Search results

Ok your right. Its ok to gamble with the companies fixed assets. You've just lost any authority in being critical of Richardson then.

So if I'm interpreting sisu bullshit correctly, the initial investment in the new stadium will come from selling Ryton? Past mistakes repeating themselves?

WTF are you talking about? First game at the Ricoh the capacity was limited to 23k. The attendance was 23k, yet your saying it wasn't a sell out?

That's the intelligence of the average footballer though. Most sensible people would try harder if they thought there was a chance of getting a better job out of it.

Robbo, Nick, I dont think I could disagree with you more to be honest. Why exactly should the trust have stayed neutral? Their job is to do what is right for the club, and if one side decides to up sticks and move the club 35 miles away then they should be criticised.

By consult, do you mean tell? A bit like how we were consulted about the Northampton move?

I would be interested to know which bit of the article they disagree with. All looks pretty accurate to me.

Apologies if its already been posted but I couldn't see it anywhere.

http://www.skybluetrust.co.uk/attachments/article/324/slet.png

I'm still confused as to what is balanced about Les Reids view anyway. We all want CCFC back in Coventry, that we agree on. Surely a balanced view would be showing equal pressure to both the council to sell, and Sisu to accept the rent deal?

NOPM to the Coventry Telegraph until facts are reported, not opinions!

What Les Reid needs to realise is he has an opinion, that's all. He's not some David Dimbleby style debate host who is completely impartial. He has expressed his opinion which he is entitled to do, however that doesn't mean he's anymore balanced, or right than anyone else. I hate it when...

Can I just ask then, if the club never faced admin before, why was it forced to sell its shares in the Ricoh?

Not sure I could support the paving over of a thousand year old park.

Well we've been told a higher rate than what the council pays to borrow the money.

Ok. Do you have an evidence of a direct link between the Acl loan and council cutbacks? Surely your pleased as the interest received will help the local public purse in the long run?

Please look up definition of "Loan" please. I think your a bit confused.

Yes, ACL had backers who didn't go missing in action who stepped in when the business needed them. I though CCFC also had backers that were "in it for the long haul". Pity they weren't about when the bills needed paying.

Surely a properly run business doesn't get itself into the position where an outside party can threaten administration anyway?