CWR (1 Viewer)

mr_monkey · Jan 9, 2020

Nick said:
Coventry City and the Ricoh Arena - What we know so far

Its funny Stuart Linnell goes on about people on social media stirring, it's a bit different to people bullshitting live on radio while paid by the BBC like he does..

And just to put any confusion to bed about the indemnity clause and the EU complaint, from Eastwood in the above article:

"Talks began in April and we entered those discussions in good faith. Since then we have been working to get that deal over the line and we did not halt discussions even when it emerged that the owners had filed a complaint to the European Commission as far back as February"

So they DID know about the complaint and still carried on talking when they knew about it, hopefully that shuts some people up about how it was all down to the EU complaint

Flying Fokker · Jan 9, 2020

This pitch issue would be a reason not to go back until we are promoted this year. I want city back at the Ricoh but not this season. Wasps get the pitch wrong virtually every season.

letsallsingtogether · Jan 9, 2020

Flying Fokker said:
This pitch issue would be a reason not to go back until we are promoted this year. I want city back at the Ricoh but not this season. Wasps get the pitch wrong virtually every season.

Have to agree with that.

Earlsdon-Loyal-Blue · Jan 9, 2020

fernandopartridge said:
I can see the next PR story from Wasps:

[Retweeted by the Sky Blue Trust]
"When the Arena was originally planned in 1997, it was to have a retractable pitch. We have just delivered on that plan with a retractable pitch that can even be moved in the middle of the match. This is a first of its type for professional sport...."

‘Retweeted by the Sky Blues Trust’ - nice touch!!!

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

mr_monkey said:
And just to put any confusion to bed about the indemnity clause and the EU complaint, from Eastwood in the above article:

"Talks began in April and we entered those discussions in good faith. Since then we have been working to get that deal over the line and we did not halt discussions even when it emerged that the owners had filed a complaint to the European Commission as far back as February"

So they DID know about the complaint and still carried on talking when they knew about it, hopefully that shuts some people up about how it was all down to the EU complaint

Thing is as the article says officially both sides have been under an NDA and aren’t talking. We don’t actually know the “legals” are the current action, we’ve all just assumed that. As I said in the other thread the statement from CCFC seems to imply it’s restricting Sisus ability to sue or appeal going forward that’s the issue.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Thing is as the article says officially both sides have been under an NDA and aren’t talking. We don’t actually know the “legals” are the current action, we’ve all just assumed that. As I said in the other thread the statement from CCFC seems to imply it’s restricting Sisus ability to sue or appeal going forward that’s the issue.

I suppose as I said in the other thread - if there’s something wrong, then SISU should rightly be able to pursue the council.

It would be more than unfair if they weren’t able to seek indemnity from the party in the wrong

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
I suppose as I said in the other thread - if there’s something wrong, then SISU should rightly be able to pursue the council.

It would be more than unfair if they weren’t able to seek indemnity from the party in the wrong

Ill park my cynicism on whether the legal action has any merit. How would CCC indemnifying them work? Wasps have to pay the council say £20m and then the council just give it back? And we are back where we were. Doesn’t sound like that’d be possible.

I think the whole indemnity thing is a joke and a spoiling tactic TBF. I can understand the agreement to stop legal action but not that.

Nick · Jan 9, 2020

Maybe it was just a way to kick ccfc out without being the baddies?

After all, they were involved with a consortium trying to buy them at the time.

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

Nick said:
Maybe it was just a way to kick ccfc out without being the baddies?

After all, they were involved with a consortium trying to buy them at the time.

Its a terrible plan if so. Better to just let Sisu hang themselves by insisting on the ability to keep suing. People are sick of it and would’ve kicked off anyway.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Ill park my cynicism on whether the legal action has any merit. How would CCC indemnifying them work? Wasps have to pay the council say £20m and then the council just give it back? And we are back where we were. Doesn’t sound like that’d be possible.

I think the whole indemnity thing is a joke and a spoiling tactic TBF. I can understand the agreement to stop legal action but not that.

I’d imagine that ultimately the party seem to be in the wrong would be the seller for underselling - yes they’d recoup the money from wasps, but I’d imagine then SISU would sue for any losses they have incurred as a result of the underselling

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
I’d imagine that ultimately the party seem to be in the wrong would be the seller for underselling - yes they’d recoup the money from wasps, but I’d imagine then SISU would sue for any losses they have incurred as a result of the underselling

My understanding is that Wasps will be instructed to pay back any aid by the U.K. Government. The point is to return the market to how it was before the aid was given so not sure you could sue as surely any losses would’ve been taken into account in the ruling? God knows when it comes to this stuff.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
My understanding is that Wasps will be instructed to pay back any aid by the U.K. Government. The point is to return the market to how it was before the aid was given so not sure you could sue as surely any losses would’ve been taken into account in the ruling? God knows when it comes to this stuff.

