St Andrew's it is then (1 Viewer)

[Nick]

I'll be honest, I don't know. Aren't the "removal of future legal action" and the indeminty entirely separate?

No-one, outside of those on the inside, knows the detail of these agreements. CCFC have already said they've dropped any legal claim against Wasps. The Indemnity has been guessed at being Wasps saying to CCFC that "if there's a problem with the way we bought the stadium, CCFC will pay". Quite right the club don't sign up to that. The full detail of the indemnity or the conditions for CCFC to return to Ricoh aren't known.

So we're now back to the two major parties saying one thing versus the other with regard to the indemnity. The timing of the "new stadium" announcement has been called out by many as PR in advance of announcing no return to Coventry. Sky Blue tinted glasses aside, who has most to gain by lying about it?

I think you being back posting and some strange accounts on Twitter appearing again give a good indicator.

 

---

[johnwillomagic]

Understand all opinions on here and as I do not live in Coventry and cannot make all games it does not affect me as much as others.

Yes of course Cov should be playing in Cov but not at all costs to the detriment and future of CCFC.

I honestly think if more people could get to St Andrews to support the club it would be fantastic and help build on the feel good factor of last season yes the away support is fantastic but if some could see their way to getting to St Andrews to help finances and the team with support it would be great and send a message to the council and wasps.

I have to hope to stay sane that the new ground is genuine and does give us hope for a sustainable long term future for the club the Ricoh with it's current status and terms to play there is sadly not the answer.

I actually think current situation is a lot different from Northampton and hope fans can see it that way and support Mark Robins and the fantastic set of lads currently playing for the side!

 

[Orca]

I think you being back posting and some strange accounts on Twitter appearing again give a good indicator.

A good indicator of what?

I've asked a reasonable question. One of the two parties involved here is lying. It could be either of them. Which has the most to gain?

 

[shmmeee]

A good indicator of what?

I've asked a reasonable question. One of the two parties involved here is lying. It could be either of them. Which has the most to gain?

In theory they’ve both got the same thing to gain.

 

[David O'Day]

There goes all my enthusiasm.

Oh well, Preston, Barnsley or Sheffield Wednesday away perhaps.

Really sad about this.


I still remember staying up all night in Perth to see whether SISU had saved the club . I thought that was good news at the time.

ffs

 

[Nick]

A good indicator of what?

I've asked a reasonable question. One of the two parties involved here is lying. It could be either of them. Which has the most to gain?

It could be both of them to be fair.

I am pretty sure we are going to hear more about it.

 

[Great_Expectations]

Sod the negativity around the announcement. Support the club, regardless of politics - too many people missed out last year because of this, and if they do so again, it’s their loss.

I enjoy St Andrews for a multitude of reasons, and the fact that by playing there means we aren’t helping to fund Wasps is a bonus.

Don’t get me wrong, I wish we were playing in Coventry, it’s absolutely ridiculous we aren’t, especially in our first year back in the Championship. But it’s not on the club, and it certainly isn’t on MR and the players.


There’s so much positivity around the club at the minute, let’s not let any third parties derail that.

We are where we are, and in fact we’re in a stronger position both on the pitch (promotion) and off it (Warwick Uni announcement) than when we confirmed St Andrews last year.

Re comments about MR potentially leaving because of St Andrews; he’s in a select group of managers in that he has influence in decisions and discussions beyond the usual remit of a Manager. He’s also been public on his views of the importance of the pitch and CCC. He isn’t going anywhere, at least not of his own volition.

 

[cc84cov]

It could be both of them to be fair.

I am pretty sure we are going to hear more about it.

I Expect the club to respond tomorrow probably going on the attack

 

[Grendel]

Sod the negativity around the announcement. Support the club, regardless of politics - too many people missed out last year because of this, and if they do so again, it’s their loss.

I enjoy St Andrews for a multitude of reasons, and the fact that by playing there means we aren’t helping to fund Wasps is a bonus.

Don’t get me wrong, I wish we were playing in Coventry, it’s absolutely ridiculous we aren’t, especially in our first year back in the Championship. But it’s not on the club, and it certainly isn’t on MR and the players.


There’s so much positivity around the club at the minute, let’s not let any third parties derail that.

