Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

£6-7m sale price? (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter AFCCOVENTRY
  • Start date Oct 3, 2016
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 4, 2016
  • #106
clint van damme said:
how would it affect the Compass deal if we left? They must make a decent wack from the F&B at City games.
Click to expand...
They run the hotel & bars 24/7, losing the matches will dent their profitability a bit but won't kill them, they'll only find other events to stage on Sat afternoons.

There will be a bigger effect on Stadium Sponsorship income I think.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 4, 2016
  • #107
Astute said:
SISU keep up with the JR's. Wasps keep on about the 'background noise' stopping negotiations. So no deal is made.

Wasps get the arena to themselves. SISU get to move us out of Coventry again...if someone will let us play in their ground again.
Click to expand...

Wasps want a big name sponsor for the arena - life really is a bitch for wasps in that regard. It's the one thing we have left
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 4, 2016
  • #108
I feel like a kid watching helplessly while a dog chews my oldest and most cherished toy to pieces. And all the adults just seem to be arguing with each other, instead of doing something about it.
 
Reactions: Brylowes, Sky Blue Dal, covcity4life and 2 others
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #109
oldskyblue58 said:
not entirely sure what they have to do. I suspect it might simply be to ensure the two replacement pitches and some changing rooms with no specification of standard etc within the RBC boundary ARVO could call on their debenture at any time that suits them in order to maximise recovery of their loan monies
Click to expand...

The covenants with Sport England and Rugby BC prevent a sale without a suitable/proper/ fit for purpose replacement
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #110
oldskyblue58 said:
The FL looks first and foremost at getting the fixtures completed, then look at protecting its members, then paying lip service to the fans and grass root football. Personally I wouldn't rely on the FL doing anything, especially not if said action brings with it the real threat of legal action or setting a precedent that might upset an already dodgy apple cart known as football finance
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see WASPs results then to see if they meet their Bond Covenants
Also the Stadium revaluation is over due I think
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #111
oldfiver said:
The covenants with Sport England and Rugby BC prevent a sale without a suitable/proper/ fit for purpose replacement
Click to expand...
Are there covenants in place? The recent Rugby Local Plan out for consultation just says (on page 22) "Implementation of site allocation DS3.9 can only occur when adequate replacement of pitch provision is made to the satisfaction of Rugby Borough Council and Sport England in accordance with national planning policy". Replacement of pitches isn't quite the same thing as a full replacement of the facilities is it? Not being confrontational here - just curious as to whether you know of stronger legal safeguards which are in place?
 
Reactions: skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #112
Calista said:
Are there covenants in place? The recent Rugby Local Plan out for consultation just says (on page 22) "Implementation of site allocation DS3.9 can only occur when adequate replacement of pitch provision is made to the satisfaction of Rugby Borough Council and Sport England in accordance with national planning policy". Replacement of pitches isn't quite the same thing as a full replacement of the facilities is it? Not being confrontational here - just curious as to whether you know of stronger legal safeguards which are in place?
Click to expand...

Glad you've made that point and highlighted what it actually says. The club have wishy washied over it and many posters on here seem to be sleep walking into Ryton being replaced with a few goal posts in a field near Rugby and CCFC having no first team training ground.
 

albatross

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #113
skybluetony176 said:
Glad you've made that point and highlighted what it actually says. The club have wishy washied over it and many posters on here seem to be sleep walking into Ryton being replaced with a few goal posts in a field near Rugby and CCFC having no first team training ground.
Click to expand...

Sports England are concerned with the overall delivery of sport not the training facilities for an elite football club as they do not serve the wider community. If a professional football club re houses its training facility to say Alan Higgs, Warwick University, Copsewood, or Broad Street then then it can be argued that there has been no loss of facilities to the public or the football club.
 
Reactions: Sky Blue Dal and skybluetony176

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #114
Has our local media thought to check with RBC or Sport England to see what actually has to happen to allow Ryton to be sold?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #115
Fail to see where the wording guarantees like for like replacement of the Ryton facilities. There might have been more detailed wording in correspondence that does but that would require an FOI wouldn't it. Of course the club could clear it up easily themselves couldn't they

Strange that a post entirely about the FL could illicit comments entirely about Wasps.

