Hypocrisy (1 Viewer)

[Grendel]

Not saying people are worshiping them. However the tough hard ball tactics.

Matters such as taking people's shares. Promising to get promotion in 3 years. Selling top scorers knowing it will consign us to relegation. Not talking to the fans putting us in administration. Coming out of admin just after our main targets sign for someone else........

Are often attributed to the fact they are a hedge fund. They are ruthless they don't care they are nasty buggers they will destroy us for a profit etc..

Hardball tactic when dealing with another company. Nit negotiating. Reneging in a contract.
Starting negiotions then pulling out.
Not entering talks.
Not compromising
ACL left thinking they are going to destroy us. (sound familiar)
However for some 'its ok they get the rent lowers it helps cov'.

I wonder if the same people who support them on using these tactics in ACL will support them when they start screwing CCFC or the fans over something again.

I'm no fan of sisu but tell me which board in recent times has performed any better?

 

---

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

So what would you rather? We pay the rent and sell our players? Let robins walk and appoint another clueless fool as he is cheap..

Let's not go to the latter point if your post as its the usual diatribe regurgitated. What would I prefer? The club explains to us fans in clear terms how the rental is beating upon the daily operation if the club. Be candid with regards other club's rentals, then accept a fair offer.

I think they've now received a fair offer. Beating in mind the facilities available to them. The difference between the leek they are discussing and ACL's latest offer is one squad player.

 

[Grendel]

No. They stopped paying the rent they're contractually obliged to pay. This process could have - if genuine and candid - have been completed with a whole lot more grace and dignity than has prevailed

The last board stopped paying transfer fees owed to other clubs. Did that bother you?

 

[Grendel]

Let's not go to the latter point if your post as its the usual diatribe regurgitated. What would I prefer? The club explains to us fans in clear terms how the rental is beating upon the daily operation if the club. Be candid with regards other club's rentals, then accept a fair offer.

I think they've now received a fair offer. Beating in mind the facilities available to them. The difference between the leek they are discussing and ACL's latest offer is one squad player.

A previous post started by you has already highlighted the outrageous levels we have been paying. it is not 1 squad player and by your own analysis it is still disgracefully high.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Providing the end result is a fair rent rather than the obscene levels previously levied I am sure we will all be happy.

As for ACL we are assured they don't need the funds we pay. They are doing very well anyway. So no need to worry about them.

You may be happy with the product if an immoral negotiation, but if doesn't sit comfortably with me. Maybe one day in the future, we might go up and look at a better quality of player; then be frustrated as the selling club won't offer us the normal staged-payment profile as they don't believe the contractual promises of our owners.

In business, reputation is everything. Wonder if you'll still be 'happy' if our poor reputation comes back to haunt us?

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The last board stopped paying transfer fees owed to other clubs. Did that bother you?

Yes. Not a proud moment either. And this latest activity enhances our reputation no further

 

[Grendel]

Yes. Not a proud moment either. And this latest activity enhances our reputation no further

Fair enough. However I suspect very few were bothered but if it was the present owners would be very bothered. And that is our problem.

 

[dongonzalos]

When we had transfer embargo were we still paying our debts then? Will we if we go into administration

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

No. They stopped paying the rent they're contractually obliged to pay. This process could have - if genuine and candid - have been completed with a whole lot more grace and dignity than has prevailed

Maybe not paying the rent was the only way the club felt would force ACLs hand into negotiations, maybe from entering negotiations they wanted a new rent when agreed to be backdated from when negotiations began which isn't unreasonable

Lets not pretend ACL have been blameless in this, it has taken them about 8 months to come up with a half decent offer.

I don't agree with how they have gone about it but if it secures the lowest rent possible for the club I won't lose any sleep over it.

I would rather the club play hard ball and get a rent at 250-300k than accept the first reduction made to them and still be paying 250k over the odds

All I want is the best deal for Coventry City Football club

 

[Grendel]

When we had transfer embargo were we still paying our debts then? Will we if we go into administration

We were defaulting to local creditors. There was a rumour Harry Shaw hadn't been paid for months. Sisu paid the debts to Southampton the prior board had defaulted on.

