious. He started off a year or two back being a sensible poster. Something happened and he's got very bitter and twisted. As I've mentioned once or twice, in a query with Hills83 I think it was, I'm 67. I have never been Kev Monks in all those years. I understand Kev is a bit younger. I understand Kev is a decent bloke, but I've never been him. And I have never met him. I read he was ill. Hope he's feeling better.
Torchy is just having a swipe.
And no I've not been to Sixfields to watch City play. That will never ever happen. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. I was always told to do the right thing.
If Kev Monks goes I think he's wrong and I'm not going to apologise for saying so.
Torchy, you've let yourself down again.

 

[Astute]

That was spin!
And I think this is the third or fourth time I say that.

Just about everything he says is spin. Does it make it right though?

 

[fernandopartridge]

How did they try to negotiate a new rent payable before they stopped paying the rent?

How have CCC pushed for all out war?

SISU wanted a lower rent. They got offered a lower rent.

SISU wanted an even lower rent. They got offered an even lower rent.

Then it was all about the pie money. They got offered pie money.

It still wasn't good enough. SISU then said they would build a stadium. Plan A. Although they have since admitted plan B is plan A :thinking about:

They got offered rent free this season and only 100k the next two seasons. The SISU reply was ACL hadn't offered them the deal. Pushing the truth to the limit as the offer was made to them through the FL so the offer could be proved. IMHO the offer was done through the FL as SISU had said that part of the JR was for being forced out of the Ricoh.

All out war from CCC? SISU want them to pay off contracts and Higgs before selling the Ricoh cheaply to them. CCC have told them it can't be done. And from what we can gather it can't be done by law. Paying out to sell a property that already has a value with contracts in place. Maybe if CCC did treat it as all out war it would be finished by now. But they kept making better offers and leaving the door open. The door is still open for SISU.

When they were in formal negotiations they were offered a rent of £400k p/a with a little concession on food and beverage income. This was stated as the 'best and final offer'.

Negotiations broke down and SISU went down the alternative road of agreeing a deal with Northampton. It was only after that that an indirect offer of paying a much smaller rent was made.

Personally, I think neither side has any real credibility.

 

[Godiva]

How did they try to negotiate a new rent payable before they stopped paying the rent?

How have CCC pushed for all out war?

SISU wanted a lower rent. They got offered a lower rent.

SISU wanted an even lower rent. They got offered an even lower rent.

Then it was all about the pie money. They got offered pie money.

It still wasn't good enough. SISU then said they would build a stadium. Plan A. Although they have since admitted plan B is plan A :thinking about:

They got offered rent free this season and only 100k the next two seasons. The SISU reply was ACL hadn't offered them the deal. Pushing the truth to the limit as the offer was made to them through the FL so the offer could be proved. IMHO the offer was done through the FL as SISU had said that part of the JR was for being forced out of the Ricoh.

All out war from CCC? SISU want them to pay off contracts and Higgs before selling the Ricoh cheaply to them. CCC have told them it can't be done. And from what we can gather it can't be done by law. Paying out to sell a property that already has a value with contracts in place. Maybe if CCC did treat it as all out war it would be finished by now. But they kept making better offers and leaving the door open. The door is still open for SISU.

All the rent talk is spin on both sides. From the moment when ccc bought out the ACL mortgage and effectively stopped any chance of the club acquiring ACL BOTH parties were well aware any deal was dead. From that moment CCC pursued a strategy that should lead to sisu being forced out and the club pursued a strategy that would lead to a break of the 42yr lease.
They can dress their arguments up nice and pretty, but it is still spin - a rent is not going to happen.