The Wasps bond financial covenants appear to be three, one of which kicks in for 2017. Another relates to senior debt excluding monies owed to Richardson. the other about the relationship between the bond debt and the value of the Arena plus the league share. I wont bore people with more info than that. We wait to see what the financials reveal.

As for the valuation being overdue, is it? The valuation was to be done on 30-06-16. There is no mechanism I can see for publication other than the release of the audited accounts. Those are due by 31-10-2016 latest.
 
Reactions: skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #116
chiefdave said:
Has our local media thought to check with RBC or Sport England to see what actually has to happen to allow Ryton to be sold?
Click to expand...

Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.
 
Reactions: singers_pore

Calista

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #117
skybluetony176 said:
Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.
Click to expand...
Well I think Fisher did say something about moving to a more modern and inspiring environment. It’s a question of how much faith you place in his pronouncements, which (to put it kindly) always seem to leave room for interpretation.
 
Reactions: Captain Dart and Astute

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #118
Calista said:
Well I think Fisher did say something about moving to a more modern and inspiring environment. It’s a question of how much faith you place in his pronouncements, which (to put it kindly) always seem to leave room for interpretation.
Click to expand...

Announcement in three weeks, new year. We've narrowed it down to two sites. We're talking to local authorities, highway agency, environment agency and preparing impact statements blah blah blah.

Enough said
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #119
skybluetony176 said:
Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.
Click to expand...
The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?
 
Reactions: Deleted member 5849

Nick

Administrator
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #120
chiefdave said:
The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?
Click to expand...
As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #121
chiefdave said:
The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?
Click to expand...

Did they? Can't see the statement on the clubs site now but from memory they suggested that that was the condition imposed by RBC and Sports England when it actual fact it isn't.
 
Reactions: ricohroar

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #122
Nick said:
As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...
Click to expand...

No. It's for the club to explain why they're selling Ryton and how that falls into a long-term plan for the club. If they clarify the facts readers won't have to make their minds up...
 
Reactions: ricohroar

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #123
skybluetony176 said:
Did they? Can't see the statement on the clubs site now but from memory they suggested that that was the condition imposed by RBC and Sports England when it actual fact it isn't.
Click to expand...
And that's exactly why the local media should get involved. The club have said one thing, most don't believe it. What do you expect from the club, them to make the same statement again? Whatever they say they won't be believed. But if the CT, Observer or CWR went to RBC and / or Sport England and got clarification we would know where we stood.

Or is journalism now extinct and we just wait for the involved parties in any story to make their own statement?
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #124
chiefdave said:
And that's exactly why the local media should get involved. The club have said one thing, most don't believe it. What do you expect from the club, them to make the same statement again? Whatever they say they won't be believed. But if the CT, Observer or CWR went to RBC and / or Sport England and got clarification we would know where we stood.

Or is journalism now extinct and we just wait for the involved parties in any story to make their own statement?
Click to expand...

That's the trouble with the statement Dave. It was gibberish, uninformative, ambiguous and not even attributed to any one individual at the club.
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #125
Nick said:
As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...
Click to expand...
I'd rather have some facts to base my opinion on than guess or assume.
 

Brylowes

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 5, 2016
  • #126
Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,
 
Last edited: Oct 5, 2016

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 6, 2016
  • #127
Brylowes said:
Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,
Click to expand...

Don't think that is the angle. Derek Richardson may buzz off with a premium but Eastwood has been in rugby for some time, a bit of googling shows he was CFO of the RFU back in 2003 and arrived at Wasps in 2012. So I see him as being the architect of the Arena purchase plan. Everything I've read about him shows he has no interest in football other than indirectly to make money from it to put into rugby projects.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Oct 6, 2016
  • #128
oldfiver said:
Will be interesting to see WASPs results then to see if they meet their Bond Covenants
Also the Stadium revaluation is over due I think
Click to expand...

of course you could turn it around, what if the whispers are wrong

what if the valuation remains unchanged or improves
what if the bond covenants are met or exceeded
what if the group is profitable and has turned it round from last years losses

I suspect there would be some raised eyebrows, but also a sinking feeling in some quarters. It may scotch some conspiracy stories but encourage others. Will certainly beg a few other questions too I feel.

