The Butts - CRFC Confirms it is willing to join mediation talks (3 Viewers)

[Nick]

Why are you assuming CCFC has to die for Sisu to leave, I don't see that way at all?

Have you given up on NOPM now then?

 

---

[duffer]

Why are you assuming CCFC has to die for Sisu to leave, I don't see that way at all?
They obviously going nowhere untill they have sold Ryton and JR2 has run its course !
Duffer you carry on and lap up the charade !

Where's the evidence that SISU will leave after JR2 and Ryton are sold? Are you sure that you're not playing your own little internal charade here John?

Even then JR2 could take years. I suspect that you've become so obsessed with 'beating' SISU that you'd be happy for that to happen. And you're happy to give a free pass to the council in the meantime because you're unable to separate the club from the owners.

If this is SISU bullshit, and it may very well be, the easiest way to expose it is surely for the council to reverse that stance and say "OK then, what do you want from us?". At the moment their attitude gives SISU the perfect excuse to fiddle around with vague proposals or even take the club out of the city completely. You lap it up though, if it keeps you happy!

 

[duffer]

The current one is always the last one

If it's not up-to-date, then by definition it's not current.

 

[sky blue john]

Have you given up on NOPM now then?

Hi Nicķ does NOPM still exist ?
Your so last season you need to keep up with the times!

 

[sky blue john]

Where's the evidence that SISU will leave after JR2 and Ryton are sold? Are you sure that you're not playing your own little internal charade here John?

Even then JR2 could take years. I suspect that you've become so obsessed with 'beating' SISU that you'd be happy for that to happen. And you're happy to give a free pass to the council in the meantime because you're unable to separate the club from the owners.

If this is SISU bullshit, and it may very well be, the easiest way to expose it is surely for the council to reverse that stance and say "OK then, what do you want from us?". At the moment their attitude gives SISU the perfect excuse to fiddle around with vague proposals or even take the club out of the city completely. You lap it up though, if it keeps you happy!

Nothing you or me say is going to change anything. We just have to wait and see what happens and hope we have a club left at the end of it all.
I don't know anything for definate just like you. My oppinion/ conclusions are based on logically evaluating history and from research on Hedge funds.

 

[duffer]

Nothing you or me say is going to change anything. We just have to wait and see what happens and hope we have a club left at the end of it all.
I don't know anything for definate just like you. My oppinion/ conclusions are based on logically evaluating history and from research on Hedge funds.

Which is absolutely fair enough John, except that I don't think that there's ever been a story quite like ours. In fact, I'm thinking of turning it into a musical. (Tom Hardy has expressed an interest in playing Fisher, he likes dark, conflicted characters).

However to focus solely on our owners' shortcomings results in an incomplete evaluation and isn't entirely logical to my mind, but you're as entitled to your opinion as anyone else here.

 

[sky blue john]

Which is absolutely fair enough John, except that I don't think that there's ever been a story quite like ours. In fact, I'm thinking of turning it into a musical. (Tom Hardy has expressed an interest in playing Fisher, he likes dark, conflicted characters).

However to focus solely on our owners' shortcomings results in an incomplete evaluation and isn't entirely logical to my mind, but you're as entitled to your opinion as anyone else here.

I have apportioned blame to all parties its just I can't see any resolutions, way forward untill Sisu have gone.

 

[Brylowes]

[QUOTE="duffer, post: 1299253, member: 1715)

SISU aren't the only side here who have pulled stunts - where does it get us if they don't at least start talking?[/QUOTE]
Any stunts pulled by other parties have been as a consequence of, and in response to
Stunts pulled by SISU.
Once they monumentally fucked up the any deal for the Ricoh the game was up for us,
We are only here now for as long as the legals take. IMO

 

[chiefdave]

Any stunts pulled by other parties have been as a consequence of, and in response to
Stunts pulled by SISU.

How was CCC refusing to even consider CCFC owning a stake in the stadium prior to SISU coming in a consequence of stunts pulled by SISU?

 

[MusicDating]

How was CCC refusing to even consider CCFC owning a stake in the stadium prior to SISU coming in a consequence of stunts pulled by SISU?

I think the council's historical attitude to CCFC prior to Sisu arriving is forgotten by some...

