Andy Turner article (1 Viewer)

[bigfatronssba]

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/sport-opinion/sisu-rejected-latest-ricoh-arena-6373747

Good article. Better than the usual Les Reid stuff. Tells Nikki Sinclair how it is.

 

---

[wingy]

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/sport-opinion/sisu-rejected-latest-ricoh-arena-6373747

Good article. Better than the usual Les Reid stuff. Tells Nikki Sinclair how it is.

Yes almost like he's a Supporter.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

 

[valiant15]

Is this nikki sinclair the self confest Liverpool fan?

The majority of us city fans may not go at the moment but we'd never change allegiance to another club and not one of the glory hunting ones nikki.

Wimbledon got shafted so i think ill go and support a champions league club now! !

Shit supporter.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

I fail to see what difference it makes whether its 10 years or 3 years.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

I fail to see what difference it makes whether its 10 years or 3 years.

Sisu have said that they will not go back to the previous tenancy arrangement that means either purchasing the freehold of the Ricoh or building their own stadium, lets say for a moment CCCouncil choose not to sell the Freehold and the Club have just started a Rental Agreement at the Ricoh and plan to build thier own stadium to move into, they're then stuck in a ten year agreement before they can look to try and recoup any money and put the clubs vision of owning it's own stadium in place.

 

[wingy]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

While I don't think that would prevent it on the terms the league accepted ,IE;Temporary while the new one is constructed ,your point would have been better used by the club than the one trotted out by Labovich

 

[skybluetony176]

he's doing a god cop bad cop routine with Les.

i like Mr Turner, like Wingy said "Yes almost like he's a Supporter". i assume he means the club and not sh1tsu .

as for Ms chucked out of UKIP Sinclair, nail on the head.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

While I don't think that would prevent it on the terms the league accepted ,IE;Temporary while the new one is constructed ,your point would have been better used by the club than the one trotted out by Labovich

You mean Labradoodle?

 

[skybluetony176]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

Not if they are building their own ground, the Ricoh would be classed as a tempoary home. As the FL have already aceppted that Sh1tsu are building their own ground they have already put them selves in a position where they cant refuse. besides the FL rules are more like guidelines as they have already demonstrated, you know like the pirate code from pirates of the caribean.

good clutching at straws effort though on behalf of sh1tsu. timmy would be proud

 

[oldskyblue58]

If it is a temporary deal I think all parties would put the 10 year deal to one side (including the FL - using their discretion as ever). In which case discussions would be on the basis of a shorter deal with perhaps annual lease break clauses. Not sure length of deal is the problem

 

[bigfatronssba]

Sisu have said that they will not go back to the previous tenancy arrangement that means either purchasing the freehold of the Ricoh or building their own stadium, lets say for a moment CCCouncil choose not to sell the Freehold and the Club have just started a Rental Agreement at the Ricoh and plan to build thier own stadium to move into, they're then stuck in a ten year agreement before they can look to try and recoup any money and put the clubs vision of owning it's own stadium in place.

They had a 45 year agreement this time last year yet they managed to worm their way out of that.

 

[bigfatronssba]

If it is a temporary deal I think all parties would put the 10 year deal to one side (including the FL - using their discretion as ever). In which case discussions would be on the basis of a shorter deal with perhaps annual lease break clauses. Not sure length of deal is the problem

The problem with the deal is it contradicts Sisu's plan of distressing ACL.

 

[wingy]

If it is a temporary deal I think all parties would put the 10 year deal to one side (including the FL - using their discretion as ever). In which case discussions would be on the basis of a shorter deal with perhaps annual lease break clauses. Not sure length of deal is the problem

Like you said in the other thread Looks like Its not to be for this season ,ACL driving in a new direction.Then unless things are right i don't see them dancing to anyone else's tune In the Future .The New Stadium for me should go ahead now.By the Way OSB while your're here ,Am I correct that in your recent appraisal you stated that there Are currently no charges through ARVO?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Not if they are building their own ground, the Ricoh would be classed as a tempoary home. As the FL have already aceppted that Sh1tsu are building their own ground they have already put them selves in a position where they cant refuse. besides the FL rules are more like guidelines as they have already demonstrated, you know like the pirate code from pirates of the caribean.

good clutching at straws effort though on behalf of sh1tsu. timmy would be proud

Parley....

 

[RoboCCFC90]

They had a 45 year agreement this time last year yet they managed to worm their way out of that.

Fair point.

 

[sky blue john]

The problem with the deal is it contradicts Sisu's plan of distressing ACL.

Exactly that is why Sisu can't and won't except the offer. It will also more importantly to Sisu Arvo otium and whoever effect the way they plan to claim damages regarding the JR.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Wingy .......There is a charge on the assets/shares of Otium and SBS&L taken out in favour of ARVO. The charges on CCFC H have been filed as satisfied - have to be so they can wind CCFC H up

ARVO of course earn interest on the loans they have made to Otium at a rate that has not been declared but in the past they have earnt £1m+ per annum in interest. (no reason why they shouldnt charge interest on a loan though)

 

[olderskyblue]

ARVO of course earn interest on the loans they have made to Otium at a rate that has not been declared but in the past they have earnt £1m+ per annum in interest. (no reason why they shouldnt charge interest on a loan though)

Well, at least ARVO are not bleeding the club dry.....

