stupot07
Well-Known Member
Can you tell me why it was in ACLs best interest to reject the CVA? I still can't see it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
So the council and ACL denied Coventry a play off place?
I presume they sold or allowed the clubs best players to leave whilst in a relegation battle.
I presume they refused to pay a legally binding debt.
I presume they Moved us to Northampton after convincing the FL that if they didn't the club would no longer exist.
All of the above stopped us watching Cov for the first time minus a few months in a decade playing good football.
After all of the above they cost us 10 points.
Is that what you are saying?
Can you tell me why it was in ACLs best interest to reject the CVA? I still can't see it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Can you tell me it was in SISU's best interest to threaten our club with liquidation until ACL went for administration which made SISU go for administration first so they could have Appleton who couldn't even find the GS?
It will go out of existence far quicker if people don't give them cash...
Try and deny that all you like, but it's a truth that business without income, and owners unwilling to make up the funding gap = oblivion.
So please, if you think oblivion is preferable, fine (schmeee does for one) but don't try the ridiculous logic that not giving them cash will guarantee they pack up and go home with their tails between their legs!
Only time will tell........
Most people I speak to totally agree with that, it's only on here that you get the bizarre cheerleading for a stadium management company.
So Grendel & co your proposal of CCC gifting the Ricoh stadium to Sisu seems a bit unfair to ccfc in my book !!!
please explain why ccfc should pay rent to Sisu for playing in a stadium that didn't cost them anything ???????
Where have I ever said that I don't want us playing in Coventry?
The difference with some of our supporters to the majority of our supporters as well as myself is that we fear for our clubs future. Letting the Ricoh go to SISU for a fraction of it's true value wouldn't make our future safe. Letting them have the freehold wouldn't give them the pie money that some say would give us a massive cash boost. What it would do is give one part of SISU the freehold to do what they want with. Would that be to pile up debt against in the name of CCFC? If so this would make liquidation a reality. Not only would we not have a club but also not have a place for a new club to play.
So more or less giving them the ground would bring us back to Coventry. How long would this last for? So what is wrong in looking more long term to the future than a season or two? So why does looking towards a more secure future for our club make me a grumpy t**t?
There are times in life when you just have to accept most people don't agree with you and Les
Should the council sell the Ricoh Arena to Sisu so Sky Blues can play in Coventry?
YES
33%
NO
67%
Two points: "Most people"?
Secondly, "...so Sky Blues can play in Coventry".
Where do "most people" want them to play then? In Northampton still? If so I presume we won't have any more "protests" on the hill and a full Sixfields.
Trying to be objective and realistic (bearing in mind I support NOPM and KCIC ) I feel the only way out of this is for ACL and CCC to sell the Ricoh to SISU - I don't want SISU as owners, but I think it is the only way out. If SISU owns the whole lot, hopefully they will then sell to someone else. I don't want a "new" tin pot Stadium. Unless SISU own the Ricoh we are stuck with them - and Northampton. Hurts me to say this, but pressure should also be put equally on ACL, CCC and SISU.
I was starting to think you were no longer the voice of reason! You are exactly right in this statement. Hope your ACL loving mates don't turn on you for saying this
That second point is interesting isn't it. The Ricoh is, technically, the only option if we do want Cov in Cov, by definition of the fact that Sisu have said they refuse to move back into CCC jurisdiction.
I'd still argue the point was fairly clear to most, but it's pointless really. Just like every other piece of information that's come out over the last year it can and will be interpreted in different ways depending on your initial viewpoint.
Ignoring the insults, do you seriously think our options are: 1) stay in Northampton forever. 2) sell the Ricoh to Sisu. 3) Build a new stadium. or do you think there's a number 4) Sisu leave/put the club into admin (bearing in mind the club hasn't been in admin yet, just a non-trading property subsidiary)
Not asking which is good/bad just do you think that's an option?
Ignoring the insults, do you seriously think our options are: 1) stay in Northampton forever. 2) sell the Ricoh to Sisu. 3) Build a new stadium. or do you think there's a number 4) Sisu leave/put the club into admin (bearing in mind the club hasn't been in admin yet, just a non-trading property subsidiary)
Not asking which is good/bad just do you think that's an option?
