Meeting with Joy Seppala & Dave Boddy - Thursday 27th February 2020 (6 Viewers)

[hill83]

When is enough enough?

The exact moment a couple of blokes off here finally engage with the club.

 

---

[Nick]

But how would the debt be gone in a deal that by definition was state aid and can’t be replicated. You want the council to write off debt just after receiving a slap on the wrist for state aid.

What are you on about? The debt is their bonds.

What debt is anybody on about the council writing off?

 

[Grendel]

But how would the debt be gone in a deal that by definition was state aid and can’t be replicated. You want the council to write off debt just after receiving a slap on the wrist for state aid.

I don’t think we can afford the Ricoh on crowds of less than 10k, no. As I said to Grendel that might change if we get promoted.

The bigger point is how long do we try this avenue before giving up? Would you support another three years away while we appeal say? What about after that if we want civil action would you support another decade away?

The assumption seems to be that wait a few months and Wasps will go and CCC will come crawling giving us the Ricoh for peanuts and we ride off into the sunset making millions. It just doesn’t make sense for me. But it is a very nice dream to hold onto when wondering why your club are playing outside Coventry. People were saying this would happen any minute now for the last six years. When is enough enough?

The loan goes and the council that lake ownership why are you ignoring this

 

[shmmeee]

Haven't posted for a while and this thread takes some reading, it's like war and fucking peace. My question for shmee is why would Sisu withdraw the appeal, which they can't? If you win that appeal after you have built a new stadium you could use the possibility of getting a financial settlement to offset the cost? Or perhaps get some sort of part ownership of the Ricoh as settlement which means a new stadium would be a white elephant. The one thing that you can't argue with is CCC are a bunch of idiots. I have a relative that started their last year after working in the corporate sector for 20 years. They waist money constantly and are top heavy in the management structure. If you're shit at your job you get moved side ways or paid off, this means that it's the same people doing the same things whilst holding the same political bias. The issues of grounds and ownership will never be resolved until the legal avenue's open to our owner's are exhausted. Wasps have insisted on the indemnity after taking legal advice presumably, they won't change that as they advice will have modelled all the possible outcomes. One would think that the 3 year agreement at Blues is because the owners thought that would be the time scale for legals to be exhausted. The whole scenario is s clusterfuck with 3 guilty party's, I am not s fan of them or the EU but at least the EU will give us closer for once and all.

Because there’s no indication it’ll benefit CCFC from Sisu. They say we don’t want the ground and can’t afford it and the court action is nothing to do with CCFC. So as a CCFC fan I don’t care about it and want us home thanks. It’s all just assumptions from us that we’ll get tens of millions in compo which is seriously unlikely.

 

[shmmeee]

The loan goes and the council that lake ownership why are you ignoring this

Mostly because “the council that lake ownership” makes literally no sense.

 

[Nick]

Mostly because “the council that lake ownership” makes literally no sense.

It does because he clearly means "take" and not "lake".

Getting a bit desperate to avoid things?

 

[mr_monkey]

Because there’s no indication it’ll benefit CCFC from Sisu. They say we don’t want the ground and can’t afford it and the court action is nothing to do with CCFC. So as a CCFC fan I don’t care about it and want us home thanks. It’s all just assumptions from us that we’ll get tens of millions in compo which is seriously unlikely.

So in your mind it's play in cov no matter the long term affect?

 

[Grendel]

Mostly because “the council that lake ownership” makes literally no sense.

That is the default position of ACL
2006 goes into administration and the extended lease is foreclosed

 

[SkyBlueZack]

Original debt with the Ricoh was £21 million. That was paid down and then paid off by the council. Wasps took over, issues bonds and used that money to pay the debt with the council. Therefore the only debt left is wasps, if they go bust, the debt goes with them.

 

[hill83]

Mostly because “the council that lake ownership” makes literally no sense.

Really? That’s the best you’ve got?

