Ricoh for next to nothing (1 Viewer)

[Hobo]

So who's responsible for the team and manager now? They invested in the youth setup, which is paying off massively when certain people involved with the club no longer with us wanted to close down the academy...

When SISU took over, they 8did* invest in the team.

That was the problem!

So was their original plan to invest get back in the Premier League buy the stadium or a share in...then they would have had a chance to continue investing or sell presumably at a profit.

Once they found getting out of the Championship harder have they changed tactics to get the Ricoh by trying to distress ACL and also let the club slide down the league.

What ever the reasons playing at Northampton does not make economic sense. I have not seen enough evidence of SISU trying to make negotiations happen. I have not seen SISU being prepared to make any compromises.

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Because they've asset stripped the club they have to invest in youth. At this level it is the correct model to follow. However that doesn't mean they SISU are following that policy for that reason.

As for Fernandopartridge, if you don't believe a mid table or lower mid table team cannot push for the play offs with the right investment I find it hard to believe you have ever followed football.

Brian Clough Nottingham Forest comes to mind. Man Utd anyone? Reading, Swansea, Hull? Bolton? Wigan?

With the first two examples I am talking pre Premiership and play offs of course.

You said they were play off prospects at least. They weren't. Only in the first season after relegation were we ever close to being promotion prospects. They invested but invested badly, look at the side Chris Coleman had in 2008/09 and ask yourself whether it was about investment.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

So was their original plan to invest get back in the Premier League buy the stadium or a share in...

Well, a certain someone said this about the stadium:

It isn’t our priority – the success of the team is. The funds should be spent on the team. It is about getting the product right on the pitch.

He said plenty else about it not being viable either.

So either he was badly mistaken... or what makes it viable now?!?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

So who's responsible for the team and manager now? They invested in the youth setup, which is paying off massively when certain people involved with the club no longer with us wanted to close down the academy...

How so? Did ACL appoint the manager and sign the players? Or did that 500k (+500k grant from FA) not happen?

I was referring to the other part of your assertion.

 

[duffer]

Ignoring your snide comments, thank you for endorsing my point.
I had left out the ACL bail-out to simplify the message.
but working on your figures £24m + 6m =£30
and the council would still have saved £17m that they should have paid for the gasworks clean-up!

I haven't seen anything to suggest that SISU would expect to get the freehold for less than £30m. I think they would see purchasing the Ricoh freehold for £30m as excellent business compared to the alternative of building another stadium.

The problem is that the council are not prepared to sell it for a figure like that!

imp:

I'm not quite sure which bit of my response was snide, but hey ho.

What on earth gives you the idea that SISU could either afford or would offer £30m for the Ricoh?

They walked away from buying the Higgs share, and they've got the arse with the council because they couldn't pick up the mortgage at a distressed rate (the entire thrust of their JR).

They're already saying that they don't intend to spend anything like £30m on the 'new' stadium - in fact Fisher delights in making this point, how little they intend to spend on it, how small and modular it will be. It's just a pity it's entirely fictional.

And how do you know how much the Council will sell the Ricoh for? The one thing that is fairly certain is that they're unlikely to sell it to someone determined to haul them up in court.

Again, it comes down to an honest negotiation. How could anyone trust SISU to do that. Their whole strategy has been designed to distress ACL.

(As for the £17m, it's an utter irrelevance. I think we're broadly in agreement with what the Council and Higgs are currently on the hook for.)

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I was referring to the other part of your assertion.

Oh, you mean this?

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=23866

Draw your attention to page 4/10 then I'll expect an apology.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Oh, you mean this?

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=23866

Draw your attention to page 4/10 then I'll expect an apology.

Try reading it.

Then ask yourself a few questions.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

And to give you a little help with your thinking, here's a post from while you were "away" -

Can I suggest a different perspective?

For my sins, I've sat on various company Boards since 1985. Whilst all Boards are different, there are some things that are generally common. For example (generalising, I accept) there are 2 ways to present a proposal.

The first (which I always favour ) is to do all your lobbying in advance, get all the necessary agreements in place, present your proposal and watch it go through on the nod. The second is to present your proposal unheralded. Maybe there isn't time for the other option, maybe you're trying to surprise someone - either way, a bit more risky.

With option 1, all should be plain sailing, implementation should follow as a matter of course. With option 2, you may run into opposition, in the meeting, in lobbying afterwards, or both.

So a question. How soon after the meeting did the academy close?

It's rhetorical of course because it's still going, albeit under threat following the bust up with the Higgs.

So does that perhaps suggest that there might have been some decision makers who weren't happy with the proposal?

Maybe the minutes don't give a totally full record of all the discussions (I've yet to find any that did!).

Just a thought.....

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Try reading it.

Then ask yourself a few questions.

And to give you a little help with your thinking, here's a post from while you were "away" -

Can I suggest a different perspective?

For my sins, I've sat on various company Boards since 1985. Whilst all Boards are different, there are some things that are generally common. For example (generalising, I accept) there are 2 ways to present a proposal.

The first (which I always favour ) is to do all your lobbying in advance, get all the necessary agreements in place, present your proposal and watch it go through on the nod. The second is to present your proposal unheralded. Maybe there isn't time for the other option, maybe you're trying to surprise someone - either way, a bit more risky.

With option 1, all should be plain sailing, implementation should follow as a matter of course. With option 2, you may run into opposition, in the meeting, in lobbying afterwards, or both.

So a question. How soon after the meeting did the academy close?

It's rhetorical of course because it's still going, albeit under threat following the bust up with the Higgs.

So does that perhaps suggest that there might have been some decision makers who weren't happy with the proposal?

Maybe the minutes don't give a totally full record of all the discussions (I've yet to find any that did!).

Just a thought.....

So are you admitting I didn't present misinformation?

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

Just a random question, a lot of people don't like the way that Sisu are trying to get the ground for next to nothing, illegal I don't think it is but immoral certainly.

However, if they managed to get the ricoh for a VERY low price would that not be decent business going forward for the club?

If when it was first built the owners drove a very hard bargain and got the ricoh for a cut price it would have been good for the club wouldn't it? (As long as it is the club...)

I'm not saying they would or will but is getting something for a huge discount good business?

I such a scenario: How much would SISU(owners of the stadium) charge CCFC the tenanat in terms fo rent do we think?

 

[skybluetony176]

I such a scenario: How much would SISU(owners of the stadium) charge CCFC the tenanat in terms fo rent do we think?

what ever the amount it will be to the benifit of their investors not the club.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

So are you admitting I didn't present misinformation?

If you recall, I said "here we go..." i.e. predicting what you were about to say.

My (admittedly implicit) prediction was that you were going to say that GH and JE "wanted to close the academy". I think that this was pretty unequivocally confirmed by your reference in your post at the top of this page.

If having considered matters further, you are now longer of that mind - then fair enough.