We're working with Dan Walker at the club to publicise the SCG a bit more. Including an update of the SCG page on the CCFC site, which should also include profiles of those people on the group.
Maybe an article in matchday programme or even a regular feature?
I still find it very telling that it seems Tim has lied to both Jan and King regarding the council using a veto on the buyout of shares.
kingharvest or anyone ...... says on the official site that the SCG includes "high-ranking members of both Coventry City Football Club and the Ricoh Arena". Who actually makes up the members, I didnt think ACL were represented?
Yeah but it's not £150k rebate per season is it? Or did I get that wrong?
There was also some doubt on the accuracy of the £100k F&B figure, hence the failure to agree.
We're not independent in that our role is to collaboratively work with the club regardless of ownership. ACL used to attend meetings but since the dispute they don't anymore. I think it would be great to ask ACL the same questions but unlike ccfc they aren't a stakeholder in the group so it may be difficult. It's definitely something we've asked for and will carry on asking for.
We don't know - do we?
You are assuming he is, so that is telling you what exactly?
We don't know - do we?
You are assuming he is, so that is telling you what exactly?
I would just like to thank PWKH, Jan and King harvest for keeping us on here up to date and please don't stop posting because of a mindless few that are brainwashed and can't help themselves.
If Tim isn't lying then PWKH is.
I am pretty confident I believe PWKH from they way he has behaved on here.
Also Higgs were intending to sell to SISU much to my shock at the time.
If Tim has blatantly lied about this then it puts a massive question mark over everything he says
If Tim isn't lying then PWKH is.
I am pretty confident I believe PWKH from they way he has behaved on here.
If Tim has blatantly lied about this then it puts a massive question mark over everything he says
So you are assuming.
And that my friend, is the point I have been trying to make throughout this whole thread.
But until we get some evidence, we can only guess or assume. It's words against words.
In this particular case it is KH/Jan telling us TF's word - against the words from PWKH.
2nd hand words against 1st hand words.
Can we really make a case based on that?
See...this started off as a very good informative thread with great credibility, & serious questions, & honest answers. Now it appears to be degenerating into something of a snide, tit-for-tat, even slanging match (between what I'll call the usual suspects)
Some very useful posts in this thread - for anyone who doesn't want to read the whole thing/repeat it all again tomorrow the key points seem to be:
“the rent…was agreed at the well-publicised £400k” (KingHarvest)
“the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent” (ashbyjan)
“The assertion by Martin Reeves [Coventry City Council Chief Exec] (I think it was) on CWR that the rent was £150k was misleading” but what ACL have offered is a “total cost to club of using ricoh as 150k per season ….The 150k rebate was off the rates and 100k was what ACL were giving to club from the food so the 150k council was on about was 400k [rent] - 150k [rates rebate]- 100k [what ACL have offered ccfc from food and drink] [=£150k]” (ashbyjan)
There appear to be three sticking points in the dispute but the rent is not one of them - 1. “Sisu require more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2. ACL’s financial stability; and 3. the length of the deal. (ashbyjan)
Tim fisher says ACL are reluctant to provide the numbers on food and beverage but SISU need to understand these numbers in order for things to progress (Tim Fisher’s comments as reported by KingHarvest)
Sisu would like ‘break clauses’ in the contract – “There is also a disagreement about the length of the lease - it currently stands at 49 years with no break clauses. CCFC would clearly be much more comfortable with break clauses in the lease going forward”(KingHarvest)
“An arbitrator would listen to the arguments from both sides and come up with a "judgement" that both sides would "have" to abide by” but “A mediator would only be a referee and both sides can continue to argue, spin and bullshit to their hearts content but an agreement has to be reached by the two parties not the mediator”. (Ashbyjan)
“Last night Tim Fisher did state he had asked ACL for mediation but only during a radio broadcast and on the clubs website, no direct request made to ACL with terms of reference or anything like that”. (Ashbyjan)
“[Moving to] a new stadium…it’s not something the fans need to even really consider right now according to Tim Fisher” (KingHarvest)
“If Tim Fisher said the Council had vetoed the sale of the shares in ACL owned by the Charity to Sisu, as reported by KingHarvest it is a completely untrue statement by Fisher” (PKWH - Clerk to the Trustees of the Higgs Charity)
“joy seppala is heavily involved, speaks to Tim 4 times a day ” (KingHarvest) but “was accused of lying in a High Court wrangle over bust electricity company TXU. Seppala who is described by rivals as having "balls of steel", was criticised by the trial judge over her "distorted recollection of events" and for being "prone to exaggerate”” (Mary_Mungo_Midge)
There have also been further points about rates, Doncaster, whether ACL is “failing” and the business set up for food and drink at the ricoh but I’ve run out of time to do anymore…..
