So its a low risk strategy as they collect rent from CCFC ? Are you serious? That rent will form a fraction of the turnover that the company will need to make this work.
They have no established fan base and no experience of running a management company. No redevelopment history either
The owner has a history of making promises he does not always fulfill and the company has lost significant money in the last 3 years.
Where is the money coming from to achieve all these redevelopment costs? Loans against the stadium,equity release or other borrowings?
But you are right - none of these factors matter - just what sisu do next.
Over 125 years rather than 250 should surely mean that Wasps should offer at least twice as much as Sisu.
Ergo, the Sisu offer was better.
The wasps offer was genuine and done in the right manner to be completed. SISU's was none of those things.
Ergo, wasps offer was better commercially. Hence it's happened.
Do you think we will win today ?The Council would not accept an offer for Higgs from Sisu, hence it didn't happen.
Been made pretty clear that was the case several times.
Are you turning into Astute?
Do you think we will win today ?
Is Noble fit?
Do you think we will win today ?
The Council would not accept an offer for Higgs from Sisu, hence it didn't happen.
Been made pretty clear that was the case several times.
Are you turning into Astute?
Tell me, had this apparent fact happen before or after the rent strike began?
Over 125 years rather than 250 should surely mean that Wasps should offer at least twice as much as Sisu.
Ergo, the Sisu offer was better.
Once the lease is longer than the stadium will likely exist, or would need major repairs and upkeep, then the actual term is largely irrelevant, they may just as well give a 999 year lease. The lease wouldn't be worth any more for a million years than it would for 125 years.
So have another go at explaining why SISU's offer was better.
I'll turn it around, as I've shown why it is til I'm blue(or maybe yellow and black) in the face.
Just answer this for me.
Why is the apparent deal, from Wasps better than what Sisu offered.
Would it have made much difference what(reasonably sensible, from both sides) offer that Sisu made if the Council would not sell, or allow Higgs to see to them?
The Council would not accept an offer for Higgs from Sisu, hence it didn't happen.
Been made pretty clear that was the case several times.
Are you turning into Astute?
You've not shown it at all.
As I understand it the offer was either £2m, which is less than the current reported offer, or £5.5m which was made up of £1.5m upfront, and the rest over 10 years with no security offered, and this was dependant on getting the bank to agree to take a unrealistic discount on the loan.
So, in summary £2m is less than £2.77m. The second example was never going to become an offer due to the loan, but even so £1.5m with a SISU promise of getting £4m later with no security is no better either.
If you know of a better offer I would enjoy reading about it.
More wrong 'facts' I see.
CCC didn't stop any offers for the Higgs share. They didn't either offer what Higgs saw as enough or wouldn't pay unless it was over 10 years....and wouldn't give proof of funds. But lets not have the truth get in the way of one of your 'facts'
"Leggatt J found (at [31]) that the Trustees did not wish to pursue the negotiations further, because they knew the Council was not prepared to consent to the sale of the shares to SISU, and was pursuing an alternative strategy which they (the Trustees) supported
Councillor Mutton was asked if the council would sell to another buyer and he replied, “Not at the moment, no.
He went on to explain, “We haven’t taken any dividends out of it even though it is making a profit each year because the ACL board had to take out a loan of £21million to pay the council back what we put in over and above our investment stake.
“So we haven’t taken dividends to enable them to get their debt to the bank down and I don’t see why we would want to sell knowing that at some stage there will be dividends coming out of it that we can use to pay for front line services without having to increase the level of council tax for the people of Coventry.
"They are the ones who invested the money, or we did it on their behalf, in the first place so they should benefit from it. So why would we take all the risks we did take when we built it and then sell it off to someone else to enjoy the profits? So it is most unlikely and I would certainly have no intention, at the present time, of even considering it.”
Read more at http://www.football.co.uk/coventry_...oh_arena_rss1904942.shtml#DDOemrmA68Puh9PA.99
You're a fucking idiot
I know it's a phrase you like to use, but going to use it anyway.
"Those are the words of a High Court Judge"
Even before the rent strike they weren't willing to sell their stake to Sisu, or to anybody else according to John Mutton.
The bold bit is another interesting point, the answer to his own question appears to be:
"When it's Wasps".
You are the fucking idiot that either is trying to stick up for SISU or use things as a stick to beat CCC. Yes they are a bunch of cunts for letting theeir share go to Wasps. But SISU are as bad as everyone knows and therte is no need to try and make them look better. We all know the reasons that SISU never took over the Higgs share. And it was nothing to do with CCC.
Did CCC ever veto a move by SISU to take over the Higgs share like you have said? 100% no.
Do you like to copy and paste bits whilst leaving out the parts that show the truth? Yes.
Just by saying the council do something bad, it isn't saying that sisu are good. Some people struggle with that.
I hate bananas, therefore I love me some turnips.
Did CCC ever veto a move by SISU to take over the Higgs share like you have said? 100% no.
.
"Leggatt J found (at [31]) that the Trustees did not wish to pursue the negotiations further, because they knew the Council was not prepared to consent to the sale of the shares to SISU
Nobody has said sisu are good,some just fail to be able to stomach that the council may be in the wrong for something.
Just by saying the council do something bad, it isn't saying that sisu are good. Some people struggle with that.
Do you ever read anything that is actually posted you cretin?
Fucking hell.
So Higgs have said they didn't pursue negotiations further as they wouldn't consent?
How much did SISU take the piss before this? How much did they offer for what? And if you remember by this stage it was all about the freehold. This happened after the road map......suggested by SISU........collapsed. And yes CCC would not let the freehold go.....just like they have not now.
It was not about the fucking freehold!
Moron.
I wonder if comments such as 'the council had no choice' would be so rife if it was another football team that had been bought into the Ricoh, and not a rugby team....
I know I am right.
So would you like to tell us when it became about the freehold? I know I am right.
Oh yes do your normal and insult anyone when they are right and you are wrong. Me a moron? Try looking in the mirror.
It's not an apparent fact, it''s a fact.
Negotiations were going on during the rent strike.
Now naturally it didn't help, but naturally it wasn't in isolation, and there is certainly an argument to be made that certain refusals to discuss provoke drastic actions. Black and white? Never, always shades of grey, always.
Now, fine, SISU are evil, but to use as stock answer 'aha, but SISU are evil!' to everything is a bit crazy really. Ann Lucas could shoot the pope, and we'd still have the response that SISU were evil, witheld the rent, and wanted the freehold!
Don't tell those people protesting to keep the 50m pool open that it is SISU's fault for withholding the rent
Now naturally it didn't help, but naturally it wasn't in isolation, and there is certainly an argument to be made that certain refusals to discuss provoke drastic actions. Black and white? Never, always shades of grey, always.
Now, fine, SISU are evil, but to use as stock answer 'aha, but SISU are evil!' to everything is a bit crazy really. Ann Lucas could shoot the pope, and we'd still have the response that SISU were evil, witheld the rent, and wanted the freehold!
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?