Search results

ACL's obligations were to their shareholders to recover the maximum amount of monies owed. The amount of money they would receive was the same whether they rejected or accepted the CVA? So again - where is their benefit? The only benefit ACL could have got with the process being revisited would...

He's right though - what did ACL 'achieve' by rejecting the CVA? How did it benefit CCFC, or the City of Coventry? You may be right about process being flawed, but it is for the court to investigate the process if they feel something untoward has occured.

To be fair I've mostly had a go at ACL and CCC. You say that Higgs and SISU have tried to do dealings a few times, so clearly they feel there is some shared vision between them. But it falls apart every time CCC get involved. I get that SISU are hated, they've fucked up royally. But they still...

Success on the pitch is the main catalyst for return on investment. Hence the divide of wealth between PL and the rest. And it's all Sky's fault.

Of course they messed up - I am in total agreement. To not deal with that at the time of purchase was absurd. But at some point in the future the club and it's long term future had to be addressed. But the club can't suffer forever because of that mistake. I wouldn't say the lease argument is...

I was saying that's what would occur had the lease arrangement gone full term. Obviously that is not the case now. I can see the rationale for stadium ownership, but seeing as the Ricoh is there then a long term lease with all revenue streams is a far better scenario right now.

It takes a special person to love a council more than their football club.

There are more than sufficient 'mistruths' from both sides to suggest that all comments are to be read with a certain amount of cynicism.

If you are going to quote me - then do it properly. I said I quite clearly stated that the 'handing over' would be in exchange for a price. So the club buying the rights to these revenue streams. Or did that not fit in with your agenda?

Yes I do agree that the actions of SISU are ridiculous, at no point have I ever defended their decision to move the club. But I'm sorry I don't subscribe to the anti-SISU love in on here. There are thousands of comments and threads about what SISU have fucked up. However in this whole debacle...

How do you define unfit? If you use the measure of the law then it would suggest they are acting illegally? Just look at Leeds to see how difficult that could be, and i'm sure if they had acted illegally by now it would have been reported and they would be charged accordingly. Deplorable...

Agreed - I think SISU have to sacrifice the idea of a freehold and accept a leasehold, the council have to hand over the revenues. How much of the revenues will obviously drive the price. It has to be such that the club can sustain itself without the current and future owners subsidising it.

Hypothetically - Yes. Do the council have the right to try and force out someone because they don't like them? No

FWIW I have never said that SISU should get anything on the cheap. They should pay the going rate. No doubt if the parties did their own valuations they would be light years apart. I would like to see an independent party do a valuation if this was possible.

I don't really think the council are in any position to be the moral compass? They have plenty of their own issues that need to be addressed outside of this particular area

If SISU and ACL could do a deal on the basis of the JR being dropped then that could be a win win for everyone. The council are not going to give an uncumbered freehold. SISU will not be tenants in the same way they were before. They could have a long term lease with full control of ACL and all...

This has only happened since CCFC left.

So you are saying every single football stadium, cinema, bowling alley and place for children to 'not be on the streets' is a community asset? Could the young people of Coventry play their football final at the Ricoh? Could the local grass roots mens competitions do the same? That's what I...

EVERYONE could have done more. Especially SISU. All parties are culpable.

So between 2003 and 2012 there wasn't a single opportunity to sell the share back?