Some very useful posts in this thread - for anyone who doesn't want to read the whole thing/repeat it all again tomorrow the key points seem to be:
“the rent…was agreed at the well-publicised £400k” (KingHarvest)
“the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent” (ashbyjan)
“The assertion by Martin Reeves [Coventry City Council Chief Exec] (I think it was) on CWR that the rent was £150k was misleading” but what ACL have offered is a “total cost to club of using ricoh as 150k per season ….The 150k rebate was off the rates and 100k was what ACL were giving to club from the food so the 150k council was on about was 400k [rent] - 150k [rates rebate]- 100k [what ACL have offered ccfc from food and drink] [=£150k]” (ashbyjan)
…..
I think there is too much reference to TF lying, and it isn't helpful or justified.I still find it very telling that it seems Tim has lied to both Jan and King regarding the council using a veto on the buyout of shares.
Grendel the 400k includes match day costs - they are not on top of the rent. Mr Fisher said last night that the rent etc had been agreed upon and his three sticking points were 1 more clarity on the food and beverage numbers 2 ACLs financial stability and 3 the length of the deal.
So you are assuming.
And that my friend, is the point I have been trying to make throughout this whole thread.
But until we get some evidence, we can only guess or assume. It's words against words.
In this particular case it is KH/Jan telling us TF's word - against the words from PWKH.
2nd hand words against 1st hand words.
Can we really make a case based on that?
I only reported the facts from the meeting, none of my opinions or interpretations. I agree it's positive towards Tim but that's to be expected.
I'm sure if I factually reflected an hour long telephone conversation with ACL it would sound positive to ACL and paint Tim Fisher and SISU in a bad light.
That's the the thing isn't it? Report the facts for us to interpret ourselves.
Personally, my opinion, I think grego is probably right when he suggests veto may have been used in the non-literal sense.
I think there is too much reference to TF lying, and it isn't helpful or justified.
the comment reported by KingHarvest was not a direct quote (didn't give the exact words used). Even if TF did use the word "vetoed" it may not have been literal.
I think there was a point recently when we were told that JS & TF had attended a meeting with the Chief Exec of the council. If he had said in such a meeting that they would not get council approval to the deal they might have taken that as practically vetoing the deal.
We do not know why TF has this viewpoint but in my opinion it is very likely to be valid, I certainly don't think he would make it up and I don't see any point in him lying about it.
Why would he? It is bound to come out in the wash so wouldn't gain him anything.
By all means ask for clarification - but whoever does so, please have some respect and don't begin by telling him he's a liar!
imp:
SBT - I did say my answer is NO - the cost of the deal is too high and in my view unnecessary in the acrimony it has bred. As I said our problems run far deeper than the rent and the wages is the biggest of them. Our current wage bill is simply unsustainable on our gates and income (even with a reduced rent and added match day revenue) - how can we justify 4 players who allegedly earn more than Tranmeres entire squad? If we were able to replace these with cheaper players of similar ability then great but we are stuck with 3 of them for at least another season after this. Yes the rent reduction helps but it doesn't provide a solution and the cost of getting (assuming we ever do) to an agreement is too high.
Do you think he shook hands with the directors of ACL and said gentleman we have a deal. We can now put all of this behind us and move on?
I am happy you fully believed what Tim said.
I have no issue that you reported what you were told.
However are you not concerned that Tim may have lied to you?
Well i don't think he's lied - i think he's perhaps used the wrong word. But i'm with grego, i think people have taken it too literally. I know the club are convinced that the council don't want to allow SISU to have any stake in the Ricoh, and i believe this is what Tim was implying when he said veto.
Well i don't think he's lied - i think he's perhaps used the wrong word. But i'm with grego, i think people have taken it too literally. I know the club are convinced that the council don't want to allow SISU to have any stake in the Ricoh, and i believe this is what Tim was implying when he said veto.
Again, to reiterate, Fisher is paid a salary consummate with someone who doesn't use the 'wrong words' - such as this instance, or ACL 'going bust'. There is a clear and precise legal and business interpretation being these words and phrases that would give rise to their use implying something that it's not the case. Which is either unprofessional, or sinister. Take your pick....
Well i don't think he's lied - i think he's perhaps used the wrong word. But i'm with grego, i think people have taken it too literally. I know the club are convinced that the council don't want to allow SISU to have any stake in the Ricoh, and i believe this is what Tim was implying when he said veto.
I think I agree with your first point, and maybe TF is purposely trying to be provocative, had he used the words "running aground" or "hitting the dust" perhaps you wouldn't have been able to be so concerned. But I don't think its half as sinister or unprofessional (or illegal?) as the council using tax payers funding to finance an independent company - 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?