I see that rustybone is still happy to criticise the club he claims to support.
I see that rustybone is still happy to criticise the club he claims to support.
As a point I reserve the right to criticise anything I deem worthy of criticism. I think we've all criticised the club we claim to support at some point haven't we.
Now to your concerns, what particularly have I criticised the club for that you're having trouble with?
I'm not going to debate much of the above; as we simply see things differently.
But please - stop on one thing; cease saying people support Wasps/Higgs/ACL/CCC. People don't. Everyone on here - except those on the wind-up - support CCFC.
You were saying? ................................................... Coventry City FC bosses 'ready and willing' to discuss a deal to return to Ricoh Arena 18:25, 11 July 2014 By Simon Gilbert Open letter says move back home would only be temporary while club builds new stadium 120 Shares Share Tweet +1 LinkedIn Ricoh Arena Senior Coventry City FC officials have written an open letter to supporters stating they are “ready and willing” to talk about a deal to bring the club back to the Ricoh Arena. The open letter is signed by Joy Seppala, head of club owners Sisu, and Coventry City chief executive Tim Fisher and has appeared on the club website hours ahead of a protest march calling for the club's return to Coventry. However, the letter states the return would only be on an interim basis while the club builds its own stadiumHe said own - not build.... completely different context and linked in at the time with the statement regarding building trust when they returned.
You were saying? ................................................... Coventry City FC bosses 'ready and willing' to discuss a deal to return to Ricoh Arena 18:25, 11 July 2014 By Simon Gilbert Open letter says move back home would only be temporary while club builds new stadium 120 Shares Share Tweet +1 LinkedIn Ricoh Arena Senior Coventry City FC officials have written an open letter to supporters stating they are “ready and willing” to talk about a deal to bring the club back to the Ricoh Arena. The open letter is signed by Joy Seppala, head of club owners Sisu, and Coventry City chief executive Tim Fisher and has appeared on the club website hours ahead of a protest march calling for the club's return to Coventry. However, the letter states the return would only be on an interim basis while the club builds its own stadium
Where was I... oh yeah, kind of agree with this. It's the argument of the moronic, the crazed and the idiots to retort thus either way. Usually, when there is limited comeback. It'll be grammar and speeling mistakes next...
Anyway, having got that out the system, the problem is empathy goes all ways. Can I see why financially ACL may have been sold to Wasps? Yep. Can I see how the clubs actions may have accentuated that? Yes. Can I also see how a commercial dispute motivates the club to act as it did? Yes.
And here's the problem - all arguments are educed to the financial. The justifications for actions are the financial and this is what sticks. I warned (long ago) that being owned by an entity such as SISU would see financial considerations put first and, alas, I was right... and still am.
You kind of don't necessarily expect that with public service though. Unfortunately, more and more it's the case and the sale of the Ricoh exemplifies that. The entire argument has been based on the financial, the justifications are about the company being in rude health or otherwise, and a good return.
This, too, plays fast and loose with a football club. There's a fine balance between running one financially prudently and crazily but, tbh, if all of us support CCFC why on earth are we accepting of a free market to suh a degree? If we do accept it to that degree then, rightfully, the club should not exist now - it shouldn't really have existed when SISU bought it either. In the words of an auditor friend of mine then fucking hell, the club's fucked and the fucking directors are fucking nutters if they keep it fucking going. (I assume in his day job his language is tempered slightly when delivering similar news).
So that's where we are. With a basket case of a club, it appears the options are either magnanimous and social, or take a high risk strategy that may commit hari-kari, but may also at least hasten an inevitable demise. And personally if it must die, I'd rather swiftly than watch it drool in bed unable to wake and having to take in food through a straw.
But then we'll all have different views on that.
But surely we didn't support a football club in order to back the most pragmatic financial decisions? This, therefore, makes every party culpable. They all appear to attempt smoke and mirrors to present ongoing plans in certain ways, they all justify it through... money.
So that, then, makes them all culpable. They all want to have their cake and eat it. They all want the best financial deal, and they all seem to think people are too stupid to deserve the full facts in front of them
I find it very... sad.
A football club is central to a community - even if people do not go it implicitly goes towards an understanding of who they are, and this also applies to outsiders understanding who we are. The custodians of the club in all senses seem determined to eradicate that. At this rate... perhaps it should just go as it seems nobody cares about it beyond it being an extra decimalpoint of return in a budget.
He said own - not build.... completely different context and linked in at the time with the statement regarding building trust when they returned.
Where was I... oh yeah, kind of agree with this. It's the argument of the moronic, the crazed and the idiots to retort thus either way. Usually, when there is limited comeback. It'll be grammar and speeling mistakes next...
Anyway, having got that out the system, the problem is empathy goes all ways. Can I see why financially ACL may have been sold to Wasps? Yep. Can I see how the clubs actions may have accentuated that? Yes. Can I also see how a commercial dispute motivates the club to act as it did? Yes.