But as I have said before, we (including me) do not know yet so we wait to see
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Oct 6, 2016
  • #129
Brylowes said:
Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,
Click to expand...

I think uniting CCFC with the stadium is some way down the list of priorities that Wasps have or had. Their focus is on the Rugby Club and driving the off field incomes at the stadium. CCFC is a small part of that, and the bigger and more entrenched Wasps become the less important CCFC are to them. They need to show progress and profits for the next 7 years bringing CCFC in to the group would make that harder. They do not need to acquire CCFC to benefit from the income streams a successful CCFC could generate at the stadium.
 
Reactions: stupot07
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 6, 2016
  • #130
oldskyblue58 said:
of course you could turn it around, what if the whispers are wrong

what if the valuation remains unchanged or improves
what if the bond covenants are met or exceeded
what if the group is profitable and has turned it round from last years losses
I suspect there would be some raised eyebrows, but also a sinking feeling in some quarters. It may scotch some conspiracy stories but encourage others. Will certainly beg a few other questions too I feel.

But as I have said before, we (including me) do not know yet so we wait to see
Click to expand...

So we can speculate negative thoughts about CCFC but not WASPs?
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 6, 2016
  • #131
oldfiver said:
So we can speculate negative thoughts about CCFC but not WASPs?
Click to expand...

Sure you can. There's a Wasps sub section for that very reason. Go and knock yourself out in there but lets not let them distract from the issues that are facing CCFC in the CCFC section. There's a good lad.
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #132
skybluetony176 said:
Sure you can. There's a Wasps sub section for that very reason. Go and knock yourself out in there but lets not let them distract from the issues that are facing CCFC in the CCFC section. There's a good lad.
Click to expand...

The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!
 
Reactions: Grendel

albatross

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #133
oldfiver said:
The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!
Click to expand...

Comparing the track records of the respective owners one seems to be delivering the other dissembling at best so I think OSB58's post was appropriate
 
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #134
Not saying it wasn't
But then mine wasn't either !
 

albatross

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #135
oldfiver said:
Not saying it wasn't
But then mine wasn't either !
Click to expand...

agreed
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #136
oldfiver said:
The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!
Click to expand...

If there was positive things to say about CCFC we'd all be saying them including you. As none of us including you can find anything positive to say about CCFC (especially the decision making at the club) doesn't mean biased it means reality.
 
Reactions: montydon87
O

oldfiver

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #137
skybluetony176 said:
If there was positive things to say about CCFC we'd all be saying them including you. As none of us including you can find anything positive to say about CCFC (especially the decision making at the club) doesn't mean biased it means reality.
Click to expand...

I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!
 
Reactions: torchomatic

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #138
oldfiver said:
I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!
Click to expand...

And I quote "I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments".

What unproven allegations have been made against the club?
 
Last edited: Oct 7, 2016

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #139
oldfiver said:
I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!
Click to expand...

What springs to mind for me is the plans Wasps have on building loads of houses on the Higgs site. No room for us but plenty of room for houses. A London franchise freezing us out of a facility built for us...silence...
 
Reactions: Grendel and The Reverend Skyblue

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
  • Oct 7, 2016
  • #140
torchomatic said:
What springs to mind for me is the plans Wasps have on building loads of houses on the Higgs site. No room for us but plenty of room for houses. A London franchise freezing us out of a facility built for us...silence...
Click to expand...

They're not building on the Higgs site, they are proposing to build on the former ST land site which is adjacent to it.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/wasps-rfc-talks-severn-trent-10576047
If SISU had actually been looking for land to build on they would have found this site easily, it has been unused for many years.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-10-7_15-7-44.jpeg
    113.2 KB · Views: 8
Reactions: Brylowes
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next
First Prev 4 of 5 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?