 

[ladywoodskyblue]

Adjacent to BPA is Butts Park, could this land be used in the building of a new stadium? I know getting rid of parkland can often be unpopular, but this park seems fairly underused

 

[Captain Dart]

I thought Wasps haven't had the valuation done, and therefore it is not known whether the assets outstrip the liabilities.
We can all make presumptions, I am sure yours are far more pro than mine, but at the end of the day the fact of its value is currently unconfirmed.

(If there is a current valuation I am happy to pointed to it)

One is due soon isn't it. Sure someone said that recently. Is it in Wasps interim accounts? I know they backed out of doing one before they were published.

 

[Captain Dart]

Which is absolutely fair enough John, except that I don't think that there's ever been a story quite like ours. In fact, I'm thinking of turning it into a musical. (Tom Hardy has expressed an interest in playing Fisher, he likes dark, conflicted characters).

However to focus solely on our owners' shortcomings results in an incomplete evaluation and isn't entirely logical to my mind, but you're as entitled to your opinion as anyone else here.

He'll have to wear some padding for act one.

 

[Moff]

The current one is always the last one

Haha, nice deflection, so that means there hasn't been a recent one.

As it stands there is no current/recent valuation, which I believe needed to be done with regards to the bonds. If there isn't anything recent your assertion that Wasps assets outstrip their liabilities seems to be standing on pillars of sand.

 

[Moff]

Have you given up on NOPM now then?

He was upset Luton didn't get to the Checkatrade final so came back to supporting CCFC.

 

[skybluetony176]

Isn't the point here that it would be a lot easier to do if all parties were on board, including by definition the council? You've accepted now that they've tried to block a possible move to the Butts already, I think. Unless you're a bit daft, and I don't think you are, I think you'd also accept that this would be a lot easier to do with council support.

As others have said, surely the fastest way to find out whether this is another piece of SISU bullshit, is for the council to join in with this mediation and to say that they'll help the club find somewhere else. The eaiest way to drag it out and potentially ensure that at some point in the future we'll be playing somewhere other than in Coventry, is for the council to keep playing the same game.

On board with what? There's nothing to get on board with until an official approach is made. Has that happened?

The fact that they're telling us that they have plans drawn and finances in place but aren't acting on them what does that tell you?

Why would you spend money and time doing that and then not act on it if you were serious?

That's the point. The council don't need to do jack. If our owners are serious they'll take the next step. Of they're not serious all the council have to do is sit back and let them trip themselves up. Which history has already shown us with the Ricoh they will.

If they're serious get on with it. Sell the plan to the fans of both CCFC and CRFC, put in a planning application, get the local community behind it (much like they've already done with selling of Ryton for housing. Did you notice how quickly they did that in comparison to the Butts proposal? It's almost like they're actively seeking to do one but not the other) and then let the council be the bad guys. It's not like the council have the final say in this process anyway. The final say comes from Westminster.

 

[Moff]

One is due soon isn't it. Sure someone said that recently. Is it in Wasps interim accounts? I know they backed out of doing one before they were published.

One is well overdue. We can speculate to the delay, but its still outstanding.

 

[Astute]

Quote from the council in the CT today

So doesn't sound like the "active not passive support from Coventry City Council" Fisher spoke about. Why can't the football club get the same level of assistance Wasps do with any plans. When it was them building at Higgs there were emails from the council talking about how they could ensure the application passed.

The difference is Wasps put their plans to them. For all the bluster that Fisher has come out with he has never put plans in for anything. And a mock up picture of a stadium doesn't count. We will have to wait to see if any plans ever get put forward before we can have a go at anyone for the way they are dealt with.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

They need CCFC for the naming rights deal. I would expect they only get half the value without CCFC on board

If that was true theyd be all over them

 

[fernandopartridge]

It could. But the fact is it appears despite what people on here are insisting and by the looks of it an award winning investigative journalist is saying the site doesn't have approval for a 12k stadium. That's the point I'm making.

Yes the previous application would support it, I'm not saying otherwise but it's by no means a full gone conclusion and the demographic of the immediate vicinity has also changed. And despite what the expert who incorrectly insisted that the site does have planning permission when it seems it doesn't say's people living in the locality will have a big say and a precedent has already been set in the court case for Mildenhall stadium which actually puts the ball squarely in the residents court. All this has happened since the last application was approved.

Also I noticed on the link you put up ir specifically says Rugby Stadium. Is this a reflection on the conditions that apply to the site?

No. There are a list of conditions of things that can't happen there but football isn't one of them.

 

[fernandopartridge]

even in the short term 12,000 wouldn't be enough unless we still haven't hit rock bottom. 45,000ish to a tin pot trophy final. how many seats do you think we would sell if this time next year we are sat 8 points clear at the top of league 2?
If this club won league 2 or even top 2, come March 2018 I'd expect gates of 15,000 plus. prob 25,000 for the last few games. We get sub 10,000 because we are bottom and going no where.

There were 7K at the Ricoh last night.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

There were 7K at the Ricoh last night.

There will be 11,12 or more thousand on Saturday so

 

[skybluetony176]

No. There are a list of conditions of things that can't happen there but football isn't one of them.

I would make the comment that this means there's little stopping us and CRFC putting these plans in that people are insisting are around and start getting on with it but having read the statement released today from CRFC it seems that there isn't even an agreement in place in principle between CCFC and CRFC to move forward on any level. Basically this whole thread has been an exercise in futility.

Might as well close it Nick.

 

[fernandopartridge]

The talk of the Ricoh sponsorship deal is interesting. Are any of the other stadiums of clubs in Wasps' league sponsored?

 

[duffer]

On board with what? There's nothing to get on board with until an official approach is made. Has that happened?

The fact that they're telling us that they have plans drawn and finances in place but aren't acting on them what does that tell you?

Why would you spend money and time doing that and then not act on it if you were serious?

That's the point. The council don't need to do jack. If our owners are serious they'll take the next step. Of they're not serious all the council have to do is sit back and let them trip themselves up. Which history has already shown us with the Ricoh they will.

If they're serious get on with it. Sell the plan to the fans of both CCFC and CRFC, put in a planning application, get the local community behind it (much like they've already done with selling of Ryton for housing. Did you notice how quickly they did that in comparison to the Butts proposal? It's almost like they're actively seeking to do one but not the other) and then let the council be the bad guys. It's not like the council have the final say in this process anyway. The final say comes from Westminster.

On board with mediation Tony. You know when I said you weren't daft, I'm having my doubts now.

What's the point of getting started on anything in the city of Coventry if the council are clearly hostile to the idea. The best way of outing the idea as rubbish would be to go along with it and see if it's actually got legs. But some people will accept the council doing anything to the club as long as it gets in SISU's way, clearly.

 

[1940oldfive]

There's a decent chance we'll all be dead by then, and the world will be ruled by apes!

leave tiny tim out of this

 

[Hobo]

Adjacent to BPA is Butts Park, could this land be used in the building of a new stadium? I know getting rid of parkland can often be unpopular, but this park seems fairly underused

It is in regular use from local residents in Earlsdon and Spon End

 

[skybluetony176]

On board with mediation Tony. You know when I said you weren't daft, I'm having my doubts now.

What's the point of getting started on anything in the city of Coventry if the council are clearly hostile to the idea. The best way of outing the idea as rubbish would be to go along with it and see if it's actually got legs. But some people will accept the council doing anything to the club as long as it gets in SISU's way, clearly.

What are the council hostile to exactly? Not developing the BPA according to the JS statement. And I quote "The City Council and the RFU have been involved in those discussions and the City Council in particular have expressed themselves most supportive"

You might find it helpful to read the statement on CRFC's website. I'd hate for you to look daft with presumptions.

 

[Hobo]

The talk of the Ricoh sponsorship deal is interesting. Are any of the other stadiums of clubs in Wasps' league sponsored?

Sale had a sponsorship deal, not sure if it is still going. Not same league but same level, Ulster in Pro 12 have sponsorship on their stadium.

 

[ricohroar]

There were 7K at the Ricoh last night.

Your point being? or are you saying we will be rock bottom of league 2? in which case yes I agree 12,000 is more than enough...

 

[chiefdave]

What are the council hostile to exactly?

The football club. And that's been the case since long before SISU arrived.

 

[duffer]

What are the council hostile to exactly? Not developing the BPA according to the JS statement. And I quote "The City Council and the RFU have been involved in those discussions and the City Council in particular have expressed themselves most supportive"

You might find it helpful to read the statement on CRFC's website. I'd hate for you to look daft with presumptions.

