FAO Torch, Grendel, Covcity4life, Mark82 (1 Viewer)

[covcity4life]

Where's the 37.2 million gone? ?

Have the council had it?

Maybe lucas has spent it on cigarettes?

I'd like the resident troll to answer or can't you?

Go on be honest,you can't can you.

i have never said this is a 100% council issue.ever

you are making stuff up and getting angry about it lol. shape up kid.

 

---

[thelookout]

i have never said this is a 100% council issue.ever

you are making stuff up and getting angry about it lol. shape up kid.

You said the councils been feeding of the carcass. You appoint blame totally on ccc. Ive never seen you slag the owners off.

Where's the 37.2 million gone?

 

[mark82]

You said the councils been feeding of the carcass. You appoint blame totally on ccc. Ive never seen you slag the owners off.

Where's the 37.2 million gone?

This is the type of post that really irritates me. Telling someone else what their opinion is.

 

[MichaelCCFC]

A sincere thank you to Torch, Grendel and Covcity4Life for responses and I repeat my apology for any offence caused. If we can ignore the noises off on this thread I'd be very grateful to continue the 'conversation'.

There are some points that there is agreement on and however inconsequential that might seem it strikes me as important to hold on to given some of the 'debate' on here.


The divergence of views seems to be based on - and do say if I've misunderstood - in Grendel's case sisu not seeing any ricoh rental deal as beneficial; covcity4life - ACL should make the first move and if there was a rental agreement ACL/ccc would use it to string sisu along paying rent with no intention of selling; Torch - need to be clear about the ACL offer and fire wouldn't be trained on ACL.



So would any of the following be of any use


- ACL could be asked to set out in detail the last offer and confirm it's still on the table
- I'll be up front in saying that I don't discount things simply because one party or other says they don't want to do it - persuading people to do something different is what campaigning is all about
- I think I've posted before that, from a pragmatic campaign perspective, ACL/ccc is dead easy - councillors are local, well known etc etc. Some people on here appear to be motivated by being pro acl/ccc but kcic ain't and I'd hoped the ePeition approach made that clear
- who should make the first move? If ACL state clearly the offer that's on the table does that suffice or is more needed?
- what seems to me to be the difficult bit is the sale of the ricoh to sisu. I'm not an expert but people who know more about these things have said the council would by law be required to put any sale out to competitive tender (not sure if that's the right phrase). Can anyone shed light on the facts of this and then I can say a bit more on a possible way forward (being able to sell direct to sisu or having to invite offers from any interested party presents 2 very different scenarios).




And just to explain a bit further, the straw poll last week was nothing more than that but what did shake me was a few people in the ST 20-40 years bracket who have been involved in this from the start (which is now 2 years) saying they've had enough and are not even bothering with away games and are focusing on Cov RFC, Nuneaton or other local non league team. Those of who in whatever way remain interested/involved are a diminishing number so however hard it is, trying to identify common ground seems to me to be more important then ever.

 

[shmmeee]

i would imagine if we get back home people will remember CCFC and forget SISU hopefully. if they stump up cash for players that is. have backed recent managers, lets hope that continues.

That's the real problem. Because the leadership strategy changed so much it's hard to tell what's genuine and what's part of the plan. I've said before the football strategy under Fisher is far better than we've had in recent years, but people inevitably link it to the ground move and the other crap. I hope it remains once all this is over, but I've got a nagging doubt that once they get the Ricoh they'll take off their mask and MWAHAHAHA all over us.

I'd also add that I think even with the current football strategy, there's an awful lot more than could be done to attract fans and improve the matchday experience.

 

[covcity4life]

- ACL could be asked to set out in detail the last offer and confirm it's still on the table-HELPFUL


- who should make the first move? If ACL state clearly the offer that's on the table does that suffice or is more needed?-SUFFICE

 

[covcity4life]

that's the real problem. Because the leadership strategy changed so much it's hard to tell what's genuine and what's part of the plan. I've said before the football strategy under fisher is far better than we've had in recent years, but people inevitably link it to the ground move and the other crap. I hope it remains once all this is over, but i've got a nagging doubt that once they get the ricoh they'll take off their mask and mwahahaha all over us.

i'd also add that i think even with the current football strategy, there's an awful lot more than could be done to attract fans and improve the matchday experience.

100% agreed

 

[skybluetony176]

i have agreed with you many times that it is worrying and indicative of a bad set up for the fans.

So you're willing to be led from the frying pan into the fire in the hope that it's not hotter. Wow.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

- what seems to me to be the difficult bit is the sale of the ricoh to sisu. I'm not an expert but people who know more about these things have said the council would by law be required to put any sale out to competitive tender (not sure if that's the right phrase). Can anyone shed light on the facts of this and then I can say a bit more on a possible way forward (being able to sell direct to sisu or having to invite offers from any interested party presents 2 very different scenarios).

Thing is Michael I don't see a return happening without the outright sale of the stadium so discussions on rent offers, however good they are, won't be good enough. It is as clear as day that playing in Northampton represents a far worse financial deal for the club with the ongoing boycott (even if the ground were full every week losses on comparable Ricoh crowds would be large), and those running the club know this. The personal agenda the owner has against those in charge on the other side will forever be a stumbling block on this.

