Search results

"Ideally, we would like to keep playing our home matches at the Ricoh if the stadium owners, Arena Coventry Ltd (ACL) will offer reasonable commercial terms. All we've ever asked for is an affordable rent with access to matchday revenues, like any other club. We hope these will be offered to us...

Would like to stick to what we actually know but as is usual there is very little the fans actually know for certain. Yes the only people that know what is going on are a small group at SISU head quarters and at ACL, but even they dont know fully what the other is doing. So what follows is my...

We do not know what GR lost or not, certainly the accounts do not show he personally loaned the club £20m Was it not disclosed that GR is a guarantor under the lease the club has at the Ricoh...... so right now he could be facing action for recovery if a deal is not done Perhaps a reason why...

Actually according to Boris Johnson on BBC Radio 5 this morning the council get a significant share of the income generated at the stadium to help defray the cost of rebuild ....... including naming rights, event income etc. So looks like they do not get 100% of the revenue.

Just a question why do CCFCH accounts show them as paying the rent and having the lease liability both as an individual company and as a sub group of SBS&L? If the contracts for players were always supposed to be linked to the golden share why is it that CCFC limited have always paid the wages...

maybe the council wont be able to stop it but they can make it damn difficult, extend timelines and add costs by insisting on planning requirements and infra structure improvements

not necessarily long term ....... still a thought that they are still trying to break ACL

I think that is what we are going to find out It seems to be a device to prejudice the rights of a creditor......... The League will have decisions to make on this because it sets a dangerous precedent that will be exploited time and again in future

The clue is in the statement it says that CCFC Holdings is paying players etc....... that wasnt the case before. CCFC limited own the lease and licence at the Ricoh ....... SISU have shifted everything including the trade out of that company in to CCFCH to leave CCFC only owning lease at the...

Here is what I think is going on ...... it is a best guess Keep in mind that SISU own Otium entertainments who own CCFC Holdings who own CCFC. In short a group that is in each case a company wholly owned by the one above it. CCFC was as far as we know the only subsidiary of CCFCH You are able...

careful how you hand that quid over ......... you might end up with a club !:laugh:

Here we go again ACL cant survive without CCFC.................. it will be a white elephant ....... it can survive without CCFC ...... it goes round and round. There are things that seem to get forgotten in assessing the possibility of survival I know everyone likes to focus on taking the...

I cant think where they mean either mattylad....... all the big ex factory sites already have planning permissions for retail and housing......... the butts just isnt going to be big enough, certainly wont have enough parking....... any "common land" is likely to remain just that i would have...

I told Pressley, after wrapping bell up in cotton wool and creating a sterile zone around him, to handle with care and to be careful how he used him ........... and look what happens, takes him out of the box for a couple of minutes and goes breaks him!:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

neither ............ and the club is theirs to do with as they choose........... what fans may or may not want is way down their list of priorities

wont matter unless CCFC go into administration and/or a sale is forced upon SISU............. doesnt seem SISU are open to the possibility of sale

Got a question or two ...... Bullying ............... isnt that pot calling kettle black TF ? In actual fact isnt that what a lot of business is about in a lot less overt and more subtle way to get the best for the company you represent, why would anyone be surprised that either side tried to...

says more than that I believe fernando but to reply the charity wasnt at the Club and it lent £2.5m to the club to keep it going at a rate that was 1.5% above base rate at the time........ hardly profiteering then purchased the net investment at nearly full value not distressed value then...

From details in CCFCH accounts The option to buy the land lapsed sometime before 31/05/02. So CCFC never had any land to sell in part or its entirety to Tesco or anyone else There had been costs incurred in the initial development some £18.4m against which there were debts and loans...

From details in CCFCH accounts The option to buy the land lapsed sometime before 31/05/02. So CCFC never had any land to sell in part or its entirety to Tesco or anyone else There had been costs incurred in the initial development some £18.4m against which there were debts and loans...