Grendel
Well-Known Member
Because this council hasn't offered the benefits of a stadium compared to other councils has it?
Ian, no one is disagrees that revenues are important for the club.
However, that has nothing to do with ownership, or even a long lease. It can be achieved whilst still under a rental agreement.
I have yet to hear the argument of why the club needs to own the freehold, or even a long lease.
Ian, no one is disagrees that revenues are important for the club.
However, that has nothing to do with ownership, or even a long lease. It can be achieved whilst still under a rental agreement.
I have yet to hear the argument of why the club needs to own the freehold, or even a long lease.
Revenue, revenue, revenue... fuck all to do with who owns it. All these clubs that don't 'own' their grounds have a council that allows them to prosper and gives them contrevenues.
CCC are either too fucking stupid or too fucking interested in their own agenda to realise this. So the new ground option - no matter how ridiculous it seems, appears to be the only way for the club to have access to these, until CCC wakes up and joins us in the 21st Century.
SISU need to pay a fair value for either the freehold, or failing that a long term lease with 100% revenue control - the existence of ACL os the problem, and realistically it would have to cease to exist if a deal to return to the Ricoh was done.
Also whilst on the subject of the other bids - Michael Byng made it very clear he wanted the stadium and club to be a single entity if he was going to get involved and take the club forward. There's a recurring theme here.
Here's a novel idea. Why don't sisu instead of denying that temporary rent offers haven't been made, make a counter offer based on the sixfields rent deal. Clearly the sixfields rent deal suits sisu's investors and playing at the ricoh not only suits the fans of CCFF it would also assist sisu financially which will aid them in either building the club or indeed build imagination land if that is what they really believe is required.
Now Ian, can you give me a reason why they shouldn't.
Any new owner is immediately in a very difficult position. There is the overwhelming reason to return the club to the City. However they will be required to move into a Stadium where only limited income can be achieved, amde all the more galling by the fact that other companies are making money on the back of the club. Thats why I believe there is currently no other viable option to the ownership of Sisu.
Any new owner is immediately in a very difficult position. There is the overwhelming reason to return the club to the City. However they will be required to move into a Stadium where only limited income can be achieved, amde all the more galling by the fact that other companies are making money on the back of the club. Thats why I believe there is currently no other viable option to the ownership of Sisu.
Why can't new owners buy the Higgs share of ACL and restore the income streams that we sold*? Sisu have apparently pissed off the Higgs enough that a sale to Joy and her investors is unlikely but someone with no historical dealings with the Higgs might be welcomed more?
*It has been said (by Joy/Tim?) that we sold the matchday revenue when we sold the share so buying the share back should give us that stream back shouldn't it?
Higgs also Said they would be legally bound to consider any offer from SISU. I think they would be more than happy "to get out of jail". The extension of stadium naming rights until 2025 blocks any naming income and "corporate image" benefits to a new owner. E.g. If Red Bull had CCFC, they would not be able to have their name/ logo on both the shirts and the stadium. CCFC could not offer stadium name with shirt spontship as a package to any sponsor. That would frustrate me as an owner of the Higgs Share - no more stadium name income until 2025, and no joint package to offer a big name sponsor.
All the more reason that we should have bought the Higgs share sooner? :facepalm:
Dies the Higgs share actually get anyone anything? What does it actually get?
For anyone other than SISU, the benifits of the Higgs share are limited as the catering and naming rights are tied up for years and the potential anchor tenant is controlled by SISU who have their own Agenda.Dies the Higgs share actually get anyone anything? What does it actually get?
One player less in this drama for a start. Only two people arguing. Access to all future emails between CCC and ACL ( easier than a "hopeless case" to gain access ). Access to ACL revenues. Share of decision making of ACL. Both sides forced to communicate. Not bad in return for a 5,5 mil "donation" to a Coventry based charity - which Joy recognises as such. Also good pr for SISU.
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?