From the Boardroom (Luton) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
That’s from Duggins the other day
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Translation : "We have said this to get the sale to Wasps over the line, while appeasing the CCFC fans for a short time so they don't realise we have screwed CCFC for years to come"
Nick
Administrator
That's how it reads.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Oh have a day off, the council's statement was fairly unambiguous at the time, for them to now claim that it had a 4 year life is utter shite.
mark_ccfc
Well-Known Member
Doesn't read that way to me. If that is what they said why don't they just state it?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not to open a can of worms, but it wasn’t the council that broke the secure tenancy the club had.
peace ndlovu
Well-Known Member
A secure tenancy. But also a shit tenancy from a CCFC perspective.
Not that I'm advocating what Sisu did next, but it really pisses me off when the council are not held to account for their (massive) role in this shitstorm
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
I don't have enough years left on this planet to go round those circles again!
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
What was said by Lucas was misleading, but it is a worry that the "club" place so much reliance on it. I am guessing, but i do not think there is anything in the sale agreement that says any such thing. Which is a problem if it is being relied upon to leverage a new deal.
Both SISU and Wasps are entitled to make their own choice it isnt that one side is more entitled than the other side to do it
Two other thoughts. Is it really down to CCC and wasps to maintain for ever more (or at least 250 years) the well being of CCFC, isnt that the Otium owners duty first and foremost. SISU have kept us alive but as for well being? CCC and Wasps should not go out of their way to hamper or hinder CCFC but that is against a back drop of what is best for Wasps at the Ricoh and what is best for CCC in the city of Coventry. Wonder what would happen if CCC were to back a new stadium build now?
Second thought. Was it reasonable to assume that the club owners in their role at CCFC would show some commitment to the City of Coventry and probably the Ricoh. It wasnt until February that the latest deal was struck and up until that point it was kept open ended, and even after. It wasnt really until it sank in that perhaps Wasps might not offer another deal that you had Fisher at the end of September making his "Plan A has always been to stay at the Ricoh" statement, followed by regular pleas to talk by Boddy. I think if you are going to rely on the lucas statement you had to show evidence of commitment to staying not just a reluctant choice for the time being because the bluff has been called.
Its a complete mess, with no sign of any compromise.
Both SISU and Wasps are entitled to make their own choice it isnt that one side is more entitled than the other side to do it
Two other thoughts. Is it really down to CCC and wasps to maintain for ever more (or at least 250 years) the well being of CCFC, isnt that the Otium owners duty first and foremost. SISU have kept us alive but as for well being? CCC and Wasps should not go out of their way to hamper or hinder CCFC but that is against a back drop of what is best for Wasps at the Ricoh and what is best for CCC in the city of Coventry. Wonder what would happen if CCC were to back a new stadium build now?
Second thought. Was it reasonable to assume that the club owners in their role at CCFC would show some commitment to the City of Coventry and probably the Ricoh. It wasnt until February that the latest deal was struck and up until that point it was kept open ended, and even after. It wasnt really until it sank in that perhaps Wasps might not offer another deal that you had Fisher at the end of September making his "Plan A has always been to stay at the Ricoh" statement, followed by regular pleas to talk by Boddy. I think if you are going to rely on the lucas statement you had to show evidence of commitment to staying not just a reluctant choice for the time being because the bluff has been called.
Its a complete mess, with no sign of any compromise.
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
What happens if when SISU are gone there are still no guarantees? It's all well and good that there is the SISU thing to hide behind but once they are out of the picture we are still at the mercy of Wasps for somewhere to play.
It isn't just the here and now, they should really be asked to confirm what was actually meant by it and why it was even said in the first place to know going forward for the next how many years. What will happen is that they will say 1 thing, get quizzed on it and say something completely different and that's that. They know they can, hence the "public opinion is firmly on our side" type comments.
It might not fix things now but ideally would need to know if there was actually anything behind it or they would help the football club if there was no SISU. Wasps is their new baby and their gamble, they can't let that fail.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It isn't the first time somebody from the council has made misleading statements, for years it has been the same. Hence why I just don't buy the council narrative on anything anymore:
"I don't think we'll be able to sell [the Arena] while there is a hedge fund involved" - John Mutton 2012.
Anyway, wasn't Anderson talking to Wasps about a longer term deal while he was here? i.e. outside of the timeframes you describe
"I don't think we'll be able to sell [the Arena] while there is a hedge fund involved" - John Mutton 2012.