I would say 1) is not an option and won't happen. 2) & 3) are the only realistic options there unless some Cov loving billionaire wants to pay over the odds for the club. At the current time there is no benefit to Sisu in selling the club or for that matter liquidating. Liquidation may become an option in the future if they can't realise 2) or 3). They would sell off any assets we have before doing so though (ie players and maybe Ryton). This would likely mean starting again.
Can you tell me why it was in ACLs best interest to reject the CVA? I still can't see it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
If they accepted it then they were endorsing it as a correct procedure
I believe They rejected it as a a couple of unknown conditions were not agreed. If they had been they would have accepted the procedure.
It will go out of existence far quicker if people don't give them cash...
Try and deny that all you like, but it's a truth that business without income, and owners unwilling to make up the funding gap = oblivion.
So please, if you think oblivion is preferable, fine (schmeee does for one) but don't try the ridiculous logic that not giving them cash will guarantee they pack up and go home with their tails between their legs!
Common sense and sub GCSE economics.
It will go out of existence far quicker if people don't give them cash...
Try and deny that all you like, but it's a truth that business without income, and owners unwilling to make up the funding gap = oblivion.
So please, if you think oblivion is preferable, fine (schmeee does for one) but don't try the ridiculous logic that not giving them cash will guarantee they pack up and go home with their tails between their legs!
I believe They rejected it as a a couple of unknown conditions were not agreed. If they had been they would have accepted the procedure.
I thought those conditions were the £150k rent on a 10 year deal or is this something else?
I thought those conditions were the £150k rent on a 10 year deal or is this something else?
That and dropping the JR.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Didn't PWKH say there were a couple of condition?
I've said countless times with caveats of some kind.
Some moan about Northampton but would rather their team stayed there.
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Indeed. Although you miss the nuance that I state the opposing position as absolute certainty not as certain as you think, but also to point out stating as FACT future episodes is the surefire way to getting it wrong, guaranteeing recriminations, and jumping in feet first without considering the implications.
And let's face it, mass movements demanding people hand over their shares to SISU, mass movements demanding SISU rescue us from the ticking clock etc. etc. is as much why we're in this position as anything else... that nobody ever considers the possibility of an alternative.
Past history of SISU, incidentally, says in the wider scale of what they are, it's of more benefit to them to wind the thing up btw. Now *that's* researchbut there's also a tendency to assume that for SISU, everything is centred around the club as it is to the fans whereas to them, we're an annoyance that of course it helps if they sort out, but isn't their sole reason to exist.
oh, i didn't realise you had a GCSE. wow you've totally changed my mind with that one, not.
What would happen then? The golden share would presumably revert to the Football League. This is the Football League that interpreted their rules in a fairly imaginative way when CCFC Ltd was in administration, because (as they stated) they saw their key priority in ensuring we fulfilled our fixtures.
So, if SISU insisted on liquidating the company despite other options (which I firmly beige there would be), would the FL Shake their heads and say "Oh well, that's the end of them", or would we see another imaginative interpretation of the rules?
So, if SISU insisted on liquidating the company despite other options (which I firmly beige there would be), would the FL Shake their heads and say "Oh well, that's the end of them", or would we see another imaginative interpretation of the rules?
Honestly? I think we've had our lucky strike, and the only reason for getting that, their ineptitude.
Next time I'd say it's far more likely to be the Aldershot and Maidstone scenario, and bye-bye...
There is no doubt that SISU have a reputation for "playing hardball". It seems pretty clear that they are happy with this image and I can see an argument that they would turn their back on some potential money for a sale in order to preserve and indeed "improve" that image.
However, I believe that no matter how low we had sunk, there would always be someone willing to pay "a few million" to buy a football club that has a pretty good catchment area. I am also unconvinced that SISU would walk away from such monies to "prove a point".
But let's assume that this is exactly what they'd do. Let's assume that NOPM really bites, they decide that they're pouring good money after bad and that they'll ignore any potential offers and liquidate the club.
What would happen then? The golden share would presumably revert to the Football League. This is the Football League that interpreted their rules in a fairly imaginative way when CCFC Ltd was in administration, because (as they stated) they saw their key priority in ensuring we fulfilled our fixtures.
So, if SISU insisted on liquidating the company despite other options (which I firmly beige there would be), would the FL Shake their heads and say "Oh well, that's the end of them", or would we see another imaginative interpretation of the rules?
We'll have to agree to disagree here. I think a deal would be done somehow, maybe with a relegation and a points penalty just to prove a point, but I doubt we'd be all down the Butts for a Midland Football Combination game.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?