D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
This is more the point, haven't been in a position to sponsor really until recently, and spent half the time trying to move *out* the city then, anyway!
Stadium Name Change ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter italiahorse
- Start date
This is more the point, haven't been in a position to sponsor really until recently, and spent half the time trying to move *out* the city then, anyway!
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
I was hoping Tim Fisher might team up with David Gold (or Bobby) and they could call it The Gold Fisher Bowl
:slap:
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
We all know where your true loyalties lie.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
No, I think he is correct.
The sponsorship deal with Ricoh came about after the stadium's initial sponsor, the motor firm Jaguar, was forced to pull out because of the financial difficulties that had caused the controversial closure of the large Jaguar assembly plant at the city's Brown's Lane, previously a major source of employment in Coventry. On 4 August 2004, 12 months before the stadium's opening, it had been announced that the new stadium would be called the Jaguar Arena in a deal worth up to £7 million until 2015. However, the deal was cancelled on 17 December 2004.[SUP][13][/SUP] Ricoh's sponsorship of the new stadium was confirmed on 26 April 2005.[SUP][[/SUP]
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
i have been there. Not much has changed but its now owned by Wasps. Cant comment on TF great great great grand daughter !
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Not that bothered what the sponsorship is, its not like it matters to us as we didn't see a penny of the Ricoh sponsorship and won't see a penny of any new deal.
Went to the rugby today, first and last rugby game i ever been too. It was so sad to be there, just looking at what the Sisu fockwits lost out on. There was entertainment, flowing beers, service behind every till, every turnstyle open, no queues to get into ground and stewards who were helpful and just let everything flow. It has now lost that home feeling for me.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
to be fair, we never had any of the highlighted stuff
Paragraph 41
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/2014-06-30-final-jr-judgement-pdf-16944132-1144-1707475.pdf
Reading this again I see the Ricoh was valued at £37m some years ago. But this was dependent on a team playing at the Ricoh. Perhaps the valuation in the Prospectus may not then be too far off the mark?
Moff
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Paragraph 41 does not mention the words '£37m'.
It mentions "...to offer only closer to £2m than £5.5m.
And
"...trustees considered the valuation of ACL may have fallen to £5-6m...."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Nick
Administrator
So what it is saying is that SISU were offering £2m for 50% which was around the actual value if the lot went for £5.5. So the "SISU wouldn't pay" and "wanted it for nothing" claims aren't true?
Not to mention the council people saying how SISU would be paying well over the odds at £5.5.
Not to mention the council people saying how SISU would be paying well over the odds at £5.5.
Paragraph 41 does not mention the words '£37m'.
It mentions "...to offer only closer to £2m than £5.5m.
And
"...trustees considered the valuation of ACL may have fallen to £5-6m...."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
paragraph 41 answered the question raised.
paragraph 13 gives value
I think it says that the price agreed was then reduced. Which with hindsight appears to be the beginning of the end.
Nick
Administrator
Interesting you gave the highest valuation, even though there is another more recent one in there for less?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
So what you're seeking to confirm is that Wasps have well and truly ripped off the Council and Higgs Trust. Would have thought that would be the sort of thing you wouldn't want to draw attention to.
Nick
Administrator
In fairness, Wasps have got themselves a bargain haven't they. I'd be gloating if I just bought a Ferrari for a 10th of the price.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I thought the £2M was a charitable donation not an offer? Wasn't that what JS's PA stated in a court of law under oath?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
If anything it confirms that SISU deliberately sought to devalue the asset expecting to purchase it on the cheap, they miscalculated and screwed the club as a result.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
But it's fine and dandy if that was also Wasps strategy?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Wasps moved away from the Ricoh to deliberately devalue the Ricoh? I know they'd previously played a European game here and didn't return until they'd purchased the site but even with your imagination I can't see how you could stretch that to deliberately distressing ACL.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf it'd be crazy, absolutely crazy, to imagine a London based club attempting to buy a Coventry stadium cheap before moving away at a later date when a better offer turned up.
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
It wasn't though, was it? They didn't play games for 4 years, feigning that they would go elsewhere. They just bought it. If you don't like that Wasps got a bargain then place the blame firmly on SISU's shoulders - their shenanigans put ACL into a corner.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
SISU and Wasps are both commercial concerns, one pitched a deal at a level it would be accepted, the other played hard ball too long and screwed up themselves, the club, the fans and ultimately opened the door for Wasps. #idiots
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Frightening really, isn't it, that this is 21st century sport.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Well... tbf they were all for staying in Wycombe/all for going back to London... so you could indeed argue they feigned they'd go elsewhere to where they ended up.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
At the end of the day when SISU exiled the club to Northampton they lost all control on what happened next at the Ricoh. If we'd never moved away I would seriously doubt that either A) Wasps came knocking in the first place, B) If they had it wouldn't have been considered or C) If it had of been considered it wouldn't have happened without CCFC being consulted first. CCFC not being there as an anchor Tennant or indeed returning on a game on game basis instantly made the Ricoh more attractive to another sports team as they could not only buy ACL at a knock down price they could also install themselves as the anchor Tennant.
This was a massive massive oversight in SISU's strategy. Moving to Northampton made ACL more sellable and and at a cheaper price. SISU overplayed their hand is an understatement.
In fact, when you factor in all the free advertising SISU gave off the availability of the Ricoh in the national press someone else was always going to come in for it.
Last edited:
standupforcity
Well-Known Member
It's not the packaging, it's what's inside that counts....so as long as City keep TM and produce the kind of football to take us into the Championship, and do a good deal to remain at the Arena when the time comes, I really don't care what it's called, or what colour the seats are.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I must be bang in the button given your witty intellectual post. Congratulations on bringing SFA to the discussion.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't object to a compromise to be honest but at the moment it seems Wasps, for all their talk of being understanding landlords, don't give a toss about us. It would not have been difficult to have the Wasps and CCFC logos be equal in size, to have CCFC alongside Wasps at the atrium entrance, a mix of both clubs in the tunnel etc. Even the seats there could probably be a compromise on if and when they are replaced.
The fact is Wasps have shown total disregard for CCFC and our fans. The interview in the CT shows that 'just ask and Wasps will say yes' theory holds no water. If this is what it's like after a few months what will it be like in a couple of years?