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.

Apologies Michael (3 Viewers)

  • Thread starter letsallsingtogether
  • Start date Jul 1, 2014
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 3 of 4 Next Last
H

Huckerby

Guest
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #71
you're all whiney little bitches at times
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #72
Sorry, who abused him and what was the abuse?

letsallsingtogether said:
Michael I would like to offer sincere apologies from the posters who abused you over the Rent deal.

I know they are not big enough to do it.

:claping hands:Well keep up the good work the majority of us are behind you........:claping hands:
Click to expand...
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #73
torchomatic said:
Sorry, who abused him and what was the abuse?
Click to expand...

There wasn't any - just questions he ignored.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #74
shmmeee said:
To be fair. How is £52k for the club not a sensible offer?

I'd snap their hands off. We're a complete basket case, no-one will make money with us.
Click to expand...

People keep saying Wilson alone is worth £3 million. What it is actually worth aside, would a company who have put £60 million in - or whatever you believe the figure to be, accepted £52k? In that sense it isn't realistic.

If you were keeping the debt you could offer them £1 I'm sure.
 

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #75
So, my take on this thread:

* Grendel divides opinions - fact.
* His post on this thread with the queries to the KCIC offer raises a number of salient points.
* The abuse he gets for these points is unreal?
* Lordy rightly pointed out that it's the lack of questioning (when SISU came in) that has led us to this situation - had we been so inquisitive at the start, things might be different.
* I'll hold my hands up to another Lordy point - I was one of those who welcomed them...I've learnt that I was hasty on my assumptions that they'd be good be for the club.
* Blame me for poor due diligence if you like....kinda en vogue in the past few years.
* I genuinely believe MO has CCFCs best intentions at heart, although the plan has got many holes...as if we wouldn't get 5,000 fans back at the Ricoh.
* To whichever poster who retorted to Grendels post with the remark "Why don't you go and something about it?".....well why don't you??

The petulance on here is a disgrace sometimes...we all want the same thing....if someone disagrees with your opinion, be man enough to respect it. I for example disagree with some of Astutes posts from time to time, but he's a gent about it and explains himself without resorting to playground name calling.

Now sort yourself out you f*&king t£$ts!

WM
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #76
I agree. Not sure why questioning MO was seen as abuse.

Agree about Astute. I tend to disagree with him most of the time but at least he tries to explain himself. I've "liked" a lot of Shmmee's posts recently too. As for the rest of 'em? Wankers.

Skyblueweeman said:
So, my take on this thread:

* Grendel divides opinions - fact.
* His post on this thread with the queries to the KCIC offer raises a number of salient points.
* The abuse he gets for these points is unreal?
* Lordy rightly pointed out that it's the lack of questioning (when SISU came in) that has led us to this situation - had we been so inquisitive at the start, things might be different.
* I'll hold my hands up to another Lordy point - I was one of those who welcomed them...I've learnt that I was hasty on my assumptions that they'd be good be for the club.
* Blame me for poor due diligence if you like....kinda en vogue in the past few years.
* I genuinely believe MO has CCFCs best intentions at heart, although the plan has got many holes...as if we wouldn't get 5,000 fans back at the Ricoh.
* To whichever poster who retorted to Grendels post with the remark "Why don't you go and something about it?".....well why don't you??

The petulance on here is a disgrace sometimes...we all want the same thing....if someone disagrees with your opinion, be man enough to respect it. I for example disagree with some of Astutes posts from time to time, but he's a gent about it and explains himself without resorting to playground name calling.

Now sort yourself out you f*&king t£$ts!

WM
Click to expand...
 

Nick

Administrator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #77
Has any of the abuse been pointed out or quoted yet or is it just more arse licking for no reason? Did this offer go through or something? What are people apologising for?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #78
mark82 said:
People keep saying Wilson alone is worth £3 million. What it is actually worth aside, would a company who have put £60 million in - or whatever you believe the figure to be, accepted £52k? In that sense it isn't realistic.

If you were keeping the debt you could offer them £1 I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Why does anyone give a damn what they've put in?

Since when have you read that reasoning in the acquisitions and mergers section of the FT? "Oh yeah, the company's losing tens of millions a year, but the bloke who owns it put all his own cash in, so you gotta pay something". What??

Wilson may be worth £3m, but that £3m won't pay the bills for a year and then you have no Wilson.

By your argument, Sisu should've paid over £60m for us in the first place.

Frankly, the only reason to charge for a football club is if it has significant non-player assets (it doesn't) or significant cash flow (it doesn't), any other time whoever is taking it off your hands is doing you a favour.
 