Anyway, wasn't Anderson talking to Wasps about a longer term deal while he was here? i.e. outside of the timeframes you describe
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Didn't that fall away with administration? Don't forget it was ACL who applied to the court to put the club into administration, SISU made their application later to ensure the process ran the way they wanted with their preferred administrator.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
The facts as i see them. The only way that guarantees staying at the Ricoh is if there is a lease agreement. It is now going to be a commercial agreement that CCC has little control over but may have some influence. It will have a start and an end to it, and the landlord does not have to renew it
Get a proper lease with a decent term and the club adds to its worth. Dont do that and it is a very different story
The Lucas comment was worthless and always has been. Probably legally unenforceable in the terms being relied upon
Get a proper lease with a decent term and the club adds to its worth. Dont do that and it is a very different story
The Lucas comment was worthless and always has been. Probably legally unenforceable in the terms being relied upon
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
But was made for a reason, and therefore has every right to be brought up in the future.
We're not talking finance here, we're talking culture.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Well yes, why did she make it then? It's all part of the ongoing misleading narrative from the council isn't it? That money they spent on Weber Shandwick was obviously worthwhile
Nick
Administrator
That's the thing, even without SISU it doesn't have to be renewed. It is always going to be at Wasps mercy, who unlike ACL will be competing for the same customers.
So surely when you have a council leader spouting clear lies (not for the first time) and then gloating about public opinion being on their side it shows that they care just as little as SISU.
Why can Lucas clearly make things up to mislead the public and other councillors before a vote and it's nothing? Tim Fisher is also a bullshitter, the Trust can't go a statement without mentioning that.
She went out of her way to say it, they went out of their way to have it in the meeting. If it's meaningless, why did they?
Pick up the hotline to Weber Shandwick and it all goes away.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Agree with you on the CCC comment
As for Anderson, who knows what really went on or if he really had the power to agree anything
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
You would have to ask each of them NIck. I always take what politicians and councillors say with a huge degree of scepticism
Any team that doesn't own its ground will have a lease that is for a set term with no guarantee of renewal
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I think you've confused the word misleading with lie.
It wasn't a slip of the tongue, it was said repeatedly and issued in statements.
They can't even claim it was misinterpreted and was only ever intended to cover the deal in place at the time as they said the same of CRFC and they have never played at the Ricoh.
Its a clear and blatant lie and they shouldn't be able to just say people misunderstood us and get away with it.
Perfectly entitled to do as they wish but they should have the courage of their convictions and be honest about it.
CCC should admit they weren't truthful and that they will happily standby and watch the club go out of existence.
And similarly for Wasps they should admit there is no reason they can't agree a deal they are choosing not to and that by doing so are prepared to see the football club cease to exist.
Every word that comes out of the football club is picked apart but CCC and Wasps seem to be able to come out with any old rubbish and people just accept it.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
you dont think that was engineered by SISU from the start then with a set aim that was achieved?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
We know he was negotiating a long term deal for the Ricoh, Wasps confirmed that. They also confirmed those talks were going well. Then they suddenly played the 'no more talks unless you drop the legals card' for the first time.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I think lots of things have happened in this whole sage behind the scenes we don't know about but if we're going on known facts then ACL were the ones who first filed for administration.
Personally I think the administration process was engineered to try and force an ownership change. PH4 was in the frame then and the council , Higgs and trust were all over him.
Malaka
Well-Known Member
Politicians? Misleading comments? I am shocked!
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Do you really believe that if SISU dropped the legals Wasps wouldn't welcome a deal, do you really believe if SISU were to sell the club to an organisation who wanted to do business with Wasps they wouldn't. ?? Really
Nick
Administrator
I believe it's nothing to do with the legals, as it wasn't last year when they pulled out of talks saying they couldn't do anything while they were on (why enter them?).
Either way, it is still at Wasps mercy isn't it? We could have the biggest city fan in the world take over tomorrow but it is still then relying on a "competitor" in the city for sports fans to do a deal with us.
Who would people blame if CCC were cocks even without SISU? The same as they were before SISU. Their PR company would have to do better than drafting in supporters direct and a few social media accounts.
Surely the council should be at least asked a bit more to explain what was meant by it and what it means for the club for the next 200+ years?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
So why not let Anderson complete negotiations on the long term deal but say its can't be signed under current ownership with the legals ongoing?
For all we know when Anderson, shortly after leaving CCFC following Wasps walking out of talks, spoke of taking over a club he could have been talking about us "Which club? I can not say. Not a very big and well known team. There you can change little. A modest team for example in League One or League Two in England.".
