bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Have they been talking about transfering the lease from CCFC Ltd to anyone else? No
Only CCFC Ltd can hold the lease, no one else can as far as I'm aware ACL have not tried to transfer to anyone else like you suggest.
Have they, or have they not been speaking with people who are not involved with the club?
So they can speak with SISU too.
How do you know anything either? We can just sit around saying 'he said, she said' and kill the club ourselcves if we want, or we can actually try and get it bloody fixed by shutting them in a room with each other and not letting them out until something's agreed.
No. Don't dodge the question.
You stated they have refused to engage with SISU, yet have with others. Prove it, or retract it. Don't ask questions back of me
I'm not dodging the question at all, your emotive statements about Ltd, administrators and wotnot was a spurious red herring.
ACL should talk to anybody who might be in a position to have the club playing in Coventry next season.
it is that simple.
Forget who owns what and how, that's a side issue.
I'm not dodging the question at all, your emotive statements about Ltd, administrators and wotnot was a spurious red herring.
ACL should talk to anybody who might be in a position to have the club playing in Coventry next season.
it is that simple.
Forget who owns what and how, that's a side issue.
What a joke. Forget who owns what or how? I think you'll find such trifling issues do have a bearing.
Don't make claims you can't justify
The lease is owned by CCFC Ltd, why is that so hard to understand? If Sisu want to talk to ACL they need to own CCFC Ltd.
No deal to be done surely?? No trust so cannot be any partnershipIt would, incidentally, have been nice if instead of the shouting Fisher had been interrogated a bit more about the invite to meet ACL next week, interrogated about why this would be a timewasting tactic, and why he seemed reluctant to do it.
Do you agree that ACL should talk to Fisher about plans for next season, if Fisher wants to talk to them?
No deal to be done surely?? No trust so cannot be any partnership
Your anger seems wholly and entirely misplaced
My anger is at people who seem determined to win arguments, rather than see our club survive.
That seems a reasonable place to place anger, to me.
Aim it at Fisher then. I won't tell you why, but look at SISU's track record.
Look at what they had when they came. League position. Gone. Crowds. Gone. Trust. Gone. Great stadium. On its way....
And you talk about our club surviving?!?
apart from a small handful of sympathisers on here
But i repeat you can do nothing about history, not a man has ever lived who can change it. Our desperate position is about the here and now, the future of our club is about the here and now, we can DO something about the here and now, not history.
I won't aim it at one place and one figurehead.
Black & white polarised views is the surefire way to kill our club.
Not to mention that it absolves SISU of any blame for our exact present situation; there was absolutely zero inevitability about what has happened coming to pass. It is precisely zero % Richardson's fault that SISU are incapable of negotiating like gentleman rather than gangsters.
How far back can history be an excuse for others actions? It simply doesn't wash, sorry.
Nobody has ever stated its one party. But it is evidently one party who, over term, are more culpable than the other.
Let me ask you another question. Fisher now says its got nothing to do with rent, it's all about revenues. ACL can do nothing about that, as contracts are in place with entities such as the Compass JV. They're largely hamstrung.
So what was the point of the rent discussions? The rent being withheld?
If it was never going to work, as we are being told, why not come to that agreement with ACL - as Fisher tells us there is no other outcome - agree to part in good faith, build this fabled new stadium and move from one to the other in an ordered, structured manner?
Is it so hard to understand that if ACL are prepared to talk to people not involved with the club about the club playing there, then they should be equally prepared to talk to Fisher and SISU?
Let's not deflect the issue onto who's worthiest.
It doesn't absolve sisu of blame. By ignore history it absolves everyone that has hand in the club getting to position from blame.
Excellent point. TF throws out so many statements designed to confuse it is great when someone, like you, points out inconsistencies.Nobody has ever stated its one party. But it is evidently one party who, over term, are more culpable than the other.
Let me ask you another question. Fisher now says its got nothing to do with rent, it's all about revenues. ACL can do nothing about that, as contracts are in place with entities such as the Compass JV. They're largely hamstrung.
So what was the point of the rent discussions? The rent being withheld?
If it was never going to work, as we are being told, why not come to that agreement with ACL - as Fisher tells us there is no other outcome - agree to part in good faith, build this fabled new stadium and move from one to the other in an ordered, structured manner?
Isn't it one invite for one forum?
By going twice aren't you denying someone else who might want to, a chance to go?
I'm not dodging the question at all, your emotive statements about Ltd, administrators and wotnot was a spurious red herring.
ACL should talk to anybody who might be in a position to have the club playing in Coventry next season.
it is that simple.
Forget who owns what and how, that's a side issue.
It would, incidentally, have been nice if instead of the shouting Fisher had been interrogated a bit more about the invite to meet ACL next week, interrogated about why this would be a timewasting tactic, and why he seemed reluctant to do it.
That's absolutely true. But given the acknowledged car crash that had gone before, the necessity for thorough due diligence was profound. That should have given the club the basis to finally shed its legacy.
Call me stupid, but some if the historical owners are in my mind due a touch more sympathy than SISU? Why? Well, sometimes, it's awful hard to turn around a failing company. Debts follow debts, and the downhill momentum is hard to pull back.
Administration, or new owners with renegotiated terms are the chance to start again to an extent. It draws a line in the sand. To come through such and still point the finger back to previous owners, or contracts, really isn't good enough. Sorry, it's not
It doesn't absolve sisu of blame. By ignore history it absolves everyone that has hand in the club getting to position from blame.
Well if we take sisu at their word then they are building a new stadium.
They need to maximise income in the interim. I cannot see an argument that would suggest this would be higher in a stadium outside the city.
So by Monday the trust need a statement from ACL x
Confirming;
Would they agree a 3 year rent arrangement in principal with sisu?
Are they open to negotiation with sisu at all or have they indeed ended communications?
If they are willing to discuss a deal I cannot see any argument suggesting the move away would work.
Problem is we don't know the full details of the car crash that went on beforehand, and what people's roles were within that. It's important because someone who may or may not have been involved in those decisions is fronting a potential take over bid.
That's true but we have no influence over that. If it happens we have to hold new owners to account and make sure old mistakes are not repeated.Problem is we don't know the full details of the car crash that went on beforehand, and what people's roles were within that. It's important because someone who may or may not have been involved in those decisions is fronting a potential take over bid.
It is utterly irrelevant to what has happened in the last 18 months-unless you're looking for a scapegoat, of course.
That's true in one context. But it doesn't have a bearing on SISU's inability to capitalise on why should have been a fresh start
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?