TommyAtkins
New Member
That's quite probably the case, dear chap. But why wasn't this lack of forward viability picked up during SISU's due diligence? And of so profoundly obvious, why not renegotiated at that point, or SISU walk away?
And given Fisher's own figures cite a £41m loss in five years; even if 'the club' do achieve a deal, how do they then become viable? As even existing rent free and with match-day income, we'd have accrued huge losses anyway.
If you believe Fisher's figures, the difference between us paying a huge rent (as is), or no rent is only the difference between us losing an enormous amount and a gargantuan amount.
SISU were given shares for a promise of a better tomorrow. Now it appears even if they get the Ricoh, the figures still don't add up. What next? Do they want the cathedral?
And a Happy New Year to you also.....long time no chat
Our prime concern now should be the future of Coventry City Football Club and that means an agreement over the stadium must be reached.
I think if you look back, Ranson made the point that the stadium must be acquired (in some form).However, the evidence indicates that Ranson was trusted by SISU and Ranson decided to prioritise the playing staff over the stadium - with the limited funds available. That indicates that due diligence was performed and perhaps too much reliance was placed on fans coming back in droves.
Remember Ranson's repeated message about a breakeven attendance.
The simple truth is that SISU's initial investment was not enough to repair the damage at CCFC.
Looking forward, however, not back, Coventry will never have a chance of surviving as a football club until it secures a home