This millerchip chap why does he have an issue with SISU.
I was under the impression he is just all about CRFC.
He is saying he asked all parties to take part in peace talks but only SISU said no.
Genuine question what's his angke in this or is he sincere?
They at least have to make a bona fide attempt to resolve their differences and at least talk with the council, Wasps, Coventry Sports Foundation and everybody else. At the moment, we’re not making much progress on that
The Wasps’ arrival coincides with the launch of the Coventry Sports Foundation, founded on the philanthropy of the American lawyer and former Coventry player Chris Millerchip, which has a five-year program to promote rugby in the city’s schools and clubs.
Because he is in with Wasps, the council and CSF.... He is behind the Engage project, the one with Wasps and CSF..
If it was all about CRFC, why wouldn't he just hand over the lease to them anyway?
So he is in with Wasps
I thought his only concern was CRFC
Thought he was obsessed with protecting them.
What is engage? Sorry catching up
Yes, they are all linked - http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...bodies-a-city-of-rugby-squeeze-on-ccfc.65711/
You keep ignoring my posts, I suspect because you have no answer to what I have asked for like facts not assumptions, but I will persevere.
You keep saying/suggesting Wasps will take over us/buy us/pick up the pieces etc. So for the umpteenth time can you give facts as to why you think they would ever want to buy or own us?
Whilst I respect your opinion, I respect it more when its backed by evidence not your personal opinion.
It's personal opinion based on talking to people at the Ricoh as I said in my original post on the subject.
Clearly he has with JS/CRFCBecause they'd thought that once the current appeal had came to a conclusion SISU would decide to stop following this route?
The Butts clause thing was a twat decision which is undefendable.
Millerchip has said everyone needs to sit around the table and SISU have refused to - isn't it reasonable to expect cards being laid on the table, expecially considering SISU have mooted another site for a stadium/training facility is still in the mix?
But has he sat down with CCFC or discussed anything with TF?
Why is Millerchip so involved in looking after CCC's interests?
It's personal opinion based on talking to people at the Ricoh as I said in my original post on the subject.
Try talking so some different people then!
I do.
I talk to people in the know and then I also come on here
Clearly he has with JS/CRFC
Surely he should be seeing if there is a benefit to a CRFC / CCFC arrangement rather than getting involved in other matters?
Surely he should be seeing if there is a benefit to a CRFC / CCFC arrangement rather than getting involved in other matters?
BollocksIt's only the few on here that call it franchising. In reality it's not.
It's personal opinion based on talking to people at the Ricoh
And say the opposite of what you hear.I do.
I talk to people in the know and then I also come on here
I wonder if we are reading this bit about stopping legals wrongly and making the assumption that it refers to JR1 & JR2. The Armstrong interview goes on about background legal noise and then says that JR1 & JR2 are nothing to do with them. Clearly they entered in to talks whilst the JR stuff was on going. So is it related to the JR's at all?
So given that SISU's favourite weapon seems to be a solicitors letter is it perhaps that talks started, then Wasps received letters from SISU's solicitors regarding the stadium, the Alan Higgs Centre or other matters, and Wasps said at that point no further talks.
As much as CA can negotiate we all know who actually has the authority to sign off on any deal - it isn't him or Fisher
Just a thought
Surely they would have let it out of the bag if other legal stuff had started? It would have been front page news wouldn't it?
If you look at it Nick very little actually comes out about such things from Wasps - I was just thinking aloud really, might be completely wrong but there are a lot of assumptions being made about a lot of things ................
we all know who actually has the authority to sign off on any deal - it isn't him or Fisher
Yep, makes sense. It is a puzzle and a surprise when Wasps said no more negotiations while legal noise is going on.I wonder if we are reading this bit about stopping legals wrongly and making the assumption that it refers to JR1 & JR2. The Armstrong interview goes on about background legal noise and then says that JR1 & JR2 are nothing to do with them. Clearly they entered in to talks whilst the JR stuff was on going. So is it related to the JR's at all?
So given that SISU's favourite weapon seems to be a solicitors letter is it perhaps that talks started, then Wasps received letters from SISU's solicitors regarding the stadium, the Alan Higgs Centre or other matters, and Wasps said at that point no further talks.
As much as CA can negotiate we all know who actually has the authority to sign off on any deal - it isn't him or Fisher
Just a thought
there are a lot of assumptions being made about a lot of things ................
I wonder if we are reading this bit about stopping legals wrongly and making the assumption that it refers to JR1 & JR2. The Armstrong interview goes on about background legal noise and then says that JR1 & JR2 are nothing to do with them. Clearly they entered in to talks whilst the JR stuff was on going. So is it related to the JR's at all?
So given that SISU's favourite weapon seems to be a solicitors letter is it perhaps that talks started, then Wasps received letters from SISU's solicitors regarding the stadium, the Alan Higgs Centre or other matters, and Wasps said at that point no further talks.
As much as CA can negotiate we all know who actually has the authority to sign off on any deal - it isn't him or Fisher
Just a thought
So they might be battering Wasps in court as well already ?
In fairness, do you know what he has produced? Or is it just because it hasn't been made public?
I think "I'll believe it when I see it" is a fair approach to anything to do with our club.
There is a bus full of experts and professionals involved with our stadium drama who we were repeatedly told were far too sensible and respected to be involved in Sisu shenanigans. Garlick, the architects, etc.
Frankly most people initial suspicions about Sisu's position have yet to be proven false. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you don't need the press release saying it's a duck before you make your mind up. It's a far bigger leap of faith to assume everything is fine this time
I wonder if we are reading this bit about stopping legals wrongly and making the assumption that it refers to JR1 & JR2. The Armstrong interview goes on about background legal noise and then says that JR1 & JR2 are nothing to do with them. Clearly they entered in to talks whilst the JR stuff was on going. So is it related to the JR's at all?
So given that SISU's favourite weapon seems to be a solicitors letter is it perhaps that talks started, then Wasps received letters from SISU's solicitors regarding the stadium, the Alan Higgs Centre or other matters, and Wasps said at that point no further talks.
As much as CA can negotiate we all know who actually has the authority to sign off on any deal - it isn't him or Fisher
Just a thought
Yep, makes sense. It is a puzzle and a surprise when Wasps said no more negotiations while legal noise is going on.
If it doesn't affect them in any way then it shouldn't matter.
I wasn't aware he said it wasn't to do with JR1 or JR2.
It's also strange that that Mr Millerchip said SISU are the only ones who won't come to the table for peace talks?
That would imply everyone has been invited to something and everyone said yes apart from SISU.
What's this as well where Wasps contact CA and say lets talk about this. CA says only if you put your proposal in writing?
Why would CA say that if you are looking for help regarding your academy from Wasps.
Arrange a meeting get someone to minute the meeting and get both sides to confirm the minutes if you want it in writing?
How would millerchump know anything about these talks? Whose told him?
Or they could have offered a deal that the club could not accept.
Then say something vague about background legal noise to make everyone's favourite interloper the good guys.
How would millerchump know anything about these talks? Whose told him?
That's what I am asking
And watch as everyone is reeled in.
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?