And here's the problem - all arguments are educed to the financial. The justifications for actions are the financial and this is what sticks. I warned (long ago) that being owned by an entity such as SISU would see financial considerations put first and, alas, I was right... and still am.
You kind of don't necessarily expect that with public service though. Unfortunately, more and more it's the case and the sale of the Ricoh exemplifies that. The entire argument has been based on the financial, the justifications are about the company being in rude health or otherwise, and a good return.
This, too, plays fast and loose with a football club. There's a fine balance between running one financially prudently and crazily but, tbh, if all of us support CCFC why on earth are we accepting of a free market to suh a degree? If we do accept it to that degree then, rightfully, the club should not exist now - it shouldn't really have existed when SISU bought it either. In the words of an auditor friend of mine then fucking hell, the club's fucked and the fucking directors are fucking nutters if they keep it fucking going. (I assume in his day job his language is tempered slightly when delivering similar news).
So that's where we are. With a basket case of a club, it appears the options are either magnanimous and social, or take a high risk strategy that may commit hari-kari, but may also at least hasten an inevitable demise. And personally if it must die, I'd rather swiftly than watch it drool in bed unable to wake and having to take in food through a straw.
But then we'll all have different views on that.
But surely we didn't support a football club in order to back the most pragmatic financial decisions? This, therefore, makes every party culpable. They all appear to attempt smoke and mirrors to present ongoing plans in certain ways, they all justify it through... money.
So that, then, makes them all culpable. They all want to have their cake and eat it. They all want the best financial deal, and they all seem to think people are too stupid to deserve the full facts in front of them
I find it very... sad.
A football club is central to a community - even if people do not go it implicitly goes towards an understanding of who they are, and this also applies to outsiders understanding who we are. The custodians of the club in all senses seem determined to eradicate that. At this rate... perhaps it should just go as it seems nobody cares about it beyond it being an extra decimalpoint of return in a budget.
Said much the same(though far more concisely!)on GMK some years ago, along the lines of " If I wanted to cheer on good financial results I'd go to a fucking Tesco' shareholders meeting".
Might need to update that one!
Yes you do. Long before Sisu this council let us down badly. Never saw anything in it being an asset but a cash cow and once the cash ran dry it pimped someone in from London.
Partially agree
Some of that is true.
Some very good points are being made here against both SISU and CCC. And then you have your Grendel posts.
Our club was badly let down by Richardson. The worst of it was we were loving it at the time. We had good players and some great games to watch. But our outgoings on wages alone were much more than our income. And other money leaving our club at the time was a disgrace. I heard things at the time that I didn't believe. But we have heard things since that backs it up for instance the bonuses Richardson paid himself. This is what put our club in the position it is in now. He had the idea of building a bigger stadium as we needed more income to cover the massive outgoings. But there were two big points. We were not filling HR most of the time and we were skint because of all of the spending we were doing that we couldn't afford so couldn't raise the funds for a new stadium. But he still sold HR and the money was used to keep us going for another year. Yes Tescos put in a lot of money, but another 60m still needed raising.
So Grendel, you say that CCC treated the arena as a cash cow. Would you like to remind us how much taxpayers money that they put in and then how much they took out? It is as much of an idiotic statement as much as saying that SISU are using CCFC as a cash cow.
.
You'd better have a word with a couple of your mates on here then. They acknowledge truth in the statement.
You'd better have a word with a couple of your mates on here then. They acknowledge truth in the statement.
At least there's no confusion with your posts. We know where your loyalties lie, don't we?
Actually, Torch, contrary to the belief of a select group of you on this board, you don't have to choose a side between the council or the club. I'm absolutely gutted for my club but I'm under no illusions about who's fault the latest situation is. I'm able to recognise that the council has other fish to fry and has to act in the best interests of the tax payer...which I think they have done.
sorry, what do you mean?His do you know what they've done - commercial confidentiality.
Oh come on guys, you cant stop this thread just yet, not with the £35m bonds issue
That's on the £35m bond thread?
If we all got together and put some money into this would it mean we own a bit of the arena and would get voting rights?
If we all got together and put some money into this would it mean we own a bit of the arena and would get voting rights?
Thats the best part, the answer to your question is no. You give them your money, don't get a share or any voting rights. You hope like hell they've got enough money in a few years to pay you back.
Bonds are safer than shares.
Out of interest what would you be saying if CCC had never got involved in the Ricoh project in the first place and left the club to sort out its own mess with HR and Arena 2000? Because surely that is the only alternative scenario to what has actually happened?
So you'd pick a bond issues by Otium above a Share in Tesco anyway would you?
Are you a financial advisor?
So you'd pick a bond issues by Otium above a Share in Tesco anyway would you?
Are you a financial advisor?
So you'd pick a bond issues by Otium above a Share in Tesco anyway would you?
Are you a financial advisor?
The Tesco share price has lost a lot in the last year or so. I would say about 40% in the last year.
I wonder what a CCFC £1 share is worth
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?