NOMP & FL Decision (1 Viewer)

[dongonzalos]

It seems that the FL will base their decision on whether to allow us to ground share predominantly on financial viability.

Does this now give a massive credibility boost to the NOMP campaign.

Personally I didn't have a strong opinion on it either way.

However now that it seems that finance and the FFP will form the main crux of the FL's decision.

It makes sense that if fans do not buy season tickets merchandise etc and the FL see that fans are serious that they will not allow themselves to be railroaded.

Then this may actually be the only way the FL will be able to justify blocking SISU.

As they could legitimately say to SISU the plans will destroy the club, we have the evidence as the fans are already refusing to spend a penny.

 

---

[SkyBlueDaz]

Totally agree, even though it may be hard for people to void buying merchandise/season tickets, it really could have a big impact on the leagues perspective.

 

[dongonzalos]

It seems they are going to look at his the ground share will impact on FFP.

If they see now nobody buying anything in the build up they will already see the negative impact it will have.
They need to see the worst case scenario 1000 fans a week supporting CCFC or 10 times that at the Ricoh.

 

[SkyBlueRuffian]

There's nothing to purchase though?

 

[dongonzalos]

There's nothing to purchase though?

SISU are championing the campaign themselves!

 

[blend]

I agree FL have to consider if Otium can continue with the club as a going concern. There is a far greater chance of admin again or worse rather than them returning to Cov in a new stadium. Hopefully they base their decision on this.

 

[stupot07]

If fans do not buy season tickets, they are more likely to kick the club out the league rather than force a sale.

And is this the nomp if we're out of cov or nomp until sisu leave campaign?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

If fans do not buy season tickets, they are more likely to kick the club out the league rather than force a sale.

So just to be clear - you think that if it appears that the fans will not support SISU in moving the club out of the city, your view is that the FL would prefer to "kick the club out (of) the league", rather than try to broker a sale to another interested party.

Do you have any reason for this belief?

For what it's worth, I'm afraid that despite the reservations one must assume the FL have about SISU, they'll take the easy option (from their perspective) and give SISU/Otium the GS.

 

[Jack Griffin]

If fans do not buy season tickets, they are more likely to kick the club out the league rather than force a sale.

And is this the nomp if we're out of cov or nomp until sisu leave campaign?

Utter nonsense. On what information do you base that assertion.

 

[Evo1883]

There's nothing to purchase though?

Have you not seen the new club shop in tescos gangway lol

 

[stupot07]

So just to be clear - you think that if it appears that the fans will not support SISU in moving the club out of the city, your view is that the FL would prefer to "kick the club out (of) the league", rather than try to broker a sale to another interested party.

Do you have any reason for this belief?

For what it's worth, I'm afraid that despite the reservations one must assume the FL have about SISU, they'll take the easy option (from their perspective) and give SISU/Otium the GS.

Utter nonsense. On what information do you base that assertion.

Timescales. At what point to the league decide its not feasible? Would they sanction a move mid season? If they have rubber stamped the sale ( I know they haven't yet) how can they force a sale? Can they apply to put the club in admin? Look how long this admin process is taking? Surely then there's a real threat of not being able to complete our fixtures, wouldn't that mean expulsion from the league? And what if we only sold 1000 tickets but sisu shirt sponsored for £3m per annum?

Are these not legitimate questions? Or do you think the football league will click their fingers, we'll be at the Ricoh in front of 30k supporters with a new owner the very next morning?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Timescales. At what point to the league decide its not feasible? Would they sanction a move mid season? If they have rubber stamped the sale ( I know they haven't yet) how can they force a sale? Can they apply to put the club in admin? Look how long this admin process is taking? Surely then there's a real threat of not being able to complete our fixtures, wouldn't that mean expulsion from the league? And what if we only sold 1000 tickets but sisu shirt sponsored for £3m per annum?

Seems to be a random list of sentences rather than a thought out opinion.