<snip> does that meet your pedantry requirements. FFS.

 

[shmmeee]

So in your mind it's play in cov no matter the long term affect?

In my mind the long term effects of not playing in Cov while we wait for our owner to finish her legal fetish are worse than sucking it up and renting off a rugby club for a couple of years while we build the stadium we should’ve started more than 7 years ago when all this started.

Clearly in your mind we can play in Brum forever while we wait for the unicorns to arrive.

 

[shmmeee]

<stuff>

You care to translate then?

You’re really stretching here. Maybe try in GIF form?

 

[hill83]

You care to translate then?

You’re really stretching here. Maybe try in GIF form?

Already been translated for you. Just pointing out that you are a hypocrite.

Ohh mention a gif. You are windmilling mate. Cronies and mob coming soon.

 

[Nick]

You care to translate then?

You’re really stretching here. Maybe try in GIF form?

It is pretty simple, he meant Take and not Lake. You are choosing to ignore that because it doesn't suit. It has already been pointed out to you.

 

[shmmeee]

Already been translated for you. Just pointing out that you are a hypocrite.

Ohh mention a gif. You are windmilling mate. Cronies and mob coming soon.

Clearly you’re happy having both sides of this conversation by yourself so I’ll leave you to it.

 

[Nick]

Clearly you’re happy having both sides of this conversation by yourself so I’ll leave you to it.

Trying your hardest to ignore the point? Shock.

 

[hill83]

Clearly you’re happy having both sides of this conversation by yourself so I’ll leave you to it.

 

[shmmeee]

That is the default position of ACL
2006 goes into administration and the extended lease is foreclosed

Right. So your plan is that the EC judgement, which is designed to return the market to its original state, not bankrupt anyone, will bankrupt Wasps. The lease is basically dead and the council come back and offer Sisu a long leasehold at a cheaper rent but not state aid despite the club repeatedly saying they wouldn’t take it?

Just to be clear. That’s the plan? That’s fine. I think it’s one hell of a long shot and isn’t likely to play out like that and I’d rather not gamble the club on it. But it’s a plan.

 

[mr_monkey]

In my mind the long term effects of not playing in Cov while we wait for our owner to finish her legal fetish are worse than sucking it up and renting off a rugby club for a couple of years while we build the stadium we should’ve started more than 7 years ago when all this started.

Clearly in your mind we can play in Brum forever while we wait for the unicorns to arrive.

No one is saying play in Brum forever buddy, we are saying that we can't be held to ransom by a London rugby club to play in a stadium built for us that they now own due to all the parties involved

You do realise that sisu have gone through major staff changes in the 7 years you keep on quoting and I'm sure Dave boddy's view is very different to that of orange ken, ray ranson or any of the other cunts that have been in charge over the years

Why not see what happens short term, I'm sure we can all agree that there is more chance of us being at the Ricoh next season than us not due to numerous reasons, yet you can't let your hatred for sisu drop (just like the council)

This place will be in uproar if it all comes to nowt but right now the future looks brighter than it has done in a long time

 

[Nick]

Right. So your plan is that the EC judgement, which is designed to return the market to its original state, not bankrupt anyone, will bankrupt Wasps. The lease is basically dead and the council come back and offer Sisu a long leasehold at a cheaper rent but not state aid despite the club repeatedly saying they wouldn’t take it?

Just to be clear. That’s the plan? That’s fine. I think it’s one hell of a long shot and isn’t likely to play out like that and I’d rather not gamble the club on it. But it’s a plan.

This is where you are making things up.

You were corrected about something, then you make random things up that nobody has said. It's weird.

Why do you keep bullshitting constantly?

 

[Grendel]

Right. So your plan is that the EC judgement, which is designed to return the market to its original state, not bankrupt anyone, will bankrupt Wasps. The lease is basically dead and the council come back and offer Sisu a long leasehold at a cheaper rent but not state aid despite the club repeatedly saying they wouldn’t take it?

