bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Still doesn't stop the club returning in the interim does it?
And if the council won't sell at any price because they feel that it isn't a loss for them if the club doesn't return to the Ricoh?
And if the council won't sell at any price because they feel that it isn't a loss for them if the club doesn't return to the Ricoh?
Still doesn't stop the club returning in the interim does it?
It shouldn't, and for the sake of the fans a temporary rental deal should be struck. But SISU are thinking as a customer who in the past has not been treated with the best intentions of the football club. If ACL hadn't used the club as a cash cow, SISU might be more willing to deal with them.
It shouldn't, and for the sake of the fans a temporary rental deal should be struck. But SISU are thinking as a customer who in the past has not been treated with the best intentions of the football club. If ACL hadn't used the club as a cash cow, SISU might be more willing to deal with them.
Oh right, the article is just written to make the people who dislike Sisu feel better, why did it talk about the wrong doings or should I say no doings of the toothless Football League and the bigger picture of companies like these being bad for football. But no, you're right, I do feel better now after reading that article.
Nothing new that hasn't been said already about the football league or SISU is in the article. It's just reworded some, but not all, of the information that's been out there for the past 6 months. SISU aren't going to decide to change their minds because someone wrote a blog entry about them. The football league aren't going to change their ways because they still have a full allocation of clubs in the league. And people will continue to not look at the side ACL has played because the articles are too busy looking at the "popular view" that SISU are the worst ones in all of this.
It's probably best not to mention ACL or the previous boards. Just blame it all on the current regime. Makes things much simpler.
The current regime had 6yrs to put things right and decided the way to ,ultimately, do it was to move the club out of the city. Pretty sure no matter how good or bad our previous owners were I would bet that none of them contemplated moving the club out of the city that bears it name!
Can I ask then, what you think it will achieve to constantly talk about the high rent that ACL/CCC charged us after the figure was set by all parties including CCFC. Surely if you are going to try and get people to look at what ACL did with regard to the rent, should you not also be talking about Richardson and the other cronies at that time ? I want to add that if more people and highly regarded journalists continue to write these articles, I think it will start to snowball and possibly start to push Sisu/Otium or at least make them think they might need to change tack. Let not forget that they certainly seem like an organisation who have tended to shy away from the limelight in the past. I do not believe the old saying that there is no such thing as bad publicity, these people are a hedge fund who want people to invest with them to make money. If it becomes more high profile and into the public eye that they are constantly losing money hand over fist and seem to be making bad business decisions, would you want to invest with them or trust them with your money, I know I wouldn't.
It shouldn't, and for the sake of the fans a temporary rental deal should be struck. But SISU are thinking as a customer who in the past has not been treated with the best intentions of the football club. If ACL hadn't used the club as a cash cow, SISU might be more willing to deal with them.
It shouldn't, and for the sake of the fans a temporary rental deal should be struck. But SISU are thinking as a customer who in the past has not been treated with the best intentions of the football club. If ACL hadn't used the club as a cash cow, SISU might be more willing to deal with them.
If it included the roles that ACL and previous owners of our club had played in the reasoning behind why a hedge fund ended up running our club, then it would be even closer to the truth.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-fc-owner-joy-6096912“When the former owners of the club sold the 50 per cent share to Higgs (Alan Edward Higgs Charity), I do not believe they thought they were giving away matchday revenues. They thought they had sold the equity stake in the stadium, not the revenues.”
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/minutes-from-the-scg-meeting-1219512.aspxSM – At present the club has control of its destiny. How many fans wish SISU had done due diligence back then and not bought the club? If we go back to rental deal we might not be in control again.
And I don't disagree James. But if the rental agreement where we get no share of additional revenues from the Ricoh was a bad idea then, then why is it now an ok option to return when we will just end up where we started?
There were various additional revenues that the club had rights to, including some parking, and food and beverages. Some they sold the rights to, as they ran out of money, and some they still had access to, but it doesn't suit SISU to mention all that.
A lot of people seem to forget that point, that the club sold the rights to the revenue.
How much profit has been made from the cash cow? What has been done with this profit?
Doesn't that show how badly ACL have been run? They have benefited from £2.5m+ income from the club per annum - rent, matchday costs, F&B's, stand sponsorship, car parking, Ricoh deal, etc yet have made very little profit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
So SISU are bad owners. Do you think ACL are suitable landlords for a football club?
Doesn't that show how badly ACL have been run? They have benefited from £2.5m+ income from the club per annum - rent, matchday costs, F&B's, stand sponsorship, car parking, Ricoh deal, etc yet have made very little profit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Doesn't that show how badly ACL have been run? They have benefited from £2.5m+ income from the club per annum - rent, matchday costs, F&B's, stand sponsorship, car parking, Ricoh deal, etc yet have made very little profit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Yes I do.
I wish my landlord offered me free rent then a 90%+ reduction from there...
Why do you think they're not?
You're right. Better get into StadiumManagementTalk.co.uk and post a thread about it!
I hear the place that supplies the pies is badly run too! Better go on a pie strike.
How ACL are run is fucking irrelevant on a CCFC forum (though I don't think they've done too bad). The only relevant fact is: what's the rental offer they can make us and is it good for the club.
What do you think on that point?
Would either the 3 year or 10 year deal be good for CCFC if taken? If not what would you prefer?
A 90%+ reduction on a rate that was already over inflated. It's like buying carpets from CarpetRight at half the price of it's original price, even though the original price was only on offer for about a week.
I want to see at least some of money that is spent on the car parking, the hospitality, the food and drinks and even the events that take place at the Ricoh go to the club. Why? Because if it wasn't for the football club, the Arena wouldn't be there in the first place.
Yes I do.
I wish my landlord offered me free rent then a 90%+ reduction from there...
Why do you think they're not?
They did get some of the money from the car park and hospitality.
As for the last sentence, business doesn't work like that. If it wasnt for MG Rover there would be no new Mini, yet here we are with BMW making all the profits and Rover is gone.
I maybe wrong on this but the other examples of a SMC giving virtually free & unencumbered contracts to the resident football club I've seen posted here recently generally start with the SMC losing money.. as far as I'm aware ACL have never posted a loss and have in their 8 year period of operation managed to pay off circa. £7M debt.
Nope. We never paid our annual fee for Car Park C to CCFC.
Think of that £7m as money (or increased assets) not benefitting the club. Add to that the proceeds from their cost reductions scheme and you could argue the club has missed out on some £10m+.
Think of that £7m as money (or increased assets) not benefitting the club. Add to that the proceeds from their cost reductions scheme and you could argue the club has missed out on some £10m+.
That's business Godiva.
Amazes me when a group of neo capitalist hedge fund owners start complaining about the inequalities of the free market.
Of course it is business. I just point out that the money could/should benefit the club.
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?