No future with SISU
New Member
As the council own ACL it is not subsidising them , it is restructering the company and the judge said there was not thing wrong with it.
Well, ACL don't seem to mind a bit of subsidising, do they? Good job CCC didn't let ACL clean up their own mess, isn't it?
Sorry, have I got this right. Are you suggesting the council should hand over the Ricoh for next to nothing to SISU to allow them to shortly afterwards sell it for tens of millions to recoup their investment? Would the council not have some questions to answer legally if they gave away an asset at well below market value and it was then sold on soon afterwards by a hedge fund at a huge profit?
While ownership of the Ricoh may give SISU an exit strategy how much damage will they do to CCFC in the process of executing this strategy?
There seems to me to be 3 options:
1) SISU claim that uniting the ground and the club will turn things around for CCFC. I haven't seen any evidence to support this and given Joy's interview with the CT where she stated she wasn't interested in football and wants her money back are they really going to hang around to see a long term return on their investment? Given that SISU, and some people on here, keep telling us that ACL is not viable without CCFC paying rent and assuming if we own the ground we wouldn't pay rent how does it suddenly become hugely profitable to the point there's a £60m surplus for SISU to recoup their money?
2) SISU sell the club and ground as a package. This doesn't add up for me, can't see anyone paying anywhere near £60m for the club and the Ricoh. As mentioned above are we really now suggesting handing the Ricoh over to SISU for them to sell it on at a huge profit?
3) SISU load debt against the Ricoh and then walk away. This seems to me the most likley outcome and why they appear desperate for the freehold rather than the lease. Imagine the mess we will be in if SISU manage to get hold of the Ricoh for next to nothing then load tens of millions in debt against it which CCFC is responsible for paying. They would walk off with that money leaving us in a horrendous position.
None of those options are particularly appealing to me.
Fisher said they were finished with the ricoh and now it is been valued by them. what do you call the first bit of the sentence?
As the council own ACL it is not subsidising them , it is restructering the company and the judge said there was not thing wrong with it.
Sorry, have I got this right. Are you suggesting the council should hand over the Ricoh for next to nothing to SISU to allow them to shortly afterwards sell it for tens of millions to recoup their investment? Would the council not have some questions to answer legally if they gave away an asset at well below market value and it was then sold on soon afterwards by a hedge fund at a huge profit?
Not the taxpayer so who cares
if ccc sell the ricoh at a loss it will be the tax payers who are bailing out scrotium and SISU.
even though i don't pay my taxes to ccc i still don't want that to happen on basic principle. setting an example for hedge funds on how to rip of local authorities and the tax payers who fund them is unethical in the extreme.
The taxpayer has already bailed out the Arena once. To the tune of £14M. And at the same time as shutting down loads of care homes. Is that what you want CCC to do?
You got a "like" for using the word scrotium.
Add any council who gave away the RICOH would be voted out at the next election.
The taxpayer has already bailed out the Arena once. To the tune of £14M. And at the same time as shutting down loads of care homes. Is that what you want CCC to do?
You got a "like" for using the word scrotium.
No they wouldn't - 90% of Coventry have no interest in the Ricoh whatsoever.
source of data please.....?
ohitsaidwalker king power........You're asking the King of "Estimated Facts"....I hear the sound of silence, and see tumbleweed rolling by. mate.
source of data please.....?
Think 367 signatures supporting this says it all, democracy eh?
Hit a nerve have I?So does 50 people on a hill.
No they wouldn't - 90% of Coventry have no interest in the Ricoh whatsoever.
source of data please.....?
Ok can I ask for your source on your contrary view?
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
apologies for my abusive rants last night, being labelled a sisu apologist gets my goat that's all.Covmark you just need to act your age a little. Just because the vast majority don't share your view you tend to get abusive. Some would think your a late forty something baseball cap wearing prick.
Can I ask what Contrary view?
Think 367 signatures supporting this says it all, democracy eh?
apologies for my abusive rants last night, being labelled a sisu apologist gets my goat that's all.
Oh and I don't where a cap and I'm nowhere near forty yet
In my opinion if SISU get the freehold or even the remainder of the long lease they'll put the rent up to a 'commercial level' and either sit on it or wait to sell it to someone at a 'commercial price' which has suddenly sky rocketed to a level that leaves them with a tidy profit. I'm certain that selling it to SISU will ruin the club for a long time to come, however I'm also sure that removing SISU and getting a clean sheet with all debts written off will be a new beginning & that is the best way forward.
So are you now saying Sisu getting the stadium would be a good thing?
No they wouldn't - 90% of Coventry have no interest in the Ricoh whatsoever.
You didn't question the view a council would lose an election if they gave the Ricoh to sisu - yet there is no evidence at all to suggest that. So why did you not request his source?
I'm certain that selling it to SISU will ruin the club for a long time to come, however I'm also sure that removing SISU and getting a clean sheet with all debts written off will be a new beginning & that is the best way forward.
Not read the whole post yet so forgive me if I have missed something. Just wondered where I had given you the impression they should have it for next to nothing? That is a false assumption.
Secondly, you want Sisu to leave (as I do) but I don't understand your vision for how they are going to do so without a stadium? I assume you must be in favour of the new stadium or liquidation of the club instead as they are the only other options on the table?
Secondly, you want Sisu to leave (as I do) but I don't understand your vision for how they are going to do so without a stadium? I assume you must be in favour of the new stadium or liquidation of the club instead as they are the only other options on the table?
So are you now saying Sisu getting the stadium would be a good thing?
So does 50 people on a hill.
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?