Samo
Well-Known Member
Who on earth does not realize that?
In other words Sisu would only take it for nothing so they could make a profit for 'themselves'
It's about time people realised Sisu are not here for CCFC or the fans.
Who on earth does not realize that?
Call me a cynic but I'm pretty sure the comment about hundreds of millions was slyly dropped in by the CET to instill a measure of panic into readers and more hatred for SISU and the club.
After all they can't have their beloved Wasps getting turfed out of their franchise home can they?
Wasn't it SISU representatives that were saying it? If so aren't they the ones slyly dropping it in? Why would reporting this then install this as hatred for the club?
It's about time people realised Sisu are not here for CCFC or the fans.
Wasn't it SISU representatives that were saying it? If so aren't they the ones slyly dropping it in? Why would reporting this then install this as hatred for the club?
Because it was made out that if SISU won then they would be ripping hundreds of millions away from tax payers, rather than the council dropping a bollock and losing tax payers money.
Was it? Where?
From what I read it just reported what was heard. There was no interpretation of what that meant.
It was the way it was written in the Telegraph. If you picked a random person from Australia to read it, how would they have taken it?
It was SISU taking the money from the tax payer and they could build a new stadium with money from the hard working tax payer, it wouldn't have been the council messing up and losing the tax payers money.
I don't think SISU will the appeal
If they did I don't think they would be awarded compensation due to their own actions.
If they did win compensation I don't think it would be as suggested 100's of millions.
If they did win that amount they would be crazy not to sell the football club for whatever price they can get and walk away with their reputation restored.
I am more annoyed that someone called me a liar. For stating what was in an article. The person said said it is not the article. When it clearly was
When clearly proven to be in the wrong they haven't got the decency to apologise.
Then again what should I expect from a businessman who says contracts are there to be broken.
Your faux pas outrage fools no one.
You didn't state it was in an article your statement was that Sisu are looking to make hundreds of millions out of "compo" and then to leave the club abandoned.
You I am sure are aware that this has been the subject of a thread before and indeed the sisu source was dragged up in it. I am hardly likely to have forgotten as it personally blamed me and two other posters for ruining the City of Coventry.
To suggest they are in it for the "compo" is a fabrication with no substance or evidence.
There is zero evidence this is a motivation and given that any "compo" would be determined by an independent party they will not decide on it. Additionally even if they would the outcome would take years and years.
Still you have succeeded in your mission of once again rubbishing ccfc and creating negativity.
I am sorry that I keep feeding you the opportunity to carry out this agenda of yours and yes I ought to know better.
And if you took another random person from outer Mongolia they'd probably see it in an opposite way to the random person from Australia.
It's your interpretation that's lead you to the conclusion that the CET is out to deliberately damage the club. It's my interpretation that it was said by the people that said it quite deliberately in front of a CET reporter as a scare tactic to CCC. So you've interpreted the piece as pro CCC I've interpreted it as SISU representatives starting the war of words. The truth is non of it really means anything until all the legal nonsense is finished and a real conclusion can be found. Still it distracted from the subject of the thread so I guess it's currently serving SISU well. The minions strike again.
isn't it a bit concerning that we haven't heard conformation yet?
Who on earth does not realize that?
Those that think any compensation will go back into the club ?
He said: “The judicial review is not being bankrolled by the football club.
Those that think any compensation will go back into the club ?
Ah so from somebody from SISU apparently saying it could be hundreds of millions outside a court, that gets a story saying that Tax Payers could be losing hundreds of millions to build a new stadium with? You would have thought there would be more evidence and facts to get 3 or 4 stories and the sensational headlines from than earwigging a conversation in a street?
They probably wouldn't come to another conclusion as theres no mention of that if tax payers were to lose millions that it is down to council wrong doings and that it could possibly be their fault.
I am pretty sure SISU are doing everything they possibly can purposely to make a thread go off topic.
If sisu did get hundreds of millions in compensation it won't be at anyone else's expense would it?
Can't see where it says that would be SISU's fault. You seem to have come to that conclusion all by yourself.
Is it not at the tax payers expense? That was the headline wasn't it, that the tax payer would be paying it?
I'm not up in arms about it, im pointing out the way the article read, it was quiet clear how it read and how it was meant to read. As I said at the time you could put across the same information in two different ways and it seem totally different. The way it said hundreds of millions of tax payers money to pay for new stadium read like sisu were taking it, rather than if a court was taking it due to a cock up.Well who else would be paying if SISU win? It's not the same as saying it's SISU's fault by any stretch of the imagination.
The only people suggesting it does is people like yourself so you can get up in arms about it. It's a (wait for it)...
...self fulfilling prophecy.
I'm not up in arms about it, im pointing out the way the article read, it was quiet clear how it read and how it was meant to read. As I said at the time you could put across the same information in two different ways and it seem totally different. The way it said hundreds of millions of tax payers money to pay for new stadium read like sisu were taking it, rather than if a court was taking it due to a cock up.
Why are you and dongo the only two people to actually use that phrase?
It wasn't the way it read at all. It just stated the bleeding obvious. Why you persist in trying to make out that the headline was saying something it clearly doesn't is beyond me.
Which phrase?
Why then was a thread started from that headline which blamed certain posters on here for losing the taxpayer millions of pounds?
It wasn't the way it read at all.
That's my point and how two things can mean the same but give two very different impressions.The headline was 'Coventry taxpayers could lose millions after Sky Blues' owners Sisu win right to appeal Ricoh Arena deal', not sure you could read that any other way. Why was the headline not 'CCC could lose taxpayers millions'?
The headline was 'Coventry taxpayers could lose millions after Sky Blues' owners Sisu win right to appeal Ricoh Arena deal', not sure you could read that any other way. Why was the headline not 'CCC could lose taxpayers millions'?
Presumably if one of our players scores a wonder goal in the play off final winning us promotion your going to be upset if the isn't "The goalie fail's to save".
Coventry tax payers could lose millions and SISU are persueing the court case.
Presumably if one of our players scores a wonder goal in the play off final winning us promotion your going to be upset if the isn't "The goalie fail's to save".
It is worded in such a way as to blame SISU. "No doubt about it"....as a previous manager used to say in his post match speech.
In other words, the Council may have messed up big time, but it won't matter unless those SISU people pursue it, and they will, so it's their fault.
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?