We are where we are, and in fact we’re in a stronger position both on the pitch (promotion) and off it (Warwick Uni announcement) than when we confirmed St Andrews last year.

Re comments about MR potentially leaving because of St Andrews; he’s in a select group of managers in that he has influence in decisions and discussions beyond the usual remit of a Manager. He’s also been public on his views of the importance of the pitch and CCC. He isn’t going anywhere, at least not of his own volition.

We won’t have a club in a couple of years so forgive me for not sharing in this positivity

 

[cc84cov]

We won’t have a club in a couple of years so forgive me for not sharing in this positivity

Interested to hear your view on both statements G ?

 

[Philosoraptor]

There is a question that begs to be asked.

Is there a third party we have yet to hear from in these ground talks?

 

[Philosoraptor]

Both statements can be correct if there was another third party who wished to stay anonymous was pushing another way.

 

[cc84cov]

There is a question that begs to be asked.

Is there a third party we have yet to hear from in these ground talks?

We all know it’s the council we won’t hear off them mate they wont want the bad press Of a council who wants to kill its own football team

 

[Nick]

We won’t have a club in a couple of years so forgive me for not sharing in this positivity

We will. Are you gearing up for a seat on the Trust?

 

[Great_Expectations]

We won’t have a club in a couple of years so forgive me for not sharing in this positivity

Forgiven.

Although it’s unlike you not to be positive.

 

[shepardo01]

There is a question that begs to be asked.

Is there a third party we have yet to hear from in these ground talks?

Grendel has talked about moonstone holdings.
Hedgefund that Wasps holdings are part of???
Shot in the dark... don't really know how they fit....

 

[Orca]

In theory they’ve both got the same thing to gain.

That's what I don't understand. It benefits everyone for us to be back at the Ricoh, even if it's temporary. Whatever it is that's in the way is clearly so contentious that neither/either party is prepared to tell the truth about it. If it's just a personality clash between the hierarchy (and we've definitely been there before) then that won't be easily resolved. If there genuinely is an indemnity clause, CCFC can't come back. If there's no indemnity, the club are running the PR game about a new stadium to sell STs and putting the blame on Wasps to bump up sales at StA.

 

[cc84cov]

We won’t have a club in a couple of years so forgive me for not sharing in this positivity

Wasps will crack before us

 

[David O'Day]

That's what I don't understand. It benefits everyone for us to be back at the Ricoh, even if it's temporary. Whatever it is that's in the way is clearly so contentious that neither/either party is prepared to tell the truth about it. If it's just a personality clash between the hierarchy (and we've definitely been there before) then that won't be easily resolved. If there genuinely is an indemnity clause, CCFC can't come back. If there's no indemnity, the club are running the PR game about a new stadium to sell STs and putting the blame on Wasps to bump up sales at StA.

Why would they do that as they would be reducing the income for CCFC next season. They are not going to break off talks just to increases tickets at Stans.

 

[Orca]

Why would they do that as they would be reducing the income for CCFC next season. They are not going to break off talks just to increases tickets at Stans.

I agree. There's also the longer game to consider though isn't there? Short term: New stadium annoucement = more STs at StA. Not coming back to the Ricoh = another way to dig at Wasps and put them under financial pressure

 

[Nick]

That's what I don't understand. It benefits everyone for us to be back at the Ricoh, even if it's temporary. Whatever it is that's in the way is clearly so contentious that neither/either party is prepared to tell the truth about it. If it's just a personality clash between the hierarchy (and we've definitely been there before) then that won't be easily resolved. If there genuinely is an indemnity clause, CCFC can't come back. If there's no indemnity, the club are running the PR game about a new stadium to sell STs and putting the blame on Wasps to bump up sales at StA.

Don't really think it will make much difference in terms of ST's, it will be mostly the same people who went last year and maybe a few new purchased who got the bug because of us winning the league.

Not too sure many will run out to buy a season ticket (we don't even know when we will be able to go) based on the Warwick Uni stuff. They will be going to watch CCFC play.