Just to be clear. That’s the plan? That’s fine. I think it’s one hell of a long shot and isn’t likely to play out like that and I’d rather not gamble the club on it. But it’s a plan.

No I’m referring to the original lease and the default clauses which protect sub tenants and their rights. So ccfc under the terms have rights to remain there on the existing terms or as the lease states can pursue court action against ACL 2006 LTD

 

[shmmeee]

No one is saying play in Brum forever buddy, we are saying that we can't be held to ransom by a London rugby club to play in a stadium built for us that they now own due to all the parties involved

You do realise that sisu have gone through major staff changes in the 7 years you keep on quoting and I'm sure Dave boddy's view is very different to that of orange ken, ray ranson or any of the other cunts that have been in charge over the years

Why not see what happens short term, I'm sure we can all agree that there is more chance of us being at the Ricoh next season than us not due to numerous reasons, yet you can't let your hatred for sisu drop (just like the council)

This place will be in uproar if it all comes to nowt but right now the future looks brighter than it has done in a long time

No. The monkey has changed several times. The organ grinders are the same and haven’t budged an inch.

And you are either saying you do want us “held ransom” and back at the Ricoh or you are saying you’re happy for us to stay in Brum. You can’t have it both ways.

My position has been clear for years despite constant attempts to misrepresent it: we need our own ground. The Ricoh isn’t affordable while we are not at least an upper Championship team. Start building a ground. Drop the stupid legal shite and strike a short term deal while we build. Failing that drop the legals and strike a long term deal. It’s plainly obvious that the continued legal action is stopping us building relationships in the city and moving forward.

 

[shmmeee]

No I’m referring to the original lease and the default clauses which protect sub tenants and their rights. So ccfc under the terms have rights to remain there on the existing terms or as the lease states can pursue court action against ACL 2006 LTD

Isn’t that the lease we broke? Sorry but it’s really hard to follow your argument when you wrap it up in riddles and drop it out bit by bit.

 

[chiefdave]

In my mind the long term effects of not playing in Cov while we wait for our owner to finish her legal fetish are worse than sucking it up and renting off a rugby club for a couple of years while we build the stadium we should’ve started more than 7 years ago when all this started.

There is absolutely no reason we can't play at the Ricoh while 'we wait for our owner to finish her legal fetish'. After all if all is above board as claimed there's nothing for Wasps or the council to worry about and therefore no need for the indemnity.

Just treat SISU like a child having a tantrum, let them shout and cry all they like until they wear themselves out, in the meantime the adults can get on with business as usual.

 

[Grendel]

Isn’t that the lease we broke? Sorry but it’s really hard to follow your argument when you wrap it up in riddles and drop it out bit by bit.

No it’s the lease that’s accompanying the 250 year lease extension to ACL the terms of foreclosure mean the council pick up the mess

 

[mr_monkey]

No. The monkey has changed several times. The organ grinders are the same and haven’t budged an inch.

And you are either saying you do want us “held ransom” and back at the Ricoh or you are saying you’re happy for us to stay in Brum. You can’t have it both ways.

My position has been clear for years despite constant attempts to misrepresent it: we need our own ground. The Ricoh isn’t affordable while we are not at least an upper Championship team. Start building a ground. Drop the stupid legal shite and strike a short term deal while we build. Failing that drop the legals and strike a long term deal. It’s plainly obvious that the continued legal action is stopping us building relationships in the city and moving forward.

Sorry to sound like a stuck record (but I am genuinely interested in your different point of view) but what legals? There are no legals against wasps at the moment, if there were we would all be asking for them to be dropped

It's not as black and white as you state with the Brum or Ricoh stuff. I don't want to be in Brum in the slightest but at the moment I'd rather be in brum and still have a long term future for my football club than be at the Ricoh with the sword of Damocles over our head with the indemnity clause active. Wasps drop the indemnity clause (which again I will state as you ignored it before) was only added when wasps changed the goal posts around potential action to do with the sale of the stadium.