Last edited: Jul 1, 2014
A

AndreasB

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #79
Rather than "apologise to Michael" can you not see it is largely because of Michael/KCIC and his unstable antics that gave the "deal" no credibility.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #80
if you want to see people spitting the dummy because people have dared asked some questions of someone just read this thread

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...n-Lucas-on-Get-Cov-Back-to-the-Ricoh-platform

some classic grendulls in there and i think this must have been when torch's apprenticeship with grendull began.
 

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #81
skybluetony176 said:
if you want to see people spitting the dummy because people have dared asked some questions of someone just read this thread

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...n-Lucas-on-Get-Cov-Back-to-the-Ricoh-platform

some classic grendulls in there and i think this must have been when torch's apprenticeship with grendull began.
Click to expand...

A well thought out and reasoned comment.
























Not.
 

olderskyblue

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #82
Nick said:
Has any of the abuse been pointed out or quoted yet or is it just more arse licking for no reason? Did this offer go through or something? What are people apologising for?
Click to expand...

Didn't you abuse him, then apologise for it Nick? (or was that someone/something else?)
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #83
Skyblueweeman said:
A well thought out and reasoned comment.
























Not.
Click to expand...

Sorry.
















Did it start sooner?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #84
olderskyblue said:
Didn't you abuse him, then apologise for it Nick? (or was that someone/something else?)
Click to expand...

It gets hard to keep up with who's abusing who on here. Like a tourettes version of Home and Away.

Also worth noting that the only person who came close to reassuring me on said deal was... you. And as you weren't involved in it and we ascertained you're not Hoffman, that ain't a great endorsement.
 

olderskyblue

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #85
Deleted member 5849 said:
It gets hard to keep up with who's abusing who on here. Like a tourettes version of Home and Away.

Also worth noting that the only person who came close to reassuring me on said deal was... you. And as you weren't involved in it and we ascertained you're not Hoffman, that ain't a great endorsement.
Click to expand...

It's worse than I thought NW, get help quickly..!!
 

Nick

Administrator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #86
olderskyblue said:
Didn't you abuse him, then apologise for it Nick? (or was that someone/something else?)
Click to expand...

I didn't abuse him, something I said I re-read and apologised but he didn't get abuse.

It was people asking questions who were abused for daring to ask questions.

I suggest Michael moves out of his Greenhouse.
 

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #87
I don't recall any abuse either, only questions which Michael declined to answer. OK, so in the end Fisher came back with a load of old bollocks about revenue (P/L = Income - Expense Tim, not just Income - duh!), but the questions over the detail on a pretty valueless barrier option were valid.
 

skybluefred

New Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #88
mark82 said:
Then maybe Mr Hoffman needs to put his money in to buying rights to revenue streams and offering these for free to the club.
Click to expand...

The Club sold the rights to revenue streams for some £5m. Where in your world do you find them getting those right's back for free--cloud cuckoo land
possibly.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #89
Thanks for that. I'm more interested in the abuse MO got, if you could point me in the direction of that.

Grendel's apprentice? Tee-hee, you are a funny guy.

skybluetony176 said:
if you want to see people spitting the dummy because people have dared asked some questions of someone just read this threa
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...n-Lucas-on-Get-Cov-Back-to-the-Ricoh-platform

some classic grendulls in there and i think this must have been when torch's apprenticeship with grendull began.
Click to expand...
 
B

Buster

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #90
Think "abuse" was a tad strong ,but no one can deny the idea did receive an amazing amount of flak from certain quarters when you think it was only a proposed plan to get the team back to the Ricoh ,short term.
 

covmark

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #91
torchomatic said:
Thanks for that. I'm more interested in the abuse MO got, if you could point me in the direction of that.

Grendel's apprentice? Tee-hee, you are a funny guy.
Click to expand...
He is really funny isn't he. I particularly like his use of the word suxfields. Comedy genius.
 

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #92
skybluefred said:
The Club sold the rights to revenue streams for some £5m. Where in your world do you find them getting those right's back for free--cloud cuckoo land
possibly.
Click to expand...

Hi Fred...genuine question (memory like a sieve)....who did they sell those rights to?

If it wasn't the Higgs, then any fan of any team in the country would see the selling off rights for £5m and getting them back for nothing as an absolute result. Just like a player...say we sold C.Wilson for £3m and then tried to get him back for free....would you be against that??

The only time my point is screwed, is ethically if it was the Higgs who bought those rights for £5m.

If that's the case, then totally agree. For any other party, I'd be up for it.

Does that make sense?!

Yours forgetfully,

WM
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #93
covmark said:
He is really funny isn't he. I particularly like his use of the word suxfields. Comedy genius.
Click to expand...

cheers, but i'm not here for complements
 

skybluefred

New Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #94
Skyblueweeman said:
Hi Fred...genuine question (memory like a sieve)....who did they sell those rights to?

If it wasn't the Higgs, then any fan of any team in the country would see the selling off rights for £5m and getting them back for nothing as an absolute result. Just like a player...say we sold C.Wilson for £3m and then tried to get him back for free....would you be against that??

