I would rather their interests be in the football team than in hotels. So yes.
There is a massive shortage of hotel rooms in Coventry and it costs the city business. Midweek all our hotels are chocker and have been for years.
It's a bit short sighted to be building on the car parks too, isn't it? Regardless of whether we get CCFC back or not won't that affect future events and concerts, etc?
Dreamland I'm afraid. Where do you think owners get their money to allow them to buy clubs and players, or do you believe owners should give away any other businesses they have once they buy a club? Also, I am sure that I remember Fisher or someone like him saying that CCFC is his main objective now, so on that basis has he helped or hindered CCFC if his main interest is only CCFC?
There is a massive shortage of hotel rooms in Coventry and it costs the city business. Midweek all our hotels are chocker and have been for years.
Didn't you say you parked in Tesco's?
Are you suggesting that the response to cuts In central grant should be offset by borrowing from the Govt?
A cheap hotel was going to be built on car park 3 (opposite Tesco) a few years ago - but the collapse of the banks stopped this.
I thought we had heard the last of people trying to make out that CCC had put 14m into the Ricoh when they have not. Yet Torch who certainly knows the truth agrees with you :thinking about:
No. What I am suggesting is that borrowing such a large sum to take over the loan when SISU had agreed to go splits has to be questioned when the council isn't exactly plush with funds.
It was a SISU thing as Mutton said. They were never going to get it. However, they wooed Haskell and tried to sell it to him. This would have been fine if SISU hadn't been the owners of CCFC at the time.
No. What I am suggesting is that borrowing such a large sum to take over the loan when SISU had agreed to go splits has to be questioned when the council isn't exactly plush with funds.
So you have changed your mind now from saying CCC put 14m in?
So you think that getting a new loan to be able to offer lower rent was worse for the council than letting SISU take the whole thing over for no benefit for the local taxpayer?
If they want the Ricoh they need to pay for it. This means putting an offer in.
£14m was spent to take control of ACL's loan from the YB. How can this be in dispute?
Who is we and you?
Are you insane??
They did put in £14million through a loan.
So you have changed your mind now from saying CCC put 14m in?
So you think that getting a new loan to be able to offer lower rent was worse for the council than letting SISU take the whole thing over for no benefit for the local taxpayer?
If they want the Ricoh they need to pay for it. This means putting an offer in.
The loan was refinanced. The council never put 14m in like you are trying to make out.
The loan was refinanced. The council never put 14m in like you are trying to make out.
The door has finally been slammed and firmly shut!
Well done CCC & Anne Lucas, I hope your proud of yourselves?
So are you saying CCC didn't put £14M in?
Have CCC refinanced the 14m or not?
No - the building on a new stadium by SISU is completely irrelevant to the points about the council.
They paid the loan off and ACL pay them rather than the Yorkshire so surely they DID put in the money?
Should a thread about hotels at the Ricoh even be started on here? Let alone get to 13 pages?? Christ .......
CCC runs at a deficit and is being required to make extensive budget cuts across the board-therefore to plough £14m into something other than public services suffering from such cuts is something that needs to be answered. Especially when a third party was offering to halve the cost.
They paid off the Yorkshire so yes they did put money in. You can label it what you like.
They paid off the Yorkshire so yes they did put money in. You can label it what you like.
Yes it is directly relevant to the chances of seeing your football club playing in your city again.
If that was the case why do you and others mention that CCC would have to pay the loan back and ACL would have to get a loan to that amount if somehow SISU win the JR and are forced to do so.
Who has borrowed the money and who is ultimately liable for the money being repaid? Please keep up.
ACL and ACL.
In a separate deal CCC have a £14m loan with whoever and they are liable for that.
At least that's how I was aware it was. I'd imagine if ACL went bust CCC would have to write off that debt and still be liable for the money they borrowed, but they could carry on meeting it, the loss would be absorbed by the council.
If ACL could take the loan out directly there'd be no need for the council. There's two separate contracts and two separate interest rates AFAIK, after all CCC said they're making a profit.
And you can make as many false claims as you like by twisting words as you like. Most of us know the truth.
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?