 

[shmmeee]

Set up a non-profit run by notable/trustworthy Cov fans to look after the stadium in the clubs' interest!

(awaits argument over who is notable/trustworthy)

 

[thelookout]

This is the type of post that really irritates me. Telling someone else what their opinion is.

So what part of that post is untrue?

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Hi Michael.

1. Most fans want us back at the Ricoh asap - obviously yes.
2. Comments from players like Wilson make it clear they want to be back at the Ricoh too - you would hope so. Who wants to play in front of non league size crowds?
3. The last offer made by ACL was shown by Clive Eakin to be financially beneficial to the club compared with being at NTFC - I live in Yorkshire so don't often get to listen to CWR these days, however, anyone with an ounce of common sense could see it would be better financially to be at the Ricoh on any deal (assuming we maintain same crowds as before we moved out).
4. It would be good for fans, players and club finances to return to the ricoh even on a short-term rental deal - that's an obvious yes.
5. The sides could then take as long as needed for a long-term agreement without the damage being done by being at NTFC - within reason, yes.
6. The process is therefore for sisu to say we will return on the basis of the last ACL offer - if only they would. Can't see it though.
7. If ACL then renege on that deal all fire is aimed at them - not necessarily. Would need to understand the reasoning.

No-one really disagrees with you on what should happen Michael. This is what you don't seem to understand. No-one is pro sisu or anti ACL. What I believe is that pressure needs to be applied to both sides. Both need to be more flexible and communicate better. The problem is that both sides are stubborn and it seems to be personal. To be honest I think sisu have always been delaying until the JR has been heard.

Sorry Mark! Only just spotted your post so let me add my thanks (and double apologies) to you. I'll await responses to my plea for info about legal requirements re selling the ricoh then respond to you properly. thx

 

[covcity4life]

So you're willing to be led from the frying pan into the fire in the hope that it's not hotter. Wow.

death by frying pan dont seem all that great either.

 

[Bennets Afro]

I think a deal could be done without selling the Ricoh.

If CCFC took over the running of acl and had a long (125 year) lease. They would get all monies generated by the Ricoh and get someone in who can run the stadium properly

 

[covcity4life]

agreed, we need concessions from both sides.

low rent isnt enough, but access to revenues might be. if sisu say no to that then there can be no defence for them.

 

[skybluetony176]

death by frying pan dont seem all that great either.

At least we know from the last rent offer how hot the frying pan is. We have no guide on the temperature of the fire. It's about time sisu informed us. At least we would have a real choice to make instead of trying to guess what our choices are. Ill communication has only led us fan's to division. It's time we united behind the important questions. This is where the SGC is failing.

 

[thelookout]

I think a deal could be done without selling the Ricoh.

If CCFC took over the running of acl and had a long (125 year) lease. They would get all monies generated by the Ricoh and get someone in who can run the stadium properly

Exactly. If sisu are going to stick around(hopefully they won't), this is what the club needs.

Freehold ownership generates no income for sisu. So why are they interested in it then?

Maybe the rabid anti council zealots can enlighten us?

 

[wingy]

A 125 yr lease Is too long ,the stadiums lifespan Is 90-100 yrs max .

 

[shmmeee]

A 125 yr lease Is too long ,the stadiums lifespan Is 90-100 yrs max .

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that. I wonder what the difference in value added is between the two lengths.

 

[wingy]

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that. I wonder what the difference in value added is between the two lengths.

I'd guess when It's life Is over ,as a stakeholder of that 125 yr lease they would have an input and Stake in whatever the CCC decide to do with It next.

 

[Bennets Afro]

The length of the lease is unimportant if outstrips the life expectancy of the stadium it's as good as freehold

 

[Jack Griffin]

Apologies, it must have been the line "Walsall’s Banks’s Stadium is the most likely temporary home for the Sky Blues but that move and the relocation to the planned new stadium need League approval." that confused me.

Maybe media speculation about "a stadium in the West Midlands" was just a distraction tactic, well maybe you do but are careful not to point it out.

Anway, even the Express & star sucked up the story. http://www.expressandstar.com/sport...24/walsall-in-talks-on-coventry-ground-share/

Personally I prefer to wait for events, like I wouldn't like to assume a stadium was being build by SISU until they buy development land & apply for planning, conversely I couldn't assume they will never build one while they are still owners of the club and have not tied up long term a deal elsewhere.

A similar argument applies to not prejudging the result of the JR or weight of evidence that will be presented to it.

 

[Jack Griffin]

A 125 yr lease Is too long ,the stadiums lifespan Is 90-100 yrs max .

LOL, that is the point of the term proposed.. effectively a freehold.

 

[shmmeee]

LOL, that is the point of the term proposed.. effectively a freehold.

But importantly not a freehold. A lease can have conditions put on it, I'm not so sure a freehold sale could (especially when you've got lawyers like Sisu's to deal with).

