Warwick Uni (land near) (2 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
The Telegraph tackled Mr Fisher on widespread fans’ disbelief that he or the club’s owners Otium/Sisu had any genuine intent to return to the Coventry area.

It came after national reports that Football League chairman Greg Clarke had admitted he “does not know” whether a new ground would actually be built, despite Otium lodging a £1million bond (an “I owe you”) with the League as a penalty if the stadium is not built.

Mr Fisher said: “If we say we’re going to build a stadium, then we will. We have provided clear evidence to the League on our ability to deliver on those plans. It’s not, and never will be, our intention to mislead, filibuster or posture.

so how can clarke say he does not know and then fisher can say we have proven to the league we are going to build a stadium??? which one is lying?? or is it both of them ???:thinking about:

something stinks in this whole mess and looks like all sides have been bullshitting the fans:censored:
 
Manchester_sky_blue

Manchester_sky_blue

Well-Known Member
James Smith said:
I fail to see why SISU should be given or sold the freehold to a City asset.
Click to expand...

They dont need the freehold, just 100% ownership of ACL so that they can access all the revenues generated. I imagine they would be quite happy for the council to keep the freehold provided it was on a suitably long lease, say 50 years minimum.

Whilst it may stick in the throat to see SISU get hold of the Ricoh on the cheap, it would likely be the fastest way to get rid of them. Once upon a time they may have wanted to stick around the develop the stadium but now with the level of anti-sisu feeling i think they would sell club and stadium on in short order.
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Manchester_sky_blue said:
They dont need the freehold, just 100% ownership of ACL so that they can access all the revenues generated. I imagine they would be quite happy for the council to keep the freehold provided it was on a suitably long lease, say 50 years minimum.

Whilst it may stick in the throat to see SISU get hold of the Ricoh on the cheap, it would likely be the fastest way to get rid of them. Once upon a time they may have wanted to stick around the develop the stadium but now with the level of anti-sisu feeling i think they would sell club and stadium on in short order.
Click to expand...

Well I would agree with you except for the Ann Lucas comments about protecting a City asset (or whatever the exact quote was) and the ACL statement which makes me think that SISU want the Ricoh and won't bring the club back until they get it. 5 years is a long time.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Sky said:
What a pointless argument? I live in Coventry. The Ricoh is less than a mile within the boundary, Warwick uni is less than a mile outside the boundary. A boundary is a imaginary line which could change at any time. If you would give up on CCFC because of the 0.5 miles which separates Coventry from Warwick uni then you should rethink your priorities as a fan.
Click to expand...

I think it might be closer to the city centre than the Ricoh too.
People need to make their minds up what they want...or at least ask themselves if they are being as disingenuous as they accuse TF et al of being. Do they want Coventry back in Coventry...or is the real agenda "SISU-out" at all costs? It's a dilemma I know, but it's the kind of dilemma that clouds the issues...& hence actions, & confuses people where they should/want to direct their energies.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
James Smith said:
Well I would agree with you except for the Ann Lucas comments about protecting a City asset (or whatever the exact quote was) and the ACL statement which makes me think that SISU want the Ricoh and won't bring the club back until they get it. 5 years is a long time.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it something about keeping her husband off the sofa or something?
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
I think it might be closer to the city centre than the Ricoh too.
People need to make their minds up what they want...or at least ask themselves if they are being as disingenuous as they accuse TF et al of being. Do they want Coventry back in Coventry...or is the real agenda "SISU-out" at all costs? It's a dilemma I know, but it's the kind of dilemma that clouds the issues...& hence actions, & confuses people where they should/want to direct their energies.
Click to expand...

If Fisher held a fans forum and showed a business plan that stood up to scrutiny and showed us being much better off with the new stadium (and owning it). And had purchased the land and told us where it would be and shown us the plans and it seemed possible to get planning permission then that would be a totally different situation to what we have now and people would be able to make their minds up as to if they wished to support the plan or not.

You could build a new stadium outside of Cov and be a 2 min walk from the Ricoh so in reality the boundary is not a huge issue but the fact is there is nothing to suggest we would actually be any better off, have the funding to build it, have a site or any plans. I might as well go on CWR myself and announce my plans for a huge new state of the art stadium, there's about as much chance of me buiilding one as their is of the Fisher Arena actually happening.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
James Smith said:
Well I would agree with you except for the Ann Lucas comments about protecting a City asset (or whatever the exact quote was) and the ACL statement which makes me think that SISU want the Ricoh and won't bring the club back until they get it. 5 years is a long time.
Click to expand...

How is the Ricoh an asset to the people of Coventry? Please explain.
 
Manchester_sky_blue

Manchester_sky_blue

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
I think it might be closer to the city centre than the Ricoh too.
People need to make their minds up what they want...or at least ask themselves if they are being as disingenuous as they accuse TF et al of being. Do they want Coventry back in Coventry...or is the real agenda "SISU-out" at all costs? It's a dilemma I know, but it's the kind of dilemma that clouds the issues...& hence actions, & confuses people where they should/want to direct their energies.
Click to expand...

I think the real issue is that we have come to think of the Ricoh as home and it makes no sense to anyone to build a new ground whilst the ricoh lies empty.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
How is the Ricoh an asset to the people of Coventry? Please explain.
Click to expand...