 

[James Smith]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

Sisu have said that they will not go back to the previous tenancy arrangement that means either purchasing the freehold of the Ricoh or building their own stadium, lets say for a moment CCCouncil choose not to sell the Freehold and the Club have just started a Rental Agreement at the Ricoh and plan to build thier own stadium to move into, they're then stuck in a ten year agreement before they can look to try and recoup any money and put the clubs vision of owning it's own stadium in place.

No as other people have pointed out - to me when I asked that question about 10 years.

I haven't, I've questioned people other than OSB blindly quoting a rule of the football league, and refusing to accept the possibility that, having let the club rent a ground outside of Coventry for 3-5 years, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to have the same deal agreed within Coventry...

10 years totally irrelevant, it'd only be relevant if the club had a ground lined up for the next 10 years anyway. If they're building a new one in the right place, then renting AN Other ground in the city that bears the club's name is hardly going to be rejected by the football league, so a short term temporary agreement can be continued elsewhere.

I agree that the League just appear to want a quiet life running the fixture list and if the two parties got together and said can we have a three year deal back in Coventry whilst we build our new stadium - I'd probably faint . I can't see them being objectors, the deal at Sixfields isn't for 10 years and bending the rules at board discretion is somewhat habit forming it would seem.

 

[sky blue john]

Well, at least ARVO are not bleeding the club dry.....

Some tend to ignore this fact it doesn't suit their rent argument or justification of watching the team at sixfields !!!!

 

[James Smith]

The problem with the deal is it contradicts Sisu's plan of distressing ACL.

You mean their campaign of NOPM to ACL?

 

[sw88]

Wow! Gen did the telegraph give their journo's permission to be so direct? They normally shy away from this stuff!

Fair play Andy. Athough I do think Nikki being in support of the club coming back to Coventry is a good thing,her opinion is somewhat divided because of what happened to the club she supports

 

[skybluetony176]

Well, at least ARVO are not bleeding the club dry.....

remind me, what do the management fee's cover again :thinking about:

 

[Captain Dart]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

Seems to me it is more like the equivalent of the Northampton temporary relocation deal, but in Coventry.

 

[shmmeee]

Andy Turner's article is good but can I just point something out if this deal was to happen wouldn't it be on a ten year deal as per the rule of the Football League?

No wonder Sisu chose not to accept it :facepalm:

Hang on I thought they didn't accept the £150k because it was 10 years!

Make your mind up!

 

[robbiethemole]

Wingy .......There is a charge on the assets/shares of Otium and SBS&L taken out in favour of ARVO. The charges on CCFC H have been filed as satisfied - have to be so they can wind CCFC H up

ARVO of course earn interest on the loans they have made to Otium at a rate that has not been declared but in the past they have earnt £1m+ per annum in interest. (no reason why they shouldnt charge interest on a loan though)

Strange that...............almost exactly the same amount in interest paid as they should have paid on the lease. which would be the better deal??

 

[stupot07]

Strange that...............almost exactly the same amount in interest paid as they should have paid on the lease. which would be the better deal??

Neither. .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[shmmeee]

Neither. .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

So, according to you, paying £1.2m/year for use of a Premiership quality stadium is as good a deal as paying yourself £1.2m in interest?

I get the old rent deal wasn't great, but even you've got to admit we got more for our money than with Arvo?

 

[stupot07]

So, according to you, paying £1.2m/year for use of a Premiership quality stadium is as good a deal as paying yourself £1.2m in interest?

I get the old rent deal wasn't great, but even you've got to admit we got more for our money than with Arvo?

Unfortunately it's not an either/or question. Regardless of who is or isn't at fault, paying the £1.2m rent whilst having no access to revenues limited income and meant we had one of the lowest turnovers in the league, whilst having overspent on average playing in trying to stay in the championship meant we had considerable losses, which means borrowing money, which means paying interest on repayment. If you check out Swiss Ramble championship finances 2011/12, have the clubs are paying over £1m interest charges.

Both are/were a bum deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Unfortunately it's not an either/or question. Regardless of who is or isn't at fault, paying the £1.2m rent whilst having no access to revenues limited income and meant we had one of the lowest turnovers in the league, whilst having overspent on average playing in trying to stay in the championship meant we had considerable losses, which means borrowing money, which means paying interest on repayment. If you check out Swiss Ramble championship finances 2011/12, have the clubs are paying over £1m interest charges.

Both are/were a bum deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

What about the 400k a year deal that they rejected (after initially agreeing to it)? Or the one to play for free? Are they worse values in outlay than the owners paying themselves 1.2m in return for sweet FA for the club and its supporters? Considering that the latter also comes with the club playing in Northampton in front of a fraction of it's support, severely pissing the majority off and also wrecking your turnover: isn't that a terrible price to pay as well?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Like how he speaks like a fan - Who is Nikki Sinclaire? Does she have any affinity with CCFC or not? If she did she would understand

 

[James Smith]

What about the 400k a year deal that they rejected (after initially agreeing to it)? Or the one to play for free? Are they worse values in outlay than the owners paying themselves 1.2m in return for sweet FA for the club and its supporters? Considering that the latter also comes with the club playing in Northampton in front of a fraction of it's support, severely pissing the majority off and also wrecking your turnover: isn't that a terrible price to pay as well?

Oh the "any handshakes and not everyone had hands...." meeting.

 

[James Smith]

Like how he speaks like a fan - Who is Nikki Sinclaire? Does she have any affinity with CCFC or not? If she did she would understand

She is the local MEP .

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Is that local as in the MEP for the Midlands?