 

[Astute]

And now, my responses will be picked apart and analysed and thrown back in my face. It's only a matter on time. As Moff said singling people out isn't too surprising as you don't want to understand anyone else's opinion you just want to get the people who disagree to chant "Way to go, Michael". I ain't gonna do it. I have my opinions on the matter. You just blindly chanting "It's SISU!, it's SISU!" also isn't "particularly helpful".

Just started looking at this thread as been at work all day.

Know the feeling about having your posts picked apart, analysed and then thrown back in your face. Certain posters do it to me all the time, but recently you have been about the worse at it

 

[torchomatic]

Really? Tell me who they are and I'll get 'em.

Just started looking at this thread as been at work all day.

Know the feeling about having your posts picked apart, analysed and then thrown back in your face. Certain posters do it to me all the time, but recently you have been about the worse at it

 

[Grendel]

Really? Tell me who they are and I'll get 'em.

I think someone must have started a poll about him or called him a silly name thinking its a clever play on words. Has happened to other posters apparantly.

 

[Huckerby]

Everyones entitled to their own opinion (lol..how many times is that stuck at the front of a sentence to try and stifle reactions ), but I just keep thinking something more and more recently. Grendel said (about 10 pages of bullshit ago) something along the lines of the views of people outside of this forum lean more against the councils actions in this whole fiasco.

I just can't help but think that SISU's plan is working. Take the club out of the city, effectively holding it ransom until they get the stadium on the cheap, and stick to your guns. The fans will get more and more pissed off, try a load of protests, we won't budge a fucking millimetre, and when they succumb to the fact that nothing they do is going to change a thing as far as our position is concerned...sooner or later they will turn against the entity in this stand off that is more likely to be pressured into doing something they don't want to - the council.

Not saying the council are innocent in this, and let's be honest what the fuck do I know I try to catch a glimpse of any threads that vaguely resemble some fresh content once every few days. Maybe SISU aren't such a corrupt bunch of fuck heads and maybe this isn't their plan...but imagine if it was? Would appear to be working wouldn't it.

What a web of crap. The only thing we know for sure is who are the victims here. Sad times.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Never to me

I think someone must have started a poll about him or called him a silly name thinking its a clever play on words. Has happened to other posters apparantly.

 

[shmmeee]

Everyones entitled to their own opinion (lol..how many times is that stuck at the front of a sentence to try and stifle reactions ), but I just keep thinking something more and more recently. Grendel said (about 10 pages of bullshit ago) something along the lines of the views of people outside of this forum lean more against the councils actions in this whole fiasco.

I just can't help but think that SISU's plan is working. Take the club out of the city, effectively holding it ransom until they get the stadium on the cheap, and stick to your guns. The fans will get more and more pissed off, try a load of protests, we won't budge a fucking millimetre, and when they succumb to the fact that nothing they do is going to change a thing as far as our position is concerned...sooner or later they will turn against the entity in this stand off that is more likely to be pressured into doing something they don't want to - the council.

Not saying the council are innocent in this, and let's be honest what the fuck do I know I try to catch a glimpse of any threads that vaguely resemble some fresh content once every few days. Maybe SISU aren't such a corrupt bunch of fuck heads and maybe this isn't their plan...but imagine if it was? Would appear to be working wouldn't it.

What a web of crap. The only thing we know for sure is who are the victims here. Sad times.

To be honest, I expect most non-CCFC fans' view of the situation is whatever their closest CCFC fan has told them. Most people I know are either sick of it all and don't give a shit or anti-Sisu, but then most of the people I know get their detailed info from me so they would be

 

[Paxman II]

I think what's needed here is some actual facts about the Ricoh. Who owns what, who runs and operates what? Before anyone can make wild opinions about what SISU should be doing and what ACL or the Council should be doing then you need to study exactly what is set up there currently. That makes all the difference in the world. You can't just issue a 125 year lease to one group and expect every existing business or contract establish with many parties to just roll over?

It is convoluted to say the least. Until you get all the information on what is at the Ricoh in terms of set up, ownership and all the other parties involved you can't be making grandiose statements about the actions of SISU or the Council/ACL.
What you can do is merely accept the football club has gone and the owners (SISU) and the owners and operators of the Ricoh (ACL/Council) ought to find a solution and a coming together. Exactly how they achieve that depends an awful lot of the facts I outlinbed above and not just here say and opinion based on no evidence of facts from any of us.

 

[shmmeee]

Spoil sport.

 

[ccfcway]

- acl could be asked to set out in detail the last offer and confirm it's still on the table-helpful


- who should make the first move? If acl state clearly the offer that's on the table does that suffice or is more needed?-suffice

this

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Well!!!...I've been waiting for all of you calling skybluejohn names, "Having a mare" "Prove it" etc,etc. The only one apologising was Torchy. Gasp! shock! horror!....one little problem Torchy...It's not me you should be saying sorry to is it?

 

[Rob S]

Should I feel disappointed I wasn't singled out for this survey?

I have to say, I think Michael gets some of his survey ideas from Sir Humphrey Appleby on Yes Prime Minister ;-)

http://youtu.be/G0ZZJXw4MTA