The only time my point is screwed, is ethically if it was the Higgs who bought those rights for £5m.

If that's the case, then totally agree. For any other party, I'd be up for it.

Does that make sense?!

Yours forgetfully,

WM
Click to expand...

Hi Weeman I'am not sure who bought the rights-but-the Club where in trouble and needed the money.I think it could have been a joint purchase
by Higgs/ACL although I'm sure somebody will come up with the answer.

Sorry but in my world if you sell something and then want it back you try to negotiate the purchase. The Club/sisu will have wasted more on ill judged
legal costs to expect any right minded body to give them back for free or at a loss.
 

Skyblueweeman

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #95
skybluefred said:
Hi Weeman I'am not sure who bought the rights-but-the Club where in trouble and needed the money.I think it could have been a joint purchase
by Higgs/ACL although I'm sure somebody will come up with the answer.

Sorry but in my world if you sell something and then want it back you try to negotiate the purchase. The Club/sisu will have wasted more on ill judged
legal costs to expect any right minded body to give them back for free or at a loss.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with the legal costs piece Fred...be interesting to see what the judge passes down in costs on Friday.

As for the first bit, I see what you're getting at about negotiating but if my clubs sells something and then can get it back for free, I'm all for it. It's not cheating so why shouldn't we (unless it's a charity in which case my point is mute).

Hey ho....just see it differently.

WM
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #96
Skyblueweeman said:
Don't disagree with the legal costs piece Fred...be interesting to see what the judge passes down in costs on Friday.

As for the first bit, I see what you're getting at about negotiating but if my clubs sells something and then can get it back for free, I'm all for it. It's not cheating so why shouldn't we (unless it's a charity in which case my point is mute).

Hey ho....just see it differently.

WM
Click to expand...

It's also not popular to question why said charity would get involved in said football club in the first place...
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #97
Deleted member 5849 said:
It's also not popular to question why said charity would get involved in said football club in the first place...
Click to expand...

Been there, got the t-shirt..
 

Houchens Head

Fairly well known member from Malvern
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #98
 
A

AndreasB

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #99
Houchens Head said:
Click to expand...

Oh I'm Alex Lifeson



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Houchens Head

Fairly well known member from Malvern
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #100
AndreasB said:
Oh I'm Alex Lifeson
Click to expand...

No. You're a prat.
 
A

AndreasB

Well-Known Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #101
Houchens Head said:
No. You're a prat.
Click to expand...

We are connected now though Head, due to that beautiful picture you did. I'm very flattered . XX


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

mark82

Super Moderator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #102
shmmeee said:
Why does anyone give a damn what they've put in?

Since when have you read that reasoning in the acquisitions and mergers section of the FT? "Oh yeah, the company's losing tens of millions a year, but the bloke who owns it put all his own cash in, so you gotta pay something". What??

Wilson may be worth £3m, but that £3m won't pay the bills for a year and then you have no Wilson.

By your argument, Sisu should've paid over £60m for us in the first place.

Frankly, the only reason to charge for a football club is if it has significant non-player assets (it doesn't) or significant cash flow (it doesn't), any other time whoever is taking it off your hands is doing you a favour.
Click to expand...

That would be rational. At the end of the day the club is worth whatever Sisu are willing to sell it for. They want to recoup some of their money so of someone wants to buy it that is what they need to do. Not saying it's worth it, just that they won't just give it away debt free.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #103
skybluefred said:
The Club sold the rights to revenue streams for some £5m. Where in your world do you find them getting those right's back for free--cloud cuckoo land
possibly.
Click to expand...

Just saying if he wants to offer a handout that's where he should look.
 
T

TheOldFive

New Member
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #104
AndreasB said:
We are connected now though Head, due to that beautiful picture you did. I'm very flattered . XX


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It was funny wasn't it? Rare in these dark times that true sprinklings of comedic genius shine through. HouchensHead is consistently on of the best contributors to this forum in my opinion, a real talent.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
  • Jul 1, 2014
  • #105
skybluefred said:
Hi Weeman I'am not sure who bought the rights-but-the Club where in trouble and needed the money.I think it could have been a joint purchase
by Higgs/ACL although I'm sure somebody will come up with the answer.

Sorry but in my world if you sell something and then want it back you try to negotiate the purchase. The Club/sisu will have wasted more on ill judged
legal costs to expect any right minded body to give them back for free or at a loss.
Click to expand...

They could have spent that money better on buying back revenue streams for sure. I'd personally be more than happy if they sold Wilson and used that money plus the Arsenal/Clarke money to buy Ricoh revenue streams. I'd happily watch a team of no hoppers and kids if it meant we played in Coventry.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Next
First Prev 3 of 4 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
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?