I’m not 100% sure but the underselling would be between wasps and the council,

the losses incurred by SISU would be a separate issue altogether. I think SISU would then return to our courts with an EU judgement saying it was state aid and undersold

not sure on that but that’s how i understand it

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Its a terrible plan if so. Better to just let Sisu hang themselves by insisting on the ability to keep suing. People are sick of it and would’ve kicked off anyway.

I think that’s the point!! However Sisu And ccfc have signed an agreement not to take further legal action and so fully and squarely the only reason we are not playing in coventry currently is because we won’t sign the indemnity clause which is why Stuart should have been clearer and Clive shouldn’t make stupid points about coventry city sorting it out

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

Sky Blue Pete said:
I think that’s the point!! However Sisu And ccfc have signed an agreement not to take further legal action and so fully and squarely the only reason we are not playing in coventry currently is because we won’t sign the indemnity clause which is why Stuart should have been clearer and Clive shouldn’t make stupid points about coventry city sorting it out

Then why say in the press release afterwards that half the issue was “restricting Sisus legals rights” or something along those lines? Why not just say about the indemnity and leave it at that? It’s enough. Something isn’t right here.

The only other explanation is that Wasps are so dense they don’t understand State Aid as well as us and/or are lying. And while that plays nicely into our prejudices it doesn’t in reality make much sense.

As much as I’d like to hear from Wasps, I’d also like to hear from CCFC about legal rights going forward. Well, really I only care about the stadium, but on this point for a short term return.

skyblueinBaku · Jan 9, 2020

"Restricting Sisu's legal rights" is just one of the resons that they won't accept the indemnity clause. The other reason is that indemnifying Wasps could bankrupt the club.

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

skyblueindorset said:
"Restricting Sisu's legal rights" is just one of the resons that they won't accept the indemnity clause. The other reason is that indemnifying Wasps could bankrupt the club.

Eh? How does an indemnity restrict your rights?

Nick · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Eh? How does an indemnity restrict your rights?

I assumed they thought they will win so it restricts it because they may need to pay out.

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

Nick said:
I assumed they thought they will win so it restricts it because they may need to pay out.

Im lost. What legal rights do they lose/get restricted? Maybe I’m seeing something that’s not there it’s just a weird wording.

“This agreement introduced conditions that would unreasonably restrict the Club and SISU’s basic legal rights and would commit the Club and SISU to underwrite Wasps’ costs and any future damages.”

Thats two separate things surely? I dunno, this is my issue with the vague language involved on all sides. Just state clearly what happened instead of this vague stuff about “basic legal rights” that could mean anything. Same for the stop the legals, what legals? It seems for years we always end up more confused after these “clarifications” from any side.

It may well be the NDA is the issue and both sides can’t say more, but then who did that? So frustrating.

Still think it’s a distraction. We need stadium progress now, the Ricoh is gone.

chiefdave · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Still think it’s a distraction. We need stadium progress now, the Ricoh is gone.

Really? Lets say SISU go full steam ahead, highly unlikely to say the least, and lets say the council are right behind it, again highly unlikely, you could still easily be looking at ten years or more until a new stadium is ready. Are you really saying we should forget the Ricoh and just wait it out in Birmingham until then.

I think most people would say even if a new stadium was being built playing at the Ricoh in the meantime would be the preferred option.

skyblueinBaku · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Eh? How does an indemnity restrict your rights?

I have no idea. Ask Sisu, as it's them that said it.

shmmeee · Jan 9, 2020

chiefdave said:
Really? Lets say SISU go full steam ahead, highly unlikely to say the least, and lets say the council are right behind it, again highly unlikely, you could still easily be looking at ten years or more until a new stadium is ready. Are you really saying we should forget the Ricoh and just wait it out in Birmingham until then.

I think most people would say even if a new stadium was being built playing at the Ricoh in the meantime would be the preferred option.

Im saying we have forgot the Ricoh. So I want us back ASAP. Unless you see a way through the “lEgAlS”/“iNdEmNiTy ClAuSe” impasse before the State Aid case is resolved.

