Grendel
Well-Known Member
Do you think that Newcastle are a well run football club?
You made the point about the important thing about our owners is that they are good at running a football club. I pointed out that our present owners are not. Sounds pretty relevant to me! Who knows, maybe we could have owners that are capable of fulfilling the arena's potential and good at running a football club? Because they aren't mutually exclusive-and it's exactly what we need. SISU are as far away from matching the specification as it is possible to get.
I still do, but have always used coherent arguments rather than the aimless screaming and gnashing of teeth that you have used for debate.
You still do.
Do you think that Newcastle are a well run football club?
My point is simple, the best owner for a football club is not necessarily a property developer.
Indeed, the track record of property developers getting involved in football for the property is chequered at best.
Should we be looking to get Sam Hamman or Ken Bates out of retirement ,Or Get Ridsdale In,Is he still busy with Preston ? Not the Yank.
No, you are incapable of constructive debate only destructive. You define yourself as being in opposition to the flow.
If you feel so strongly about SISU still, how come you never criticise them?
And I see it doesn't take long for you to snap and resort to being insulting again!
Ken Bates one good example why property development and football don't mix.
Chelsea were about to go into adminstration before Abravomich took over, despite the Chelsea Village, think they were £96million in debt and days after Abravomich took over he had to pay another £23million bill that would have seen Chelsea fold.
It's not the panacea that many people think.
At no cost to himself no doubt ,Like Richardson hey.
Don't really think that there is any point in criticising Sisu now, it should be evident to even the most dim that they are useless.
But it isn't, is it? You know that. They still have plenty of disciples. No matter what happens people's resolve and opposition to them also gets worn down by apathy. I would have thought that was a battle that you would enjoy fighting rather than patronising those that do (eg the teeth gnashing comment).
Is it just me or are sisu/otium only waiting for the outcome of this judical review. As in my veiw im thinking there hoping it gets the go ahead as that would put acl in the shit if it went to court and sisu/otium won. As acl where struggleing before the council bailout. And the sisu/otium vulters were hovering hoping to gain control of acl for a pittance.Now i personaly think that if this review fails then sisu/otium will put the club up for sale as they then have no hope of getting there hands on the ricoh.
What's clear reading all the post in this thread is that once again people are quoting the 'structure' of the Ricoh in so many varied ways!
(ACL/Higgs/Lease/freehold/Shares/Council owned/Council own ACL) and the list goes on.
If you are going to discuss the viability and future possibilities of the stadium at least start with the correct facts.
A lot on here is just a bunch of nonsense.
If we asked everyone to lay out the whole structure of the stadium I bet many would get it hopelessly wrong!
Could you ask him why nothing has been done with building another hotel or anything else on the land during the time that ACL has been run?
Does any owner of the club and/or ACL have to develop the land around?
If so, why?
It's the reason that Compass signed a huge contract with ACL.
Although I see your point Nuneaton being moved to the Ricoh wouldn't be beneficial to anyone. They simply haven't got a big enough fanbase to justify playing at a stadium of premier league quality. Coventry haven't even got that at the moment.
Nuneaton are at best a League 2 club as proven throughout their history.
My point is simple, the best owner for a football club is not necessarily a property developer.
Indeed, the track record of property developers getting involved in football for the property is chequered at best.
Come on BSB you must know that's not the way it works here. If they can't pick holes in your opinion, then they just create an opinion for you and slate it. You must be used to that by now.
If we don't play at ricoh again,hope the flaming stadium burns to the ground and all acl board members burn in hell.....
<p>
What good would that be to our city?
The Ricoh is a wonderful asset, with or without the football club.
This for example BSB, is where I endorse dragging Nuneaton fans kicking and screaming away from their spiritual home. Which is an absolute identical situation to ours and I am a hypocrite of the highest order.
Do you have a Ricoh brochure in your hands? <img src="http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif" border="0" alt="" title="" smilieid="6" class="inlineimg" /></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Without the club it it would a wonderful empty asset.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Manipulation of your point again!
I am genuinely amazed
that you think you're not being hypocritical.
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
No one does. I just can't understand why so many want to see their club chucked out and the Ricoh succeed without them.
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
and a hedge fund is the best owner for a football club ??
I suppose it's because the charity has to justify their decision to sell it to their stakeholders and as the charity's prime aim is to help the regeneration and reinvigoration of Coventry then owners who will continue to develop the Ricoh to the benefit of the local area will be top of the list.
The specifics of the set-up could be drawn along those lines but we are all wanting the club to benefit 100% from everything the Ricoh hosts, including non-footballing events. If you want that then someone with non-footballing expertise to get us the maximum benefit of this enterprise is necessary. Property development is but one way of achieving this-I don't know the ins and outs of every part of what the Ricoh does on a daily basis so I can't say for sure.
People want us to get everything we can from the Ricoh but are opposed to an owner who would help us to achieve this-forgive me for being confused. All the money going to the club will put a better team on the field, draw in better crowds and be a proper money earner alongside everything else. It's all self-fulfilling.
Surely that's changing the goalposts from the original agreement that the club gets first refusal to buy back its share in ACL?
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?