We can't be the secondary party in a deal at the Ricoh as long term that fucks us as much as being in Brum

 

[ccfcricoh]

Blimey - that thread killed a couple of hours of work!

I dont care about politics/legals etc, i want whatever is best for CCFC and as far as i can see the clubs only options are:

1 - Stay in Brum forever (obviously wont happen)
2 - Stay in Brum until a new ground is built and then move into it
3 - Stay in Brum until agreement made with Wasps to move back to Ricoh
4 - Agreement made with Wasps and move back to the Ricoh and stay there
5- Agreement with Wasps and play at Ricoh until new ground built
6 - Sell up and hope new owners can come up with something

As far as i am aware, and having read all of the above I dont believe the Wasps will come to any agreement with CCFC until "the legals are dropped" or an indemnity in place. CCFC cant drop the legals and wont provide indemnity, so there goes options 3, 4 and 5.

We could argue all day whether or not SISU would actually stump up and pay for a new ground, or whether or not the council will allow another ground to be built so there's every chance option 2 goes as well.

SISU will not sell a club about to go into the Championship, and they cant be blamed for that.

So that leaves option 1 only, which cannot be long term, so it's a waiting game to see what the EU courts come back with. Either they throw out the case then Wasps wont have any reason to not come to an agreement with CCFC, or they get found guilty, in which case god knows what impact this will have on CCC and Wasps but it would certainly get the ball rolling!

I think we could survive 1 more season in Brum (if we go up) but past that i think would kill the club in the long run.

Anyway, i'm going for a 2.1 win and we obviously stay perched at the top!

 

[oldskyblue58]

Had a quick look at the Shrewsbury Town financials mainly to see how much their stadium cost. Look a well run set up having run at a profit in 2016, 2017 & 2018. In June 2018 they had accumulated £2.8m in the bank. The 2019 financials are not available yet.

Their stadium was opened in 2007 at a cost of £14.7m against which they got grant funding of £2m. In 2016 they did a deal with Lidl for a supermarket on site that looks like it raised £1m (cant be sure on that figure). It has a capacity of 9875 but can be increased to approx 10600 with temporary seating. As i understand it they already owned the site

For a ground to be capable of further expansion even if four sided as suggested then the most efficient way is to do the ground work (foundations etc) at the start of the project. This means the groundwork build costs of a stadium capable of expansion are front loaded on to the original build.

If Shrewsbury's stadium cost £14.7m in 2007 including £1.8m for already owning the site then a stadium twice the size capable of being future expanded, and allowing for inflation is going to cost our owners an awful lot more. Can only guess north of £25m - who knows. A bowl design i would suggest would be even more than that.

 

[shmmeee]

Sorry to sound like a stuck record (but I am genuinely interested in your different point of view) but what legals? There are no legals against wasps at the moment, if there were we would all be asking for them to be dropped

It's not as black and white as you state with the Brum or Ricoh stuff. I don't want to be in Brum in the slightest but at the moment I'd rather be in brum and still have a long term future for my football club than be at the Ricoh with the sword of Damocles over our head with the indemnity clause active. Wasps drop the indemnity clause (which again I will state as you ignored it before) was only added when wasps changed the goal posts around potential action to do with the sale of the stadium.

We can't be the secondary party in a deal at the Ricoh as long term that fucks us as much as being in Brum

Currently? The state aid complaint. I know I know we don’t think it can be stopped. But clearly Wasps do so it’s worth a try right? Going forward it would be appeals to that case and any other legal avenues they might have to try and reverse Wasps’ purchase of the Ricoh.

I can see the argument that “well they’re allowed their rights” and that they are, except it’s currently blocking us from having even a temporary home and frankly when it comes down to it I care more about CCFC than Joy Seppalas legal rights. I don’t think the case has merit and she should just take the L and move on.