Grendel · Jan 9, 2020

shmmeee said:
Im saying we have forgot the Ricoh. So I want us back ASAP. Unless you see a way through the “lEgAlS”/“iNdEmNiTy ClAuSe” impasse before the State Aid case is resolved.

Off the meds again? Is this going to be a daily bore fest from you now?

Nick · Jan 10, 2020

Interesting that councillors are running a petition to stop the police museum moving from Coventry to Birmingham.

Where were they when it was ccfc?

OffenhamSkyBlue · Jan 10, 2020

If you have (or feel you have, more importantly) been the subject of a wrong, it IS your basic legal right to challenge it in court. It is also ANYONE'S basic legal right to raise a complaint to, for example, the European Commission, or even ask for a judicial review. Whether that has any basis or not is for the courts to decide, and it might well be foolhardy, but it is still your basic legal right, unless you sign a legal agreement to say that you WON'T.
THAT is the bit in the statement that i don't understand, and for which there must be more in the background: if they have signed an agreement not to issue any further legal proceedings against Wasps, does it mean that this only relates to the sale of the Ricoh, but Wasps want a guarantee of no legal action on anything?
Apologies for thinking out loud!

covcity4life · Jan 10, 2020

Nick said:
Interesting that councillors are running a petition to stop the police museum moving from Coventry to Birmingham.

Where were they when it was ccfc?

at the doubletree hilton banging eastwood

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

Nick said:
Interesting that councillors are running a petition to stop the police museum moving from Coventry to Birmingham.

Where were they when it was ccfc?

Or the tax office

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

Should be a good phone in tonight with Stuart updating us all on the indemnity clause

AOM · Jan 10, 2020

Sky Blue Pete said:
Should be a good phone in tonight with Stuart updating us all on the indemnity clause

"We've reached out to the club and Wasps for comment, and are awaiting their response"

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

AOM said:
"We've reached out to the club and Wasps for comment, and are awaiting their response"

That’s ok when?

AOM · Jan 10, 2020

Sky Blue Pete said:
That’s ok when?

Haha, I was just predicting what they were going to come up with tonight.
I'm not holding my breath on a definitive answer, but if there is one, hopefully it will force one of the parties to respond!

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

AOM said:
Haha, I was just predicting what they were going to come up with tonight.
I'm not holding my breath on a definitive answer, but if there is one, hopefully it will force one of the parties to respond!

Yep here’s hoping. Let the pr men do their job but expect the journalists to do theirs too

SkyBlueDom26 · Jan 10, 2020

@Sky Blue Pete Will you be following up last weeks call tonight pal?

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

SkyBlueDom26 said:
@Sky Blue Pete Will you be following up last weeks call tonight pal?

Yep

shmmeee · Jan 10, 2020

What’s the number to call for tonight? Do you have to ring early to have a chance? How does it all work? Think the last time I called was in the 90s.

Thinking of asking about the fact the fans are in the dark on key questions, those being:

- Surely Wasps accept that the indemnity clause (or whatever name you want to give it) is unacceptable and would bankrupt CCFC. So isn’t it basically a permanent block on CCFC returning?
- Are Wasps asking for the *current/ongoing* legal action to be stopped (in which case again it’s a permanent block) or future legal action (in which case what’s the difference between that and the agreement Sisu signed prior to talks)?

It sure seems to the untrained eye that this is Wasps putting a block on CCFC returning while there is any legal action at all. If that’s the case why haven’t the media taken this point to Wasps?

Not sure how to frame that in a way that won’t lead to CWR refusing to answer, but seems those are the key issues we need answers to and it’s pretty much the local media’s job to get us them.

Sky Blue Pete · Jan 10, 2020

shmmeee said:
What’s the number to call for tonight? Do you have to ring early to have a chance? How does it all work? Think the last time I called was in the 90s.

Thinking of asking about the fact the fans are in the dark on key questions, those being:

- Surely Wasps accept that the indemnity clause (or whatever name you want to give it) is unacceptable and would bankrupt CCFC. So isn’t it basically a permanent block on CCFC returning?
- Are Wasps asking for the *current/ongoing* legal action to be stopped (in which case again it’s a permanent block) or future legal action (in which case what’s the difference between that and the agreement Sisu signed prior to talks)?

It sure seems to the untrained eye that this is Wasps putting a block on CCFC returning while there is any legal action at all. If that’s the case why haven’t the media taken this point to Wasps?

Not sure how to frame that in a way that won’t lead to CWR refusing to answer, but seems those are the key issues we need answers to and it’s pretty much the local media’s job to get us them.

Excellent questions

08007565200 I think

CWR (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency