Why Did The Council Sell To Wasps? (3 Viewers)

hutch1972

Well-Known Member
"Of course there’s a reasonable argument that Wasps’ arrival will damage existing teams in the city - particularly Coventry RFC.Only time will tell, but the initial signs are that Cov are doing extremely well regardless and crowd numbers are up at Butts Park Arena. Wasps have also promised to work closely with Cov."

Of course they have promised that. They will work closely in poaching all the good players and handing Coventry a few average ones. Nothing like working closely with your feeder club is there?!

And of course the arrival of Wasps has meant the gates at the butts park arena are up. It has nothing to do with how well they are playing.
exactly, work closely with cov untill such time they look like challenging in any way.
Wasps will be hoping cov stay in this division forever.
 

RegTheDonk

Well-Known Member
I suppose in answer to the thread title, ".... Sisu has repeatedly stated the Ricoh Arena is not essential to CCFC’s survival and that they plan to build their own stadium".

Tim kept spouting this line, repeatedly. It's come back to bite him, to the detriment of all us fans.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I suppose in answer to the thread title, ".... Sisu has repeatedly stated the Ricoh Arena is not essential to CCFC’s survival and that they plan to build their own stadium".

Tim kept spouting this line, repeatedly. It's come back to bite him, to the detriment of all us fans.

The boy who cried wolf.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
I suppose in answer to the thread title, ".... Sisu has repeatedly stated the Ricoh Arena is not essential to CCFC’s survival and that they plan to build their own stadium".

Tim kept spouting this line, repeatedly. It's come back to bite him, to the detriment of all us fans.

" Build it and they will come " Classic :claping hands:
 

Alan Dugdale

New Member
Of course they have promised that. They will work closely in poaching all the good players and handing Coventry a few average ones. Nothing like working closely with your feeder club is there?!

exactly, work closely with cov untill such time they look like challenging in any way.
Wasps will be hoping cov stay in this division forever.

Sorry guys but the way rugby works means that Cov are already a feeder club to the likes of Leicester, Northampton and Worcester, so adding Wasps to that list makes little difference in reality. The top echelons of pro rugby are the preserve of a closed shop elite and Covs only chance of breaking into it is through finding a sugar daddy to help buy their way into it. That said it is definitely the case that the presence of Wasps has probably put paid to the chances of ever attracting a sugar daddy if that ever was a prospect.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
hat said it is definitely the case that the presence of Wasps has probably put paid to the chances of ever attracting a sugar daddy if that ever was a prospect.

I hear a bloke called Richardson was keen on a rugby club in Coventry.

All for sporting glory, of course...
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

As I have said before whilst all parties have done wrong to each other, only sisu are responsible for ccfc , and only CCC/Higgs (now wasps) are responsible for acl.

Each may have influenced the other, but neither can be held responsible for the others problems.

The hypocritical council were and indeed still are the only ones who could have extended the lease on the Ricoh.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Simple answer. Wasps made a reasonable offer that wasn't tainted by legal threats...

You mean it's not good practice to expect to do a deal with someone whilst you are suing the pants off them relentlessly, even when the courts keep telling you, you are in the wrong? Who knew???
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure why the CET felt the need to step up and answer the questions when really it was for the council to answer.

Gotta say I assumed this was the council. Is it technically the council off the record so it is reported as the CET as the council have been advised to keep their gobs shut till the latest round of pointless money sapping legal actions are complete?
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Yes, I assumed it was. Pretty crap of the CT really to be the mouthpiece of the council

Gotta say I assumed this was the council. Is it technically the council off the record so it is reported as the CET as the council have been advised to keep their gobs shut till the latest round of pointless money sapping legal actions are complete?
 

Nick

Administrator
Gotta say I assumed this was the council. Is it technically the council off the record so it is reported as the CET as the council have been advised to keep their gobs shut till the latest round of pointless money sapping legal actions are complete?

Would be a bit naughty wouldn't it?
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Would be a bit naughty wouldn't it?

I don't know would it?

If they can't talk but want their message out there they feed someone the info to spread the word.

I get the feeling similar things maybe happening elsewhere don't you?
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Would be a bit naughty wouldn't it?

Depends on whether it's because saying anything would be considered contempt of court or just because the lawyers said that it wouldn't be a good idea. The former will land you in hot water with the Judge, the latter with your the people you're paying for legal advice.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
I'm thinking the lawyers said we have a really strong case. So don't say anything in case it gets twisted and potentially does damage
 

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
@ fernandopartridge........Would that be the "heads of terms" that Fisher signed to buy out the contract, but then reneged on? ;)
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
I have spent the last decade wanting CCFC to own that stadium and become a major force in English football. But does anyone really think that the elected representatives of the city could have TURNED DOWN the Wasps proposal in all the circumstances?

I agree that the piece seems slanted, but would be interested to know which parts of it people seriously take issue with, in a way that would have made any difference to the outcome? Sadly for all of us, SISU have never had anything like a viable plan.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I have spent the last decade wanting CCFC to own that stadium and become a major force in English football. But does anyone really think that the elected representatives of the city could have TURNED DOWN the Wasps proposal in all the circumstances?

I agree that the piece seems slanted, but would be interested to know which parts of it people seriously take issue with, in a way that would have made any difference to the outcome? Sadly for all of us, SISU have never had anything like a viable plan.

Of course they could have turned it down - using capitals doesn't really create any substance to the argument.
 

