Council could vote on Ricoh takeover as early as Tuesday (1 Viewer)

torchomatic · Oct 1, 2014

Firstly, there aren't any SISU fanboys.
Secondly, why will this hasten their exit
Thirdly, isn't it a tad hypocritical of ACL/CCC and fans who complained about CCFC being moved to Northampton?
Finally, if you are a CCFC fan then why would you want a franchised Rugby team to control revenues rather than the team you support?

spider_ricoh said:
I'd be surpirsed if this happens, but I hope it does. It's not great for Wasps (though they are a nomadic club who have used the Ricoh before) , and certainly not for Cov Rugby, but as a CCFC fan my main concern is SISU - this will hasten SISU's exit and will secure the Ricoh from any chance of them buying it. From that point of view, I'm desperate for this to happen.

And I don't want to read any SISU fan boy posts about a new stadium; it won't happen so forget it.

bezzer · Oct 1, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
Who cares about them???

The most important thing is that SISU won't be able to buy the Ricoh. We'll still be tenants so not affected.

How do you know CCFC will still be tenants? Have you had assurances from ACL?

sky blue john · Oct 1, 2014

Limey said:
Whilst the landlord still wants us. Also it will hardly be a ccfc ground. Can't see a Jimmy hill statue outside a wasps ground really....
The Ricoh could be a magnicent home of ccfc if we owned it.

When will people wake up to the fact that CCFC will never own the Ricoh or management company.

torchomatic · Oct 1, 2014

Dark
In
Stab
The

Rearrange the above words to create a well-known phrase or saying. And they always will be a "loss-making third tier football club" without any revenues, won't they? Still, as long as Wasps get the stadium then who cares, eh? You can sit inbetween Otis and MMM.

spider_ricoh said:
Because they are only interested in buying the Ricoh and this move will prevent that from happening. Once that's gone, there's no reason to sick around propping up a loss-making third tier football club.

Jack Griffin · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
How do you know CCFC will still be tenants? Have you had assurances from ACL?

All we know at the moment is that they have a 4 year deal. No one will alter that.
I expect SISU/ARVO to go by the end of that, I don't expect them to build a new stadium.

But then it is possible to send a pig into space, so who knows.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

torchomatic said:
Firstly, there aren't any SISU fanboys.
Secondly, why will this hasten their exit
Thirdly, isn't it a tad hypocritical of ACL/CCC and fans who complained about CCFC being moved to Northampton?
Finally, if you are a CCFC fan then why would you want a franchised Rugby team to control revenues rather than the team you support?

1) yes, you are ans so are lots of others. Grendel never misses a chance to diss someone who criticises the club/SISU
2) see above - if SISU can't buy the Rioch, there's nothing left for them to stick around for. New stadium won't happen.
3) see my earlier post - they are nomadic club who have played at the Ricoh previously and may still stage some games down south. Even if not great for most of their fans, my main concern as a CCFC fan is blocking SISU from buying the Ricoh and that will prevent this. Sorry but this is a tactical choice - if it's bad for Wasps but good for the future of CCFC (i.e. SISU leaving) then I'll support it
4) see above - it's all about SISU leaving. That's the most important outcome we can hope for.

chiefdave · Oct 1, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
Because they are only interested in buying the Ricoh and this move will prevent that from happening. Once that's gone, there's no reason to sick around propping up a loss-making third tier football club.

Even if you make a leap and assume that's all correct doesn't it create a long term problem in that it will be difficult for any new owner of the club to purchase the stadium.

oldskyblue58 · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
How do you know CCFC will still be tenants? Have you had assurances from ACL?

Because ACL and CCFC have a signed contract that gives CCFC a day rental deal for two years with a further two year option. That does not change because new owners of ACL are found and would cost ACL compensation to break it.

My understanding is that the 4 year time scale is what the club said they needed.

The problem comes firstly in taking up the option - I assume both sides have to agree...... but definitely in 4 years time.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

torchomatic said:
Dark
In
Stab
The

Rearrange the above words to create a well-known phrase or saying. And they always will be a "loss-making third tier football club" without any revenues, won't they? Still, as long as Wasps get the stadium then who cares, eh? You can sit inbetween Otis and MMM.

Do you agree that SISU should be prevented from buying the Ricoh, or a share in it? If not, your point of view is totally invalid to be honest.

stupot07 · Oct 1, 2014

Is it time to get the sky blue coffin out again?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

chiefdave said:
Even if you make a leap and assume that's all correct doesn't it create a long term problem in that it will be difficult for any new owner of the club to purchase the stadium.

Why the obsession with revenues and buying the stadium?

There's nothing in this deal to prevent the club buying it in the future - Wasps could even so a Jarni and sell the share on to us at a profit!

italiahorse · Oct 1, 2014

torchomatic said:
By being hypocritical and the fact he's specifically mentioned in the article?

Didn't he say the Ricoh needs an anchor tenant and he would prefer the Football Club to be that tenant?
Obviously if the club don't want to be that tenant then it will be someone else !!