I assume they don't mean asset in terms of everyone living in Cov gets given a tenner every year out of the profits. They mean assets as in it generates jobs, brings people into the city therefore causing more money to be spent in the city. How many shows with the likes of Bon Jovi, Take That, Muse etc were there in Coventry before the Ricoh was built?
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
I don't see the Ricoh as a community asset at all, I was thinking the other day what is there other than football that would get the youngsters to the Ricoh...There isn't anything at all.

Why would I go to the Ricoh without football? maybe for the casino every couple of months but I probably wouldn't bother...
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
I assume they don't mean asset in terms of everyone living in Cov gets given a tenner every year out of the profits. They mean assets as in it generates jobs, brings people into the city therefore causing more money to be spent in the city. How many shows with the likes of Bon Jovi, Take That, Muse etc were there in Coventry before the Ricoh was built?
Click to expand...

Not an asset in the true sense of the word then. By your rationale then, the Casbah / Colosseum / Tic Toc is an asset to the people of Coventry?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Isn't it worrying a football stadium used for football is redefined as a community asset full stop?

How did it ever come to that, that a football ground is more important for a wider community than for a football team?

Not sure I like this brave new world where a football ground's spoken of in terms of multi-use venues, revenue streams and development opportunities (none of which sound particularly community first, cold hearted profit second, anyway).

Difference between considering ACL/the council should get a 'fair' price for it, and not lose out when selling it, and deciding it should hang onto it for wider reasons than it being a football ground, IMO.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
IF the Ricoh didn't have football then surely jobs would be lost anyway as the people in the food outlets would only be needed for concerts and maybe functions?
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
I don't see the Ricoh as a community asset at all, I was thinking the other day what is there other than football that would get the youngsters to the Ricoh...There isn't anything at all.

Why would I go to the Ricoh without football? maybe for the casino every couple of months but I probably wouldn't bother...
Click to expand...

Jehovas Witness conference? :)
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Deleted member 5849 said:
Isn't it worrying a football stadium used for football is redefined as a community asset full stop?

How did it ever come to that, that a football ground is more important for a wider community than for a football team?

Not sure I like this brave new world where a football ground's spoken of in terms of multi-use venues, revenue streams and development opportunities (none of which sound particularly community first, cold hearted profit second, anyway).

Difference between considering ACL/the council should get a 'fair' price for it, and not lose out when selling it, and deciding it should hang onto it for wider reasons than it being a football ground, IMO.
Click to expand...

That's definitely been a change of tack with Lucas coming in.

Though I think the football club is also a community asset, so who am I to talk?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
shmmeee said:
That's definitely been a change of tack with Lucas coming in.
Click to expand...

Well... it seems just furthering the following, back at the time when SISU were set to take over.

Cllr Taylor set out four tests which potential buyers would have to pass before the arena was sold.

First, investors wanting to buy the Sky Blues and the arena would have to show their deal was agreed by both the football club and its bank, the Co-operative Bank.

Secondly, they'd have to promise to use the Ricoh Arena to regenerate the north of Coventry.

Thirdly, the new investor would have to bring extra management expertise and strength to running both the club and the venue.

Lastly, they'd have to show they'd enough money to do a deal which didn't short-change the joint owners of the Ricoh Arena.
Click to expand...

One and four seem fair enough. Three is... logical I suppose (although one man's expertise is another's incompetence).

Two however seems very, very odd to me!

If the price is 'fair' and whatever the value of a ground is (how to quantify that is another matter!) I see no reason why a football club should be expected to do more beyond football, in order to own its football stadium.

See, football club can be a community asset by virtue of being a football club, not by being a property development company.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
RPHunt said:
Wait for the bleating:

"They've been lining their pockets ever since"

"They keep all the pie money to themselves"

"It was Joe Elliot's fault they needed a bailout"
Click to expand...

Wait for the:

"There wouldn't be a Herbert Art Gallery if it wasn't for them".

"If they don't like it, we'll get the Tate Gallery in from London to replace them"

"Joe Elliott saved them".
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Herbert isn't the best anyway, paid a fair whack for a dinosaur expo which turned out to be in a room the size of my living room with about 5 model dinosaurs. Literally walked through in about 6 minutes and was about £30 down.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
Not an asset in the true sense of the word then. By your rationale then, the Casbah / Colosseum / Tic Toc is an asset to the people of Coventry?
Click to expand...

I certainly would. And that's the reason why when historic music venues look like they're going to be closed down you have people protesting. Went onto The Place Station (the site for right to bid on community assets) and the first example of a community asset that came up was Old Trafford!

Cut some of it out as it goes on a bit but this is a definition of community asset:

What is a community asset?

Which land and buildings do you really care about? Do any of them play a vital role or provide an integral public service in the heart of your community? Do you know of land or buildings on your street that has the potential to deliver social well-being within the area?
Community assets, in the broadest sense, are buildings and pieces of land that are an essential part of the social fabric of the area. Where they are in existing use, they are assets that if lost to community use, would significantly affect that community’s well-being. Where a building and piece of land has already fallen into disuse, their bringing back into community use would fulfil a real need in that community. Many buildings that have fallen into disuse, or at risk of falling into disuse, are heritage buildings. However, this is not just about preserving historical bricks and mortar for its own sake, but rather securing an asset for the community to use into the future.
The use of the land or building currently, or in the recent past, furthers the social well-being or cultural, recreational or sporting interests of the local community.
This use (as described above) of the building will continue to further the social well-being or interests of the local community.
The use of the building or land must not be deemed ‘ancillary’, i.e. of secondary purpose. This means that the use of the land or building to further social well-being or interests of the community must be its principle use.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top