To answer a few:

The Portsmouth transaction took much longer than this.
The FL can't force a sale, but if they withhold the GS, even SISU might realise that their position is untenable (or in TF speak, that they're not "at the bottom of the cycle")
Not sure with the FL rules, but I recall that in the FIFA version of FFP, they were supposedly looking to ignore sponsorship deals that were not based on reasonable arms length terms.

 

[stupot07]

Seems to be a random list of sentences rather than a thought out opinion.

To answer a few:

The Portsmouth transaction took much longer than this.
The FL can't force a sale, but if they withhold the GS, even SISU might realise that their position is untenable (or in TF speak, that they're not "at the bottom of the cycle")
Not sure with the FL rules, but I recall that in the FIFA version of FFP, they were supposedly looking to ignore sponsorship deals that were not based on reasonable arms length terms.

I agree Portsmouth was a lot longer, but they averaged more than we did last season, they had cash coming in. Again at what point would the fa decide theres not enough money coming in and withhold the gs? The week before the season starts?2-3 games into the season? Next week?

We haven't even agreed a ground share, and tickets aren't on sale.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

I agree Portsmouth was a lot longer, but they averaged more than we did last season, they had cash coming in. Again at what point would the fa decide theres not enough money coming in and withhold the gs? The week before the season starts?2-3 games into the season? Next week?

We haven't even agreed a ground share, and tickets aren't on sale.

I can only agree that the current situation is a farce of almost unimaginable proportions.

I think that keeping the club in the league is the FL's major driver (along with avoiding expensive legal action), hence why I believe they'll go along with SISU's plans even though they don't believe they make sense any more than we do.

If SISU were to pull out, I think they'd be equally (more) supportive to any takeover of the club.

 

[blend]

Why would they kick us out of the league? The FL confirmed during the Leeds debacle that they would not prevent a club from playing whilst in administration. They want the club to keep playing.

 

[dadgad]

Been saying this consistently from the off.
Everyone says money is destroying the game and Ccfc are an example of how purely fiscal organisations like hedge funds are bad news.
Not one penny more is the best way true Cov fans can throw their weight behind this campaign and support their club.
It is to be hoped that the FL will be forced to recognise that Club with current owners is unviable.

 

[dongonzalos]

If fans do not buy season tickets, they are more likely to kick the club out the league rather than force a sale.

And is this the nomp if we're out of cov or nomp until sisu leave campaign?

Where do you get this info from

This is Not one more penny until the FL tell SISU the ground share is not financially viable. Allowing the football league to have a legally accountable reason to reject the ground share.

 

[torchomatic]

Where do you get this info from

This is Not one more penny until the FL tell SISU the ground share is not financially viable. Allowing the football league to have a legally accountable reason to reject the ground share.

Well, thats the third version of NOPM ive seen. Which is it?!

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[stupot07]

Been saying this consistently from the off.
Everyone says money is destroying the game and Ccfc are an example of how purely fiscal organisations like hedge funds are bad news.
Not one penny more is the best way true Cov fans can throw their weight behind this campaign and support their club.
It is to be hoped that the FL will be forced to recognise that Club with current owners is unviable.

How do you think a club should be run financially?

 

[dongonzalos]

Well, thats the third version of NOPM ive seen. Which is it?!

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

I take it you can do it as long as you like to achieve whatever you want to achieve.

However if the FL said to the SBT that they will primarily decide on the right to ground share depending on how it will impact on FFP.

Then logic would suggest if you don't want to groin share the make sure the idea of it has a massive negative impact in FFP.

 

[dongonzalos]

How do you think a club should be run financially?

Not by choosing to decimate it financially in order to destroy another company

 

[covmark]

Well, thats the third version of NOPM ive seen. Which is it?!

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

I take it you can do it as long as you like to achieve whatever you want to achieve.

However if the FL said to the SBT that they will primarily decide on the right to ground share depending on how it will impact on FFP.

Then logic would suggest if you don't want to groin share the make sure the idea of it has a massive negative impact in FFP.

Oooh a groin share, sounds a bit seedy

 

[stupot07]

Not by choosing to decimate it financially in order to destroy another company

They didn't decimate it financially to destroy ACL.

 

[stupot07]

Well, thats the third version of NOPM ive seen. Which is it?!

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

I take it you can do it as long as you like to achieve whatever you want to achieve.

However if the FL said to the SBT that they will primarily decide on the right to ground share depending on how it will impact on FFP.

Then logic would suggest if you don't want to groin share the make sure the idea of it has a massive negative impact in FFP.

How low do you think crowds would need to be? When would the football league make that decision?

 

[dongonzalos]

How low do you think crowds would need to be? When would the football league make that decision?

As low as we can possibly make them. However we need Mr Fisher to announce to proposed ground and the package deal available.
Then if everyone refuses to take I that package the FA will see for certain the impact as oppose to speculating then hopefully the Ricoh will be back on.

 

[simple_simon]

If fans do not buy season tickets, they are more likely to kick the club out the league rather than force a sale.

And is this the nomp if we're out of cov or nomp until sisu leave campaign?

Has to be till we play in the City only

 

[Grendel]

Based on previous ground shares where the gates have slumped drastically the football league have never opposed a move. They have one objective - fixture fulfilment. If the owners have advised the league they will fund the club then that will be good enough.

I believe their credit rating with the league will be strong. They have to my knowledge never defaulted on payments other than ACL. They certainly in terms of that have been better than the prior regime. Isn't one of the prior regime supposed to be chairman under one of the other bidders? His credit rating I suspect will not be as high.

 

[dongonzalos]

Was the FFP in force when you look at those other ground shares that were not blocked?

 

[Grendel]

Was the FFP in force when you look at those other ground shares that were not blocked?

Why would that make any difference? League two and a handful of league one clubs have operated on 2,000 crowds or less. Your faith in the football league to "do the right thing" is charming but the likes of ken bates and Peter Ridsdale are allowed back time and time again. Remember a human rights abuser passed the test at Manchester city.

They don't care. If they did they certainly would have major concerns if Elliot was allowed near a budget as the last regime he was at couldn't even pay transfer fees for players.

FPP just means clubs need to operate within a budget. Reality is they can overdo end at a certain point and then get an embargo. It's meaningless in this debate and very much clutching at straws.

 

[sky blue john]

I believe their credit rating with the league will be strong. They have to my knowledge never defaulted on payments other than ACL. They certainly in terms of that have been better than the prior regime. Isn't one of the prior regime supposed to be chairman under one of the other bidders? His credit rating I suspect will not be as high.

What dealings have Otium had with league to have such a strong credit rating ?

 

[dongonzalos]

Because the FL seem to have said to the SBT. They won't consider that the fans are all against the ground share when they decide whether to allow it or not.
They said they will however consider the impact a ground share would have on FFP.

Hence if it seems that the proposal itself leads to no one buying tickets and merchandise then the FL would have legitimate argument to say no to the ground share.

 

[Grendel]

Because the FL seem to have said to the SBT. They won't consider that the fans are all against the ground share when they decide whether to allow it or not.
They said they will however consider the impact a ground share would have on FFP.

Hence if it seems that the proposal itself leads to no one buying tickets and merchandise then the FL would have legitimate argument to say no to the ground share.

As I say you are charmingly naive. Read back your post and conclude what that really means will happen.

 

[dongonzalos]

If the ground share means we can no longer operate within our budget due to pre existing contracts, how can the FL legally authorise such an event. Especially if there is a more viable alternative.
If the Ricoh costs the same as ground sharing and will mean we can meet the FFP criteria the FL will have to go for that. Otherwise they themselves are implemented in breaking the rules.
The Ricoh is available for free if the FL keeps us in administration.

 

[stupot07]

If the ground share means we can no longer operate within our budget due to pre existing contracts, how can the FA legally authorise such an event. Especially if there is a more viable alternative.
If the Ricoh cost the same as ground sharing and will mean we can meet the FFP criteria the FL will have to go for that. Otherwise they themselves are implemented in breaking the rules.
The Ricoh is available for free if the FA keeps us in administration.

Do we want them to keep us in admin? 10-15 point deduction, embargo and probable relegation?

 

[Sutty]

true Cov fans

Here we go again...