The morals of moving Wasps here is a separate issue to getting in an anchor tenant, which is the vote.

In your opinion what should the Ricoh do if CCFC are verbally saying they will be building a new stadium.
Should ACL wait until they build that stadium or plan ahead?

I desperately want CCFC to take up the anchor tenancy but can see it also from a business perspective.
In addition CCC are acting for the majority of ratepayers who are not really bothered about the football team.
You would be surprised how many people do not even know that the football team have played in Northampton for a year.

bezzer · Oct 1, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
1) yes, you are ans so are lots of others. Grendel never misses a chance to diss someone who criticises the club/SISU
2) see above - if SISU can't buy the Rioch, there's nothing left for them to stick around for. New stadium won't happen.
3) see my earlier post - they are nomadic club who have played at the Ricoh previously and may still stage some games down south. Even if not great for most of their fans, my main concern as a CCFC fan is blocking SISU from buying the Ricoh and that will prevent this. Sorry but this is a tactical choice - if it's bad for Wasps but good for the future of CCFC (i.e. SISU leaving) then I'll support it
4) see above - it's all about SISU leaving. That's the most important outcome we can hope for.

You're a complete hypocrite. Your signature states "Avoiding Northampton like the plague since 2013" (which I went along with), but then you are openly supporting a London based Rugby Football club moving 70 miles from their fan base!

You are Bob Ainsworth. Where do I claim my prize?

bezzer · Oct 1, 2014

italiahorse said:
Didn't he say the Ricoh needs an anchor tenant and he would prefer the Football Club to be that tenant?
Obviously if the club don't want to be that tenant then it will be someone else !!

The club has a contract with ACL to be the tenant. Or have you conveniently forgot that?

chiefdave · Oct 1, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
Why the obsession with revenues and buying the stadium?

There's nothing in this deal to prevent the club buying it in the future - Wasps could even so a Jarni and sell the share on to us at a profit!

Not an obsession but I would say that, if we assume the Ricoh is performing to a decent level even without considering us playing here, that a) you would attract more buyers for a club and stadium package and b) I would hope / expect we would get a better deal buying from the council than buying from someone like Wasps.

Covstu · Oct 1, 2014

I cannot believe that some on here are saying that this will actually be a good thing! People are not really that naive to think that SISU would just pack their bags if they lose the Ricoh are they??

This would be a bigger disaster than the move to Northampton in my opinion, at least we had hope of a return to a stadium and eventually have some stake in it to gain revenue but this would stop any of that. Of course Wasps bid could be as bad a SISU's previous bid and we have nothing to worry about (at the moment) but it does speak volumes that SISU havent made a bid or even a comment (or not that we are aware of). I wonder what Waggott has to say about this at the trust meeting?

As for Wasps - why would they spend this amount of money and just play European games there, doesnt really add up to me?

chiefdave · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
The club has a contract with ACL to be the tenant. Or have you conveniently forgot that?

And there is the key problem, SISU are still claiming we will be in a new stadium in 2-4 years and the current contract at the Ricoh reflects that. What happens when we get to the end of the 4 years and there is no new ground? The club may have had a bad deal historically with ACL but who knows what will be on offer, if anything, if we are dealing with someone else.

Say we had a 50 year rent agreement in place we could all be relatively comfortable that at least we weren't going to be chucked out but the way things are now once our current deal expires we could be stuffed.

italiahorse · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
The club has a contract with ACL to be the tenant. Or have you conveniently forgot that?

To be a day tenant on 28 days a year.
Effectively they hire the stadium off ACL when they need to fulfill their fixtures.

That deal will not change for another 4 years at which point we will be in our new stadium in Solihull.

sky blue john · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
How do you know CCFC will still be tenants? Have you had assurances from ACL?

We have four years.
We might have had more if a certain company didn't think it was a good idea to break the lease !
Various supporters on here also supported these tactics !

fernandopartridge · Oct 1, 2014

oldskyblue58 said:
and yet it is stated that the consortium is struggling to finance it via the prospectus .......... so how does the council approve a deal three working days from now that hasn't actually been made yet and is apparently unable to be financed? :thinking about:

In fairness the council approve a lot of things that are reliant on the actions of third parties. Are they just approving the parameters of a deal or even that a deal can be discussed at all?

stupot07 · Oct 1, 2014

italiahorse said:
To be a day tenant on 28 days a year.
Effectively they hire the stadium off ACL when they need to fulfill their fixtures.

That deal will not change for another 4 years at which point we will be in our new stadium in Solihull.

We used to basically pay £1.3m for that privilege before

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

fernandopartridge · Oct 1, 2014

sky blue john said:
We have four years.
We might have had more if a certain company didn't think it was a good idea to break the lease !
Various supporters on here also supported these tactics !

Certainly. I wouldn't wanna be tied to a lease of £1.3m per annum for 40 years regardless of landlord.

bezzer · Oct 1, 2014

italiahorse said:
To be a day tenant on 28 days a year.
Effectively they hire the stadium off ACL when they need to fulfill their fixtures.

