Today's game (2 Viewers)

[duffer]

But the franchise sport thing is also that which is being used by many to offer repulsion and hatred towards the deal. I understand that. I truly do. But - and here's the point I'm making - it also excuses the club's owners for the perilous position they put the football club in to achieve their own goal. And let's be honest, the asset (ACL, freehold, long lease, etc.) - would never have been held in the same Limited Company at the football club, it would have been a SISU Group asset.

What if CRFC had been a touch more successful in recent seasons - just two divisions better - and they were then in a position to move into The Arena. What would folk say then? The franchise sport argument goes out of the window, the 'supporting local sport' argument with regards the local council goes out of the window. What are you left with? The analysis of how the football club's owners put the football club's very viability at risk, and lost. That's the debate we'd be having. And we're not

It's a fair argument but I think where we differ here MMM (and I appreciate that this is matter of opinion rather than fact), is here. You would put the whole blame for the Ricoh being sold to Wasps at the door of our owners, and seem to think that SISU are getting an easy ride as the result of the sale being to a franchise.

However the choice to sell to Wasps was made by the Council - no matter how bad SISU were as owners, they did not and could not compel a sale of ACL to another third party, be that Wasps or per your example, CRFC.

From my point of view, the deal to sell to a franchise just makes the council's decision even more wrong - but selling to anyone other than CCFC wouldn't have seemed right to me.

There was a proper course of action here in my view, and it was exactly that proposed by the Council when the club first returned. It was to wait and build trust. In two or three years we'd have been no further down the road on the new stadium, and it would have been obvious that ACL wasn't going to make it without the club there. If there still wasn't a deal to be had at that point, then so be it - but I think the odds are that a little reality would have set in myself.

And in all of this, I still don't see SISU getting an easy ride. Does anyone here ever express the opinion that they are anything other than woeful as custodians of the club?

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It's a fair argument but I think where we differ here MMM (and I appreciate that this is matter of opinion rather than fact), is here. You would put the whole blame for the Ricoh being sold to Wasps at the door of our owners, and seem to think that SISU are getting an easy ride as the result of the sale being to a franchise.

However the choice to sell to Wasps was made by the Council - no matter how bad SISU were as owners, they did not and could not compel a sale of ACL to another third party, be that Wasps or per your example, CRFC.

From my point of view, the deal to sell to a franchise just makes the council's decision even more wrong - but selling to anyone other than CCFC wouldn't have seemed right to me.

There was a proper course of action here in my view, and it was exactly that proposed by the Council when the club first returned. It was to wait and build trust. In two or three years we'd have been no further down the road on the new stadium, and it would have been obvious that ACL wasn't going to make it without the club there. If there still wasn't a deal to be had at that point, then so be it - but I think the odds are that a little reality would have set in myself.

And in all of this, I still don't see SISU getting an easy ride. Does anyone here ever express the opinion that they are anything other than woeful as custodians of the club?

I just don't see an equal hand of criticism for all parties from some. Looking at your last question, for example, I invite my learned friend to look at post #66 above.

The critique of SISU: 'everyone agrees that SISU have made a mess of running the club, to put it mildly. Everyone agrees going to Northampton was a mistake'

The critique of CCC: ‘a free pass to destroy and chance the club has of improving its fortunes for decades to come’, ‘a campaign of deceit’, ‘pure dishonesty towards the electorate’

Post #66 isn't atypical. It's the way a distinct and vocal minority apportion blame. Looking at those words - both those quoted and here, and the flavour you'll see elsewhere on this board - do you honestly see that as a balanced judgement of where blame lies in the totality of this mess?

The football club was rolled-up into a campaign which had a bigger ambition. The consequences of that I hate. I keep saying it, and I'll say it again; I hate what's happened. But the consequences stem from a high-risk strategy which always had this terrible outcome as one of it's possible outcomes

 

[chiefdave]

I just don't see an equal hand of criticism for all parties from some. Looking at your last question, for example, I invite my learned friend to look at post #66 above.

The critique of SISU: 'everyone agrees that SISU have made a mess of running the club, to put it mildly. Everyone agrees going to Northampton was a mistake'

The critique of CCC: ‘a free pass to destroy and chance the club has of improving its fortunes for decades to come’, ‘a campaign of deceit’, ‘pure dishonesty towards the electorate’

So what there is factually inaccurate? SISU have been appauling owners, have done many things wrong but the fact always remained that if and when they left should a 'good' owner take over there was a pretty clear route to take the club back to its former glory.

