Ricoh sponsor value (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Astute
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Ooh look youve edited my username in the quote. Clever.
The statement is curiously worded -- is this offer an offer to the administrator by any chance and only available in administrtion?
An ACL statement read: "To enable the football club to fulfil its commitments under Football League regulations, and to provide stability whilst Coventry City Football Club Limited, which owns the League Share, remains in administration, ACL has agreed to allow the club to play its homes games free of any rental fee, therefore removing any need for the supporters to travel outside the city to watch home games.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
More for bigger crowds, I found some stuff about Liverpool & arsenal and the numbers were £0.5M to almost £1M for the season... naturally the clubs were arguing the toss with the police authorities over the costs they were expected to foot.
Was It Wigan who had a big spat over £300k?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Wasn't there a more recent offer which saw the remainder of the season just gone being 'free', think it was to offset any losses by terminating the Sixfields contract early. That was £150K the following 2 seasons by which time, if you believe SISU, we'd be moving into our new ground.
Astute
Well-Known Member
The offer was for this season. And strangely enough we are still in admin. ACL must have known something.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Taking this waaaaay out of context. At the time the issue was about the Golden Share, and whether CCFC Ltd were the club. What the FL did was insane and against all guidelines, though forced by Sisu's timing. It was perfectly reasonable to assume that CCFC Ltd was going to remain the club, you can't look back with 20/20 hindsight knowing what happened with Otium.
With that in mind, the only people ACL could have offered a deal to was the administrator, as the effective CEO of CCFC Ltd. Obviously you wouldn't offer free rent for life, so it's safe to assume that when they are out of admin (which BTW still hasn't happened, just saying) a new owner would be in place to negotiate with. Also, the offer was made to enable to FL to refuse the groundshare (another almighty fuckup) and not be forced into giving the GS away.
My best guess is Sisu pulled the same "we're taking our ball home" act with the FL that they admitted to taking with CCC, only the FL fell for it. What they should have done was let the administrator conduct his business properly and sorted out the groundshare after the admin issue if still needed. However, Sisu wouldn't want that would they? It would weaken their entire argument for everything from Sixfields, to the -10 points, to the being "forced out" of Coventry.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Dunno, but I think FOI was used to get the figures I found.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
3 wheels ?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So the current owners and in reality the club were never offered a free rent deal.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No we are not in admin.
You are not even capable of understanding evidence you post. The post you made was purely an offer before the club exited administration hence its wording.
Another astute fact.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Err let me think. Oh yes you are always right. Even when wrong
Yes the admin process is over, but not done with as the main part of it all was to lead up to the winding up order.
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
And have never been included in the rent. Nobody has ever said that police costs are or were included in the rent that I know of.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Its perfectly simple.
Sisu sacked the stewards, groundsman, and other matchday staff. These would now need to be provided by ACL.
Hence the rise in matchday costs.
Sisu sacked the stewards, groundsman, and other matchday staff. These would now need to be provided by ACL.
Hence the rise in matchday costs.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Way to conjoin two opposing statements there. I could do a case study in divisive language and logical fallacies with your post history
No, the current owners were not offered the deal, as they didn't own the club at the time. Neither were any other future owners.
Yes, the club were offered a deal. The club at that time was being run by Appleton. As stated by everyone, on all sides, including Timmy.
Hobo
Well-Known Member
Way to conjoin two opposing statements there. I could do a case study in divisive language and logical fallacies with your post history
No, the current owners were not offered the deal, as they didn't own the club at the time. Neither were any other future owners.
Yes, the club were offered a deal. The club at that time was being run by Appleton. As stated by everyone, on all sides, including Timmy.
It really is easy to understand shmmeee, you have done a fine job explaining it.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Not all of them. Some are the same stewards who used to be at the Ricoh. Also, the ticketing staff.
Nick
Administrator
True.
Weren't we paying acl 40 quid an hour for cleaners too? Hate to think what a steward would cost.