 

[cc84cov]

A chunk of games will be behind closed doors with another possible lockdown later on how would that of effected SISU with making a deal ? Would of if mattered to do another year in brum to add more pressure to Wasps

 

[David O'Day]

I agree. There's also the longer game to consider though isn't there? Short term: New stadium annoucement = more STs at StA. Not coming back to the Ricoh = another way to dig at Wasps and put them under financial pressure

Not really, no

Not playing at the ricoh will financially distress CCFC so there is no way that CCFC would break off talks unless there was no way there could be an agreement

 

[shmmeee]

That's what I don't understand. It benefits everyone for us to be back at the Ricoh, even if it's temporary. Whatever it is that's in the way is clearly so contentious that neither/either party is prepared to tell the truth about it. If it's just a personality clash between the hierarchy (and we've definitely been there before) then that won't be easily resolved. If there genuinely is an indemnity clause, CCFC can't come back. If there's no indemnity, the club are running the PR game about a new stadium to sell STs and putting the blame on Wasps to bump up sales at StA.

Both sides clearly think there’s a chance Sisu could win and they’ll end up with the Ricoh? If you value that at tens of millions (?) then a few seasons without rent payments/extra ticket sales is worth it.

 

[cc84cov]

Not really, no

Not playing at the ricoh will financially distress CCFC so there is no way that CCFC would break off talks unless there was no way there could be an agreement

We probably have broke off talks as wasps are asking us to do something we can’t agree too

 

[David O'Day]

A chunk of games will be behind closed doors with another possible lockdown later on how would that of effected SISU with making a deal ? Would of if mattered to do another year in brum to add more pressure to Wasps

Yes because the games will be BCD no matter where we play. It doesn't make financial sense to choose to play in Brum unless you feel you can not ever reach an agreement.

 

[David O'Day]

We probably have broke off talks as wasps are asking us to do something we can’t agree too

Which falls nicely under the " there was no way there could be an agreement" part of the post.

 

[Nick]

Both sides clearly think there’s a chance Sisu could win and they’ll end up with the Ricoh? If you value that at tens of millions (?) then a few seasons without rent payments/extra ticket sales is worth it.

What I don't get is that the EU stuff is going to happen regardless of where we play and can't be stopped now.

 

[SeaSeeEffCee]

Yes because the games will be BCD no matter where we play. It doesn't make financial sense to choose to play in Brum unless you feel you can not ever reach an agreement.

This is probably a big part of it. Why accept Wasps demands if we don't feel they're fair and when we don't know how long we're going to be playing with reduced capacity for. For all we know we could be playing 30% capacity for half the season which is the difference of around 500 seats between the Ricoh and St. Andrews.

 

[David O'Day]

This is probably a big part of it. Why accept Wasps demands if we don't feel they're fair and when we don't know how long we're going to be playing with reduced capacity for. For all we know we could be playing 30% capacity for half the season which is the difference of around 500 seats between the Ricoh and St. Andrews.

The capacity doesn't really matter as the crowd will be lower at Stans

 

[cc84cov]

What I don't get is that the EU stuff is going to happen regardless of where we play and can't be stopped now.

I feel the council are fully involved here and putting the block on any deal for their war with SISU

 

[Orca]

Both sides clearly think there’s a chance Sisu could win and they’ll end up with the Ricoh? If you value that at tens of millions (?) then a few seasons without rent payments/extra ticket sales is worth it.

SISU don't get the Ricoh if the case is found against CCC (I know you already know that). Wasps will have to stump up the difference between what they bought it for and whatever value the EU place on the Arena. The general assumption is that they won't be able to afford it, hence having an indemnity protects them from being destitute. That said, we now have an impasse over whether the indemnity exists at all.

 

[Orca]

I feel the council are fully involved here and putting the block on any deal for their war with SISU

Ok, how are the Council able to do that?

 

[Nick]

SISU don't get the Ricoh if the case is found against CCC (I know you already know that). Wasps will have to stump up the difference between what they bought it for and whatever value the EU place on the Arena. The general assumption is that they won't be able to afford it, hence having an indemnity protects them from being destitute. That said, we now have an impasse over whether the indemnity exists at all.

Just depends if they mean an indemnity against legal action or indemnity against the possible damages from the EU case.

 

[Nick]

Ok, how are the Council able to do that?

How were the council able to lean on Cov Rugby? They make things very difficult.

Please don't come back on here spouting your well timed bullshit just to fuck off when the football starts. Save that shit for your Council mates if they haven't all been banned from Twitter yet.

The whole "the council are innocent and would never do anything wrong" act doesn't work, it isn't 2012.