The actions of the council mean that unless a billionaire takes over and wants to write of tens of millions there is very little chance of progressing much beyond our current level, the independent experts wheeled out by the local media have confirmed as much.

In short the actions of SISU cause problems in the short term the actions of CCC cause problems in the long term. I don't see pointing that out as giving an unbalanced view.

You have of course chosen to miss out some of the quote. Particularly where I stated 'that doesn't give CCC, Higgs, ACL, Wasps or anyone else a free pass to destroy and chance the club has of improving its fortunes for decades to come'. So not a critique of CCC as you claim. In any case I would very much stand by that. I don't believe that SISU being useless means CCC can prioritise 'getting one over' on them above the future of the club.

And of course you've chosen a quote from a discussion around the sale of ACL to Wasps. Naturally that will contain more comment on CCC than say a thread from 18 months ago on us moving to Sixfields.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I have no doubt it was SISU's actions that caused CCC to take the course of action they did. In the end they dropped down to SISU's level of lies and manipulation and beat SISU at there own game it looks. SISU were seemingly prepared to go to any lengths to obtain the Ricoh on the cheap and CCC were prepared to go to any lengths to stop it happening. CCFC was collateral damage to both side, no doubt the council justified there actions by saying it was for the greater good, some believe it was and others don't.

 

[chiefdave]

I have no doubt it was SISU's actions that caused CCC to take the course of action they did. In the end they dropped down to SISU's level of lies and manipulation and beat SISU at there own game it looks. SISU were seemingly prepared to go to any lengths to obtain the Ricoh on the cheap and CCC were prepared to go to any lengths to stop it happening. CCFC was collateral damage.

The way I look at it is in 25, 50 or 75 years time (although I'll probably struggle to make more than the first one!) SISU will be a distant memory.

I suspect two things will be looked back on as the clubs downfall. One we already know, the sale of HR. I am certain the second, which will greatly eclipse the first, will be the sale of ACL to Wasps. It is the blow from which the club will struggle to ever recover unless either Wasps go bust, which seems unlikely, or someone builds us a new ground, which also seems unlikely.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

The way I look at it is in 25, 50 or 75 years time (although I'll probably struggle to make more than the first one!) SISU will be a distant memory.

I suspect two things will be looked back on as the clubs downfall. One we already know, the sale of HR. I am certain the second, which will greatly eclipse the first, will be the sale of ACL to Wasps. It is the blow from which the club will struggle to ever recover unless either Wasps go bust, which seems unlikely, or someone builds us a new ground, which also seems unlikely.

I'm with you, I believe the council should have worked with the football club to make it stronger rather than just parachuting another team in, in an attempt to replace the football and rugby clubs currently here.

But if Wasps and the Ricoh are successful, and CCFC have gone bust in 25 years time. Then in the eyes of the council they will believe they have been vindicated in there decision as it was for the greater good of the city and that the football club was a necessary sacrifice. Not a view I share with them but some seem to do so.

 

[fernandopartridge]

The Wasps bond issue is the new ACL mortgage. Expect the CCFC rent to increase to cover the cost of servicing the interest payments.

Funny how the Telegraph didn't report anything negative about the story. Similar schemes have crashed with bondholders out of pocket, although the Wasps one is secured against the Ricoh apparently, it'll be interesting to see who the bondholders are. The oversubscription might suggest that some investors are heavily exposed. Not many people with multi millions to invest apart from hedge funds and the like.

 

[torchomatic]

And remember the feint hearts writing to their local councillors pleading CCC not to sell the Ricoh to SISU as they would "mortgage it to the hilt", etc etc. Not a word when the franchisers do it.

The Wasps bond issue is the new ACL mortgage. Expect the CCFC rent to increase to cover the cost of servicing the interest payments.

Funny how the Telegraph didn't report anything negative about the story. Similar schemes have crashed with bondholders out of pocket, although the Wasps one is secured against the Ricoh apparently, it'll be interesting to see who the bondholders are. The oversubscription might suggest that some investors are heavily exposed. Not many people with multi millions to invest apart from hedge funds and the like.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Not many people with multi millions to invest apart from hedge funds and the like.

I would laugh if SISU ended up being revealed as the major investors.

Laugh, but not be surprised:facepalm:

 

[Intheknow]

I would laugh if SISU ended up being revealed as the major investors.

Laugh, but not be surprised:facepalm:

would be an odd move to buy debt as opposed to buying the Ricoh.

 

[lordsummerisle]

would be an odd move to buy debt as opposed to buying the Ricoh.

What they did when they "bought" the club, buying debt is their game.

Wasps and ACL be ideal on that front.