Well, it depends if you think Sisu and CCFC are one and the same thing - I don't. Any other owner could have negotiated a better rent, but Sisu didn't want to play nicely did they?
Well, it depends if you think Sisu and CCFC are one and the same thing - I don't. Any other owner could have negotiated a better rent, but Sisu didn't want to play nicely did they?
And, you know, the litigation.
It'll be at least another week or so until the deadline for appeal passes and we know for sure if Sisu are carrying on or not. Until then nothing will happen, as per the quote I posted earlier.
Which is slightly odd as they made at least one offer previously when the JR process was on going.
They also said they will not talk until the full £590,000 is paid - will they stick to that premise?
No two ways about it, it is still down to SISU to drop the JR appeal. Until they do, there will be no progress towards a return to Cov. I, for one, can't blame ACL for sticking to their guns on that part of the discussion having so overwhelmingly won the high court hearing & all the associated attempts to distress them. Once/if SISU drop the appeal then the onus will be on ACL to start compromising. Until that happens, (in my opinion), all SISU statements are the usual PR smoke & mirrors we have all become accustomed to.
This might be a stupid question, but why do ACL have to accept how much the Football League say SISU have to pay? They can't enforce anything legally can they?
They saved nothing! They have had to pay 480k they avioded 100k. Your they saved logic is the same as my misses when she goes to the sales. 'It was 50% off so I bought two of them'. Still empties the bank account.:jerkit:
Some clarity with the wording I think, so good news (if paid).
The JR appeal is now the sticking point, and remember that last week at the CCLSC Q&A TIm Fisher distanced Oitum (the club in his words) from the litigation. In other words, he is stating that the JR issue has been resolved as it is nothing to do with the club! So the litigatoin continues in other words. Clever tactic indeed.
TF also states in today's press release that the club needs to "own it's own stadium". Last week he was stating that the club is definately going to build it's own stadium, and in the meantme work out an intermim return to the Ricoh. - two different standpoints there.
Fudge and counter fudge.
The JR appeal is now the sticking point, and remember that last week at the CCLSC Q&A TIm Fisher distanced Oitum (the club in his words) from the litigation. In other words, he is stating that the JR issue has been resolved as it is nothing to do with the club! So the litigatoin continues in other words. Clever tactic indeed.
TF also states in today's press release that the club needs to "own it's own stadium". Last week he was stating that the club is definately going to build it's own stadium, and in the meantme work out an intermim return to the Ricoh. - two different standpoints there.
Fudge and counter fudge.
Basically you don't want any concessions given to CCFC while sisu are in charge do you? You're not alone, that's why we're fucked.
It's a good test of how serious their previous statement of wanting a return to the Ricoh is.
If they're serious they should have instructed the bank to make the payment as soon as the FL informed them what that payment is.
If they're taking the piss. Pay it at the last possible opportunity.
They saved nothing! They have had to pay 480k they avioded 100k. Your they saved logic is the same as my misses when she goes to the sales. 'It was 50% off so I bought two of them'. Still empties the bank account.:jerkit:
Surely they saved 100k?
As far as I'm concerned that attempt to distance themselves is an extremely clear indication that there is no intention whatsoever of dropping the JR.
Just a reminder that prior to the JR, most people here and many others including Ann Lucas, SBT etc. were calling for a rental return to the Ricoh. Can someone explain what the difference was back then with legal action pending but not a barrier to a return?
Negotiations should start right now and if they want to talk about legal actions, F&B, or tablecloth colourings there, fine. Everyone should be calling on all sides to get talking. Either side putting out preconditions is just stalling and stopping fans from seeing their club in Coventry.
Negotiations should start right now and if they want to talk about legal actions, F&B, or tablecloth colourings there, fine. Everyone should be calling on all sides to get talking. Either side putting out preconditions is just stalling and stopping fans from seeing their club in Coventry.
I reckon, purely because I started the thread, we should all argue and speculate about when the money will be paid even though none of us know.
THEY WON'T PAY IT UNTIL THE LAST SECOND
NO THEY WILL PAY IT TODAY
Couple of examples to work with.
THEY WON'T PAY IT UNTIL THE LAST SECOND
NO THEY WILL PAY IT TODAY
Couple of examples to work with.
SISU have to drop the JR appeal, there is absolutely no onus on ACL to discuss anything while that is in the pipeline. Imagine a business being dragged through the courts and then the same people phone them and say "any chance of getting some of your products at a cheaper price, sorry about dragging your ass through court and all that but hey thats life".
Fisher, shut up, pay up, drop the JR, get us back to the Ricoh and then F**k off.
Fisher, shut up, pay up, drop the JR, get us back to the Ricoh and then F**k off.
My understanding of the current situation is that there is no current JR appeal in place, with only an option to appeal being available up to the 15th August, so there is nothing to drop, ACL should (Assuming they receive the monies now owed) be prepared to discuss CCFC's return .
Where are people saying they don't want a rental return to the Ricoh?
In at least some of the offers made by ACL prior to SISU moving the club away the dropping of legal action was a requirement for any deal to be completed so nothing has really changed on that front has it? To me its very simple. ACL have been very clear and if SISU are serious about coming back to the Ricoh on any sort of deal they should drop the legals and then things can move forward. Its unrealistic to expect ACL to do a deal with someone who is still actively trying to put them out of business.
Not at all. If Sisu are prepared to stick to the normal rules of decent business, then I'd say make a fresh start. But trust, once lost, is hard to regain. They've only themselves to blame over this whole sorry mess.
The JR is not concluded until the deadline for appeal has passed, so far every indication SISU have made is that they intend to appeal. So either SISU state that they won't be appealing or everyone just sits around waiting for the appeal deadline to pass to see what happens.
If only ACL hadn't refused to speak to the club before them paying the money, they could have already agreed a deal in principle ready for signing this morning and season tickets on sale this afternoon!
They haven't appealed though have they? No reason not to talk once this is paid. (unless they do of course appeal)
If the legal action isn't a barrier Rob, then why did TF make a clear point of distancing the Club (Otium) from it? Again, Sisu now state that the barrier doesn't exist (for the club), and yet clearly intend to pursue the litigation tactics against CCC/ACL. Is this really offering a way forward for frank and open negotiation?
Correct Chiefdave, both have to accept each others existence and work together. There has to be compromise on both sides, not the normal SISU it is our way or no way and forever moving goalposts. If I remember correctly the last time Fisher had a deal on the table it was wrecked by Seppala.
Well as we are going down that line, if only SISU hadnt stopped paying rent, we could have all watched CCFC both last season and this season at the Ricoh???
But isn't this exactly what SISU were saying the CCC and ACL were trying to oust them from the club?