The indemnity is only an issue because Wasps want the legals gone. It’s clearly preposterous and a last ditch attempt to inoculate themselves against anything that comes from the complaint.

So far as I see it the conversation has gone

Sisu: We have dropped all legals against Wasps as agreed

Wasps: Cool let’s talk. Hold up a second you’ve complained to the EC!!

S: *trollface.jpg* but that’s against the council not Wasps lololooolol

W: Yeah that’s bullshit. Withdraw it.

S: We can’t.

W: then make it so we won’t be impacted and then you’ll be incentivised your find a way to drop it

S: No

*talks end we move to Brum*

S: NDA

W: NDA

S: Indemnity!

W: NDA (but unofficially though Linnell/Trust meetings: if Sisu asked for it to be forgotten that’d help)

S: No

SBT: Grrrrr obviously it can’t be dropped!

Me: ?? Got to be worth a try though surely? I mean if we are making requests of the owners as a fans group, shouldn’t we be asking them to try everything?

SBT: your friends and family are cunts and you’ve got an agenda and you sound like this bloke on Twitter and here’s a windmill GIF

Me: ?? O....K....

 

[Grendel]

Had a quick look at the Shrewsbury Town financials mainly to see how much their stadium cost. Look a well run set up having run at a profit in 2016, 2017 & 2018. In June 2018 they had accumulated £2.8m in the bank. The 2019 financials are not available yet.

Their stadium was opened in 2007 at a cost of £14.7m against which they got grant funding of £2m. In 2016 they did a deal with Lidl for a supermarket on site that looks like it raised £1m (cant be sure on that figure). It has a capacity of 9875 but can be increased to approx 10600 with temporary seating. As i understand it they already owned the site

For a ground to be capable of further expansion even if four sided as suggested then the most efficient way is to do the ground work (foundations etc) at the start of the project. This means the groundwork build costs of a stadium capable of expansion are front loaded on to the original build.

If Shrewsbury's stadium cost £14.7m in 2007 including owning the site then a stadium twice the size capable of being future expanded, and allowing for inflation is going to cost our owners an awful lot more. Can only guess north of £25m - who knows. A bowl design i would suggest would be even more than that.

Fairly conservative estimate I would say.

 

[Grendel]

Currently? The state aid complaint. I know I know we don’t think it can be stopped. But clearly Wasps do so it’s worth a try right? Going forward it would be appeals to that case and any other legal avenues they might have to try and reverse Wasps’ purchase of the Ricoh.

I can see the argument that “well they’re allowed their rights” and that they are, except it’s currently blocking us from having even a temporary home and frankly when it comes down to it I care more about CCFC than Joy Seppalas legal rights. I don’t think the case has merit and she should just take the L and move on.

The indemnity is only an issue because Wasps want the legals gone. It’s clearly preposterous and a last ditch attempt to inoculate themselves against anything that comes from the complaint.

So far as I see it the conversation has gone

Sisu: We have dropped all legals against Wasps as agreed

Wasps: Cool let’s talk. Hold up a second you’ve complained to the EC!!

S: *trollface.jpg* but that’s against the council not Wasps lololooolol

W: Yeah that’s bullshit. Withdraw it.

S: We can’t.

W: then make it so we won’t be impacted and then you’ll be incentivised your find a way to drop it

S: No

*talks end we move to Brum*

S: NDA

W: NDA

S: Indemnity!

W: NDA (but unofficially though Linnell/Trust meetings: if Sisu asked for it to be forgotten that’d help)

S: No

SBT: Grrrrr obviously it can’t be dropped!

Me: ?? Got to be worth a try though surely? I mean if we are making requests of the owners as a fans group, shouldn’t we be asking them to try everything?

SBT: your friends and family are cunts and you’ve got an agenda and you sound like this bloke on Twitter and here’s a windmill GIF

Me: ?? O....K....

