Search results

Not aware of the response or otherwise of Rugby BC, but as some others have said, I think they have responded about 'formal' conversations, whereas I guess TF is including any conversation. Also as said by others the 3 sites were all going to be ruled out pretty quickly, so shouldn't have been...

Ok, a different point, but you're happy in the knowledge they haven't been syphoning off loads of money then.

You've got to be realistic about that, all that money wouldn't have been enough to cover wages and running costs. SISU have run the club into the ground, but they (or rather their investors) are the ones funding the losses, not a couple of hundred pounds each a year from supporters.

They feed any relevant bits through the supporters group.

TF has told us the situation as he wants it told, he's not going to say anything different under Simons interrogation.

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/documents/21.01.15-outline-minutes-sfc144-2226857.pdf Link to the minutes of the stadium group. keep this bit in mind..."These minutes are a brief outline of the points discussed at this meeting. They are not a verbatim record and as such, should not be duplicated...

"The Telegraph contacted the council again today in light of Mr Fisher’s statements and was told the authority stands by its previous responses to the FOI requests".

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ricoh-arena-sponsors-hope-see-7108507 The original deal is thought to expire in 2015 after a ten-year deal was announced in 2005. But both the Ricoh firm, and stadium operators ACL, now refuse to confirm the length of the deal currently in...

The loan hasn't been confirmed as 20 years has it? Also I don't think there's any confirmation of the lease being extended, wasn't this a question that Reid asked in his Cov Observer piece, but an answer not given?

Who is it that they are working closely with? Presumably not Fisher if you're reporting he has no role at the club.

Be interested to know the timescale of this one, as the place I work had an option to buy it, we let the option expire as the issues over who actually owned the site were too messy.

I imagine they have been asked to wait until the minutes are published, which sounds fair enough, otherwise we get rumours that are false rather than the official line (which may also be false).

Not many of us are rewarded in any way by the club at the moment.

It will be interesting to see the list of sites that they pursued. Can't see there being a lot of terms that need agreeing in a land deal, unless they are linked to stage payments.

Excellent, finally someone with some new information. Please list those things that the Council have done to prevent the new stadium being built.

No chance at all that we've been break even, we may have been cashflow positive at one point (as per Fisher), but the period that covered was never specified, and I suspect it was short lived.

You're presumably not suggesting though that they are proceeding with the action to make a point?

I don't know what you mean, what relief?

That all sounds reasonable to me. I still think that £392k in neither here or there though, and that seems to be the small difference between being a lier or a bit wrong to some people (not saying that's you).

Lucas may have been given incorrect figures. She may have been given correct figures, but then told lies about it. She may have been figures that were correct at the time, but then as part of the audit the figures were changed. The accounts were signed on 1st Dec, her comments were early Oct.