Discussion in 'Coventry City General Chat' started by Newsbot, Jun 13, 2019.
Watch on Youtube....
Hate this twat!
Let's just listen to what he says. He is a pantomime villain but he wasn't the only person on the CCFC board at that time, he also left in 2002. He says that the option to return to Highfield Rd existed right up to the point the Arena was developed. For that reason, why on earth did the club's board ever agree to the farce deal for the Arena? What was actually in it for the club?
Some nice seating?
It was of course an amazing coincidence that when the project no longer looked like providing a secure future for the club and talk turned to making use of the buyback clause on HR Mike McGinnity's company got the contact to put the seats in at the Ricoh.
The reality is Mcginnity sold the club down the river to protect himself and his buddy on the board
The series of videos give an interesting insight into the world of football at the time.
Comments like "hate this twat" are just silly and devisive.
I thought everyone hates that twat. Hardly divisive.
One question. How were CCFC going to be able to repay the £5m to be able to go back to Highfield Road? There was nothing like that in the bank and cash flow wasn't generating the kind of surplus to do it. The club was struggling to find any finance. It is one thing saying we could buy it back quite another being able to
Richardson said that the club held on to the £5M paid by the developers for the land and could pay it back if they needed to return to Highfield road. He didn't say where the club held the money.
Perhaps Higgs et al could have bought that instead of the stupid 50/50 deal in an, at the time, worthless company.
if they held it at all, it would have to be included in the audited financial statements. As at 31/05/2002 the club had £147k in the bank
Lot easier to find £5m to buy back HR than £100m to build a new stadium. They council seem pretty keen on giving loans on favourable terms to local businesses, sure they would have helped!
Remember too that the £5m was stadium + land the other side of Thackhall St, i.e. a portion of it could have still been sold on to developers or retained by Taylor Wimpey. But, that would never have fitted with the council's objectives at the time.
Unless Richardson held it in one of his own accounts!
Might be misunderstanding this but Richardson seemed to imply the other land was held by someone else not by the club. Could it be that the idea was to sell both plots as one and to split the proceeds proportionately?
edit ..... see below my next post
I'm sure I read somewhere that Mcginnity's son was involved in the buying of Highfield Road and then renting it back to us.
would be included as a debtor in the financial statements and should have been disclosed as a related party transaction.
The sale of the two plots is included in the 2000 financials. Thackhall St had an original cost of £486k.
I think they spent it paying bills. Even then it wasnt enough because there was £10m in loans that year too
Does anyone know why the Club have done these interviews with Richardson?
I can’t see what the point is or what it achieves?
A lot of commercial property transactions can be murky at best. In truth Richardson was quite visionary in all this and seems like he had a decent grasp on development. No different to what housebuilders and commercial developers do day in day out.
Wasn't the bigger issue here that apparently Tesco bought a third of the Ricoh site for more than the entire Highfield Road was sold for. The question mark has always been about where this profit went and any other proceeds from the remainder of the wider site?
Separate names with a comma.