Thenose

New Member
I have spent the last decade wanting CCFC to own that stadium and become a major force in English football. But does anyone really think that the elected representatives of the city could have TURNED DOWN the Wasps proposal in all the circumstances?

I agree that the piece seems slanted, but would be interested to know which parts of it people seriously take issue with, in a way that would have made any difference to the outcome? Sadly for all of us, SISU have never had anything like a viable plan.

Corporation in debt, needs to make cuts, has a cash buyer offering improved loan repayment turns. I think they got an offer they just couldn't refuse (Horse head in bed)
 

wes_cov

New Member
Of course they could have turned it down - using capitals doesn't really create any substance to the argument.

With Fisher insistent they are building a new stadium i personally disagree. If your tenant tells you they are moving out do you really wait till they have gone to start looking for another?

Technically they "could" have but had CCFC then moved on they would have been in considerable more trouble
 

The Lurker

Well-Known Member
Of course they could have turned it down - using capitals doesn't really create any substance to the argument.

How could they not turn down? Sisu made it clear they didn't want the Ricoh and said they were building a new ground. What option did ACL have?
 

Thenose

New Member
How could they not turn down? Sisu made it clear they didn't want the Ricoh and said they were building a new ground. What option did ACL have?

Spot on. SISU played silly childish games, not for one moment thinking anyone but CCFC would actually want a 32K seat stadium in Coventry. I mean who else could possible want it.

WOW, it turns out somebody did...
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
How could they not turn down? Sisu made it clear they didn't want the Ricoh and said they were building a new ground. What option did ACL have?

IMHO Sisu would have kept the club in Northampton if they had not got knowledge of the Wasps agreement ?
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
IMHO Sisu would have kept the club in Northampton if they had not got knowledge of the Wasps agreement ?

Not so sure about that, I don't think they could remain there in league one without ARVO putting more dosh in. Maybe in league two they could as wages are much lower.
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
IMHO Sisu would have kept the club in Northampton if they had not got knowledge of the Wasps agreement ?

They knew nothing about the Wasps negotiations:

The acting leader of Coventry City Council has not ruled out the Sky Blues owning the Ricoh Arena in the future in the future.
Weeks of secret negotiations have led to the club agreeing to return to the stadium on a temporary agreement for up to four years.
While both parties have indicated that could be extended, club officials insist they eventually need to own a stadium.
Speaking after the Telegraph broke news of the Sky Blues Ricoh Arena return, Coun Phil Townshend said time was needed for trust to be rebuilt before looking at the potential of the council agreeing a deal for ownership of the Ricoh Arena with the club.
He also refused to say whether the new agreement included a clause which gave the club preference on buying the Ricoh.
He said: “The terms of the agreement between the club and ACL are commercially confidential. I’m optimistic and looking forward to seeing the club back playing there.
“As for the future, I think we should take one day at a time and not get ahead of ourselves and use this period to rebuild trust.
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
They knew nothing about the Wasps negotiations:

Fisher came out in the week we were still selling { loose description } the tickets for the Gillingham game that it was temporary and that SISU were building a new stadium elsewhere blah blah blah, a week later with the silly pricks words still ringing in everyone's ears the crowd drops by around 2/3 for the following home game. Not long after that an affirmation of further legal challenges. They created a hateful and spiteful business environment for themselves from 2012 onwards and got shat on at the earliest opportunity by people they'd threatened to drag through the courts. The decision by Lucas et al was wrong and harsh on the club but understandable.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Remember ACL saying once we'd come back that they were going to "rebuild trust" before discussing ownership. They were already talking to Wasps at this point so not sure why they chose to say that.

EDIT: Just seen Godiva's post./

IMHO Sisu would have kept the club in Northampton if they had not got knowledge of the Wasps agreement ?
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Be be honest I don't think it was Fisher's words that made the gate drop so dramatically. I just think people wanted to be at that first game back.

Still don't think selling to Wasps was "understandable".

Fisher came out in the week we were still selling { loose description } the tickets for the Gillingham game that it was temporary and that SISU were building a new stadium elsewhere blah blah blah, a week later with the silly pricks words still ringing in everyone's ears the crowd drops by around 2/3 for the following home game. Not long after that an affirmation of further legal challenges. They created a hateful and spiteful business environment for themselves from 2012 onwards and got shat on at the earliest opportunity by people they'd threatened to drag through the courts. The decision by Lucas et al was wrong and harsh on the club but understandable.
 

skyblueinBaku

Well-Known Member
They knew nothing about the Wasps negotiations:

"The acting leader of Coventry City Council has not ruled out the Sky Blues owning the Ricoh Arena in the future in the future.
Weeks of secret negotiations have led to the club agreeing to return to the stadium on a temporary agreement for up to four years.
While both parties have indicated that could be extended, club officials insist they eventually need to own a stadium.
Speaking after the Telegraph broke news of the Sky Blues Ricoh Arena return, Coun Phil Townshend said time was needed for trust to be rebuilt before looking at the potential of the council agreeing a deal for ownership of the Ricoh Arena with the club.
He also refused to say whether the new agreement included a clause which gave the club preference on buying the Ricoh.
He said: “The terms of the agreement between the club and ACL are commercially confidential. I’m optimistic and looking forward to seeing the club back playing there.
“As for the future, I think we should take one day at a time and not get ahead of ourselves and use this period to rebuild trust."

I've always wondered why that councillor wasn't taken to task for that outrageous statement, made when he must have known that talks with Wasps were in progress.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top