And how many home games do you think a Premiership Rugby club plays??? Tell you what, I'll enlighten you. They play 11. Even adding European fixtures and domestic cup games, I doubt they'll play at home more than 23 times.

bezzer · Oct 1, 2014

sky blue john said:
We have four years.
We might have had more if a certain company didn't think it was a good idea to break the lease !
Various supporters on here also supported these tactics !

No shit Sherlock.

oldskyblue58 · Oct 1, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
In fairness the council approve a lot of things that are reliant on the actions of third parties. Are they just approving the parameters of a deal or even that a deal can be discussed at all?

Agreed fp ........ we don't actually know do we ............. but the CT article implies it is approving it to be sold next week.

AndreasB · Oct 1, 2014

italiahorse said:
SISU get off your arse and drop the legal action and match the bid.

You are to blame for not taking up the options in your greedy push to get it on the cheap.
Not for the club but for your own financial gain.

However I see safeguards for the club in this bid and in my dreams it shows Sisu disappearing back to the City of London.

Still clinging to the wreckage eh?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sky blue john · Oct 1, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
Certainly. I wouldn't wanna be tied to a lease of £1.3m per annum for 40 years regardless of landlord.

Lol !!
You must have a bad memory or choose to ignore that there were better offers on the table before the lease was broken.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

Covstu said:
I cannot believe that some on here are saying that this will actually be a good thing! People are not really that naive to think that SISU would just pack their bags if they lose the Ricoh are they??

This would be a bigger disaster than the move to Northampton in my opinion, at least we had hope of a return to a stadium and eventually have some stake in it to gain revenue but this would stop any of that. Of course Wasps bid could be as bad a SISU's previous bid and we have nothing to worry about (at the moment) but it does speak volumes that SISU havent made a bid or even a comment (or not that we are aware of). I wonder what Waggott has to say about this at the trust meeting?

As for Wasps - why would they spend this amount of money and just play European games there, doesnt really add up to me?

Not naive at all - why would they stay.

Apparently we do get some revenue from the new deal but to be honest, I don't care about that. All I care abotu is stopping SISU getting the Ricoh. Their move to Northampton was a way of distressing ACL and getting a cheap deal on the Ricoh - that's why I opposed it, not because we are playing in Northampton per se.

italiahorse · Oct 1, 2014

stupot07 said:
We used to basically pay £1.3m for that privilege before

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Which as we know would be a bargain in the Premiership.
Unfortunately previous management (and Sisu) took the gamble on a fixed rental as they thought 'Operation Premiership' would work.
Sisu should have renegotiated this as a condition of taking over but we have done this to death.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

chiefdave said:
Not an obsession but I would say that, if we assume the Ricoh is performing to a decent level even without considering us playing here, that a) you would attract more buyers for a club and stadium package and b) I would hope / expect we would get a better deal buying from the council than buying from someone like Wasps.

You've just defined perfectly why we should all support this deal. Selling the club and the ground as a package is exactly what SISU want to do (hence why they tried to distress ACL to get the ground cheaply) - hence why we must oppose it. We also want SISU to pay as a high a price as possible for the Ricoh - again, because getting it cheaply is their objective.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

stupot07 said:
Is it time to get the sky blue coffin out again?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

As nothing has changed much, and SISU are still in charge and busy killing the club, then yes it is - not sure why it ever went away.

spider_ricoh · Oct 1, 2014

bezzer said:
You're a complete hypocrite. Your signature states "Avoiding Northampton like the plague since 2013" (which I went along with), but then you are openly supporting a London based Rugby Football club moving 70 miles from their fan base!

The move to Northampton was a way of distressing ACL and getting a cheap deal on the Ricoh - that's why I opposed it, not because we are playing in Northampton per se. So it's not hypocritical to support this.

AndreasB · Oct 1, 2014

Skybluechick said:
its absolutely disgusting where is every1 why isnt any1 fighting this! It's crazy its supposed to be a public asset why arent the councilors n cov city council being questioned about it thats cus all the idiots voted anne lucas back it she does what she wants makes me sick

Are you 12?

Grow up and see the reality. What else can the council/ACL do to make the assets of the Arena work?
We would soon get used to a groundshare. Given current attendances we could even stage a doubleheader with Wasps.

You need to look ahead and not get stuck on a past that ca never return.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rusty Trombone · Oct 1, 2014

spider_ricoh said:
You've just defined perfectly why we should all support this deal. Selling the club and the ground as a package is exactly what SISU want to do (hence why they tried to distress ACL to get the ground cheaply) - hence why we must oppose it. We also want SISU to pay as a high a price as possible for the Ricoh - again, because getting it cheaply is their objective.

Thanks for the input, but the adults are here now and we're trying to have a debate. You can play Minecraft if you want. Cheers.

italiahorse · Oct 1, 2014

AndreasB said:
Still clinging to the wreckage eh?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's your way forward on this?
CCFC are building a new stadium and ACL need an anchor tenant.

I won't hold my breathe ....................

Council could vote on Ricoh takeover as early as Tuesday (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency