Rugby Council still denies 'new stadium' contact... (1 Viewer)

[SimonGilbert]

...despite Tim Fisher telling the CCFC Stadium Forum Group that discussions had been held with the authority as three sites were ruled out.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-fc-chairman-rules-8517015

 

---

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Was the question asked to Rugby council again or are you just going off their last response in November?

 

[skybluetony176]

Any comments from Mr Fisher?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Was the question asked to Rugby council again or are you just going off their last response in November?

"The Telegraph contacted the council again today in light of Mr Fisher’s statements and was told the authority stands by its previous responses to the FOI requests".

 

[Rusty Trombone]

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/21.01.15-outline-minutes-sfc144-2226857.pdf

Link to the minutes of the stadium group.


keep this bit in mind..."These minutes are a brief outline of the points discussed at this meeting. They are not a verbatim record and as such, should not be duplicated, distributed or placed on any media, website or forum as a record of those discussions, without the express permission of the Chair".

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Formal v informal.

I'm by no means high up but I can think of many conversations I've had which would never show on an FOI request... not because anybody's sought to mislead, either.

It is conceivable both can be right.

What's needed more is a contact in the Highways Department

 

[LB87ccfc]

Their will not be one - simple.

 

[Monners]

If three sites have been rejected, and Mr Fisher was very clear on the location of these, then that points towards formal contact, as was the case for the Academy which Rugby Council has referred to.

In other words - no new stadium

 

[bigfatronssba]

Formal v informal.

I'm by no means high up but I can think of many conversations I've had which would never show on an FOI request... not because anybody's sought to mislead, either.

It is conceivable both can be right.

What's needed more is a contact in the Highways Department

An informal discussion though would indicate that discussions never got off the ground and therefore these were never serious sites.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

If three sites have been rejected, and Mr Fisher was very clear on the location of these, then that points towards formal contact, as was the case for the Academy which Rugby Council has referred to.

True, although tbf if I wanted to buy a large piece of land I'd be asking someone if there was any chance and, when being given a big fat 'no', moving on.

Whether in 18 months two conversations equates to 'working hard to build a new stadium' is another matter altogether, of course.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Formal v informal.

I'm by no means high up but I can think of many conversations I've had which would never show on an FOI request... not because anybody's sought to mislead, either.

It is conceivable both can be right.

What's needed more is a contact in the Highways Department

I agree with you in principle but reading the tf comments there is no way there would not be a note of the spur conversation.

I have to conclude tf is making a lot of very little and we are screwed

 

[AJB1983]

23 acres at £350k per acre.
£8m before they even start...

 

[skybluetony176]

Formal v informal.

I'm by no means high up but I can think of many conversations I've had which would never show on an FOI request... not because anybody's sought to mislead, either.

It is conceivable both can be right.

What's needed more is a contact in the Highways Department

I can't imagine for one moment that for a local authority to say no you won't get planning permission on a site because of X Y & Z could be anything other than formal. Otherwise they've not really said it, have they.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Simon you need to get tf to talk. The net is closing in and I think he may be found wanting. There is no progress at all and constant cutting out cloth will lead us to the conference before the ricoh temporary agreement has finished

 

[skybluetony176]

True, although tbf if I wanted to buy a large piece of land I'd be asking someone if there was any chance and, when being given a big fat 'no', moving on.

Whether in 18 months two conversations equates to 'working hard to build a new stadium' is another matter altogether, of course.

The only way you would get a big fat no is if you put in an application for outline consent. At which point it becomes formal.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Simon you need to get tf to talk. The net is closing in and I think he may be found wanting. There is no progress at all and constant cutting out cloth will lead us to the conference before the ricoh temporary agreement has finished

TF has told us the situation as he wants it told, he's not going to say anything different under Simons interrogation.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

"The Telegraph contacted the council again today in light of Mr Fisher’s statements and was told the authority stands by its previous responses to the FOI requests".

Cheers, missed that bit initially

 

[Covstu]

So pretty much confirmed that we will be based outside of Coventry (albeit close to the borders) which is disappointing but ultimately if there isnt a site then there is nowt we can do about it. Looks like we missed the boat again on some other sites and unsure on how much they have 'pushed' their interests in these sites.

Isnt this about forging a strong relationship with the insects to gain revenues particularly if they are equally reliant on CCFC to survive?

 

[albatross]

think this says it all really. Directly from minutes as stated by TF

• The ground share agreement with The Football League allowed the club to play atanother ground, outside of Coventry, until 2019. However, now that the club areplaying back in Coventry, there is less time pressure. There is a 4 year leasearrangement with ACL/Wasps. However, there might be an opportunity to extendplaying at the Ricoh after the next 3.5 seasons and therefore remain on an extendedlease.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I'm really not that impressed with the format of a meeting where tf can contradict people and don't ask him about it.

Rugby borough council have said no contact has been made, are they lying?

Who did you meet with a rugby borough council?

Which councils are you now in discussions with?

How much did you offer for the land?

Given the change of circumstances of coming back to the ricoh what is the new timescale for a new stadium?

I know he has given the details he wants but refusal to answer genuine and fair questions would show him to be a certain sort of person.

As would answering honestly and transparently without affecting the sensitive negotiations that we all know are ongoing with various parties. Not!!!!!