I've read it mate, though funnily enough it hadn't been released when this discussion started. Are you sure you have read it though, you know properly that is, without moving your lips and dribbling. I find the key is to proper comprehension is grasping the context - I'd hate for you to look daft by quoting something that you haven't really understood. That paragraph starts with this phrase:

"the plan is to develop improved match day and training facilities – for the use of Coventry Rugby and the greater community"

And goes on to add:

"The most important and early step would be to lay down a new, artificial pitch"

Then it says the stuff about the Council being supportive. You'll note there's no mention of Coventry City in that paragraph, and a fully artificial pitch would preclude us playing on this anyway under FL rules. Elsewhere in the statement there's also this unambiguous line from Jon Sharp "we will not deal with SISU". So, joining the dots slowly, what do you honestly think CCC are 'supporting' here?

And then wow, look, here's another article.... BREAKING: Coventry council NOT taking part in MPs’ mediation talks to resolve Coventry City dispute

Is there anything in that article that suggests that Coventry CIty Council is any way supportive of the club moving to the Butts or anywhere else? I'll answer it for you if you like, because I can see you're struggling with this one - what the council are basically saying here is that they'll comply with their statutory responsibilities and nothing more. Beyond that, not interested in mediation, not interested in doing anything to help the club stay in the city (except as tenants as Wasps perhaps).

I get that for you, that's good enough and all of your dancing around on here is really an attempt to justify that point of view. For me though, it isn't.

 

[Grendel]

I've read it mate, though funnily enough it hadn't been released when this discussion started. Are you sure you have read it though, you know properly that is, without moving your lips and dribbling. I find the key is to proper comprehension is grasping the context - I'd hate for you to look daft by quoting something that you haven't really understood. That paragraph starts with this phrase:

"the plan is to develop improved match day and training facilities – for the use of Coventry Rugby and the greater community"

And goes on to add:

"The most important and early step would be to lay down a new, artificial pitch"

Then it says the stuff about the Council being supportive. You'll note there's no mention of Coventry City in that paragraph, and a fully artificial pitch would preclude us playing on this anyway under FL rules. Elsewhere in the statement there's also this unambiguous line from Jon Sharp "we will not deal with SISU". So, joining the dots slowly, what do you honestly think CCC are 'supporting' here?

And then wow, look, here's another article.... BREAKING: Coventry council NOT taking part in MPs’ mediation talks to resolve Coventry City dispute

Is there anything in that article that suggests that Coventry CIty Council is any way supportive of the club moving to the Butts or anywhere else? I'll answer it for you if you like, because I can see you're struggling with this one - what the council are basically saying here is that they'll comply with their statutory responsibilities and nothing more. Beyond that, not interested in mediation, not interested in doing anything to help the club stay in the city (except as tenants as Wasps perhaps).

I get that for you, that's good enough and all of your dancing around on here is really an attempt to justify that point of view. For me though, it isn't.

If ever there was a post I would like to triple like this is it.

 

[Otis]

If ever there was a post I would like to triple like this is it.

Maybe Nick can add in a 'Whoopee' button for you.

 

[skybluetony176]

I've read it mate, though funnily enough it hadn't been released when this discussion started. Are you sure you have read it though, you know properly that is, without moving your lips and dribbling. I find the key is to proper comprehension is grasping the context - I'd hate for you to look daft by quoting something that you haven't really understood. That paragraph starts with this phrase:

"the plan is to develop improved match day and training facilities – for the use of Coventry Rugby and the greater community"

And goes on to add:

"The most important and early step would be to lay down a new, artificial pitch"

Then it says the stuff about the Council being supportive. You'll note there's no mention of Coventry City in that paragraph, and a fully artificial pitch would preclude us playing on this anyway under FL rules. Elsewhere in the statement there's also this unambiguous line from Jon Sharp "we will not deal with SISU". So, joining the dots slowly, what do you honestly think CCC are 'supporting' here?

And then wow, look, here's another article.... BREAKING: Coventry council NOT taking part in MPs’ mediation talks to resolve Coventry City dispute

Is there anything in that article that suggests that Coventry CIty Council is any way supportive of the club moving to the Butts or anywhere else? I'll answer it for you if you like, because I can see you're struggling with this one - what the council are basically saying here is that they'll comply with their statutory responsibilities and nothing more. Beyond that, not interested in mediation, not interested in doing anything to help the club stay in the city (except as tenants as Wasps perhaps).

I get that for you, that's good enough and all of your dancing around on here is really an attempt to justify that point of view. For me though, it isn't.

So like I said then. Nothing to get on board with.