Third bottle of sherry downed it seems

 

[fernandopartridge]

shmmeee - not sure why you or anybody else goes on about SISU breaking the lease. There was clear intent from ACL (and by extension the council) to break the lease anyway. They had applied to put the club into administration themselves.

 

[Nick]

Currently? The state aid complaint. I know I know we don’t think it can be stopped. But clearly Wasps do so it’s worth a try right? Going forward it would be appeals to that case and any other legal avenues they might have to try and reverse Wasps’ purchase of the Ricoh.

I can see the argument that “well they’re allowed their rights” and that they are, except it’s currently blocking us from having even a temporary home and frankly when it comes down to it I care more about CCFC than Joy Seppalas legal rights. I don’t think the case has merit and she should just take the L and move on.

The indemnity is only an issue because Wasps want the legals gone. It’s clearly preposterous and a last ditch attempt to inoculate themselves against anything that comes from the complaint.

So far as I see it the conversation has gone

Sisu: We have dropped all legals against Wasps as agreed

Wasps: Cool let’s talk. Hold up a second you’ve complained to the EC!!

S: *trollface.jpg* but that’s against the council not Wasps lololooolol

W: Yeah that’s bullshit. Withdraw it.

S: We can’t.

W: then make it so we won’t be impacted and then you’ll be incentivised your find a way to drop it

S: No

*talks end we move to Brum*

S: NDA

W: NDA

S: Indemnity!

W: NDA (but unofficially though Linnell/Trust meetings: if Sisu asked for it to be forgotten that’d help)

S: No

SBT: Grrrrr obviously it can’t be dropped!

Me: ?? Got to be worth a try though surely? I mean if we are making requests of the owners as a fans group, shouldn’t we be asking them to try everything?

SBT: your friends and family are cunts and you’ve got an agenda and you sound like this bloke on Twitter and here’s a windmill GIF

Me: ?? O....K....

Wasps don't think it can be stopped, do they?

You are making things up in your head and then getting worked up about it?

Sorry if you don't like it that people point out that you lose your head on threads like this and seem to miss certain things out and totally ignore them. You thought it was relevant that I may have got free tickets and that I know SISU but it's not that your old man was a council leader and in charge of the Trust when they were plotting against the club?

?? O....K....

 

[fernandopartridge]

Had a quick look at the Shrewsbury Town financials mainly to see how much their stadium cost. Look a well run set up having run at a profit in 2016, 2017 & 2018. In June 2018 they had accumulated £2.8m in the bank. The 2019 financials are not available yet.

Their stadium was opened in 2007 at a cost of £14.7m against which they got grant funding of £2m. In 2016 they did a deal with Lidl for a supermarket on site that looks like it raised £1m (cant be sure on that figure). It has a capacity of 9875 but can be increased to approx 10600 with temporary seating. As i understand it they already owned the site

For a ground to be capable of further expansion even if four sided as suggested then the most efficient way is to do the ground work (foundations etc) at the start of the project. This means the groundwork build costs of a stadium capable of expansion are front loaded on to the original build.

If Shrewsbury's stadium cost £14.7m in 2007 including £1.8m for already owning the site then a stadium twice the size capable of being future expanded, and allowing for inflation is going to cost our owners an awful lot more. Can only guess north of £25m - who knows. A bowl design i would suggest would be even more than that.

Yes, thought that myself when I hear "We can build x with provision for expansion", it's all in the footings, from the Ricoh experience we know full well how much extensive earthworks add to the final build cost.

I reckon we'd be looking at least £45m including acquisition of the land tbh.

 

[shmmeee]

shmmeee - not sure why you or anybody else goes on about SISU breaking the lease. There was clear intent from ACL (and by extension the council) to break the lease anyway. They had applied to put the club into administration themselves.

Not sure what this has to do with anything sorry. Grendel was saying the lease reverts to us, I asked if he meant the one we broke (and we did break even if it was going to break anyway), he accused me of being an elderly alcoholic it seems.

I’m only talking about going forward.