 

[Covstu]

I'm really not that impressed with the format of a meeting where tf can contradict people and don't ask him about it.

Rugby borough council have said no contact has been made, are they lying?

Who did you meet with a rugby borough council?

Which councils are you now in discussions with?

How much did you offer for the land?

Given the change of circumstances of coming back to the ricoh what is the new timescale for a new stadium?

I know he has given the details he wants but refusal to answer genuine and fair questions would show him to be a certain sort of person.

As would answering honestly and transparently without affecting the sensitive negotiations that we all know are ongoing with various parties. Not!!!!!

All confidential apprarently!

 

[ccfcway]

I thought the reason it wont be in Cov was that the council wouldn't work with them, but now there is no suitable site in Cov ?.

 

[ccfcway]

reading the last part of those minutes makes me think its that last of those meetings for a while, which is bizarre considering isnt that group also about match day experience at the ricoh ?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The most telling part for me is tf arrived late

 

[ccfcway]

The most telling part for me is tf arrived late

he was doing a big shop

 

[Rusty Trombone]

reading the last part of those minutes makes me think its that last of those meetings for a while, which is bizarre considering isnt that group also about match day experience at the ricoh ?

They feed any relevant bits through the supporters group.

 

[shy_tall_knight]

So pretty much confirmed that we will be based outside of Coventry (albeit close to the borders) which is disappointing but ultimately if there isnt a site then there is nowt we can do about it. Looks like we missed the boat again on some other sites and unsure on how much they have 'pushed' their interests in these sites.

Isnt this about forging a strong relationship with the insects to gain revenues particularly if they are equally reliant on CCFC to survive?

Has confirmed nothing other than there has been no serious attempts to identify a stadium site because they have no intention of building a stadium it was all about the Ricoh.

 

[Moff]

Different day, same old Fisher bullshit.

 

[albatross]

This made me smile since in the JR the biggest threat to ACL was the performance of CCFC and the potential non payment of rent. I don't challenge his numbers or what SISU thought is was worth as that is pure supposition, but its just Ironic again direct from TF

• TF was asked whether the club could buy 50% of the Ricoh. TF said that it is unlikely thata deal can be done re a share of the ownership of the Stadium with Wasps. TFconfirmed that the club’s owners and Directors are not prepared to take on the risk offinancial liability for half of the £14 million loan. TF has analysed the financial risk of theloan which is a sub-investment grade loan – meaning the loan is financially speculativeand having a high risk of default. TF will not expose the club to the risk of going intoanother administration by being joint and severally liable on the £14 million loan.
  
  
  
  • When CCFC recently bid for 50% of the Ricoh, they had to look at it from an Insolvencyperspective ie what happens if Wasps were to default on the loan repayment (whichmight be as much as approximately £2m per year on the new 20 year loan term). TFdoes not want the club to go through that situation again and recalls 2nd August, wherethe club nearly went out of existence.
    
  
  
  
  

 

[Captain Dart]

I would like CT to take up the matter of the radius the FL has stated a new stadium must lie within, I notice TF mentioned it but put no number to it, that should not be hidden because it is very a important detail indeed.

 

[Ashdown]

Mr Fisher has been given instructions to treat those Middle England soccer ball types with the same lying contempt that has worked for a few years now on some people who still refuse to believe that the hedge funds only policy is to retain the status Quo whilst they exhaust all legal avenues to try and win a case in order to sue their way back to break-even !

 

[SkyBlueHomer]

From the minutes, last page 2nd bullet point. Starting 'Fans have to trust the owners...'.
Seriously, I wouldn't trust this lot now as far as I could throw them.

Nothing new in the document we didn't know or could guess anyway

 

[oldskyblue58]

When CCFC recently bid for 50% of the Ricoh, they had to look at it from an Insolvencyperspective ie what happens if Wasps were to default on the loan repayment (whichmight be as much as approximately £2m per year on the new 20 year loan term). TFdoes not want the club to go through that situation again and recalls 2nd August, wherethe club nearly went out of existence.

[/LIST]




[/LIST]

apparently the loan 14.4m is payable at 5% pa interest (source filed accounts) We are told that the loan period has been shortened to 20 years. That equates to loan repayments of 1,140,396 per annum. They are currently paying 815,400 pa

Buying the shares in a company does not mean that you take responsibility for the loans it has - unless you provide guarantees in addition. The risk is that you lose the sum you purchase the shares for..... in this case 5.5m

It would be possible to study and discount any site without involving the local council wouldn't it? Just means you were not that serious on a particular site in the first place

Interesting the size of the sites varies so much. Ansty 100 acres Brandon 26 acres Ryton 23 acres net(?) Were we not told that the stadium and academy set up needed more like 60 acres+?

Sorry but like many other things that TF/SISU said/say the dots don't actually join up and stand scrutiny

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

It would be possible to study and discount any site without involving the local council wouldn't it? Just means you were not that serious on a particular site in the first place

I guess but Fisher explicitly states they have met with the local council with regards to the 3 sites mentioned.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It would be possible to study and discount any site without involving the local council wouldn't it? Just means you were not that serious on a particular site in the first place

Indeed.

It might be time for a little rant about FOI and how it makes for less information at the end of the day...