 

[stupot07]

When we had transfer embargo were we still paying our debts then? Will we if we go into administration

Football creditors get paid first - players, and teams we owe payments to.

 

[Grendel]

Maybe not paying the rent was the only way the club felt would force ACLs hand into negotiations, maybe from entering negotiations they wanted a new rent when agreed to be backdated from when negotiations began which isn't unreasonable

Lets not pretend ACL have been blameless in this, it has taken them about 8 months to come up with a half decent offer.

I'm don't agree with how they have gone about it but if it secures the lowest rent possible for the club I won't lose any sleep over it.

I would rather the club play hard ball and get a rent at 250-300k than accept the first reduction made to them and still be paying 250k over the odds

All I want is the best deal for Coventry City Football club

Agreed 100% and there is a first.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I don't fully understand why people are taking ACL's side over CCFC's side!? Yes, the owners aren't great as we know (but no one else is waiting to take over) but what we also know is, we pay too much rent, which SISU inherited, they didn't agree to this, their predecessors did. We've paid too much, for too long ACL enjoy 500k profit per year (give or take) so they can afford to drop the rent, they're also a 'non-profit' organisation so would it be fair to say they are immoral for burdening the club?

Point is, desperate times, call for desperate measures and if CCFC had paid their rent, would ACL be willing to renegotiate? I'm not convinced tbh, so it seems logical we stop paying to force our way to the negotiating table.

Morality? Doesn't exist in the business world! There's no point in taking the moral high ground.

 

[Bluegloucester]

I don't fully understand why people are taking ACL's side over CCFC's side!? Yes, the owners aren't great as we know (but no one else is waiting to take over) but what we also know is, we pay too much rent, which SISU inherited, they didn't agree to this, their predecessors did. We've paid too much, for too long ACL enjoy 500k profit per year (give or take) so they can afford to drop the rent, they're also a 'non-profit' organisation so would it be fair to say they are immoral for burdening the club?

Point is, desperate times, call for desperate measures and if CCFC had paid their rent, would ACL be willing to renegotiate? I'm not convinced tbh, so it seems logical we stop paying to force our way to the negotiating table.

Morality? Doesn't exist in the business world! There's no point in taking the moral high ground.

ACL are not a 'not for profit' organisation

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

ACL are not a 'not for profit' organisation

I'm pretty sure Alan Higgs charity are, 50% non-profit there then?

 

[Tonylinc]

The whole point here is that Sisu should have re-negotiated the rent at the very outset of their tenure, They failed to do so and now come bleeting that it is too high. it is only too high in the light of the drop in income due to relegation. Who is responsible for that?? OK having said that Yes; the rent needs to be adjusted BUT I want to hear Sisu saying sorry for the mistakes which they have made and promise in future to do all that they can to once again make CCFC competitive.

 

[dongonzalos]

Originally Posted by SkyBlue_Taylor I don't fully understand why people are taking ACL's side over CCFC's side!? Yes, the owners aren't great as we know (but no one else is waiting to take over) but what we also know is, we pay too much rent, which SISU inherited, they didn't agree to this, their predecessors did. We've paid too much, for too long ACL enjoy 500k profit per year (give or take) so they can afford to drop the rent, they're also a 'non-profit' organisation so would it be fair to say they are immoral for burdening the club?

Point is, desperate times, call for desperate measures and if CCFC had paid their rent, would ACL be willing to renegotiate? I'm not convinced tbh, so it seems logical we stop paying to force our way to the negotiating table.

Morality? Doesn't exist in the business world! There's no point in taking the moral high ground.

Something tells me you will be bleating from the trees when SISU shaft CCFC next

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Originally Posted by SkyBlue_Taylor I don't fully understand why people are taking ACL's side over CCFC's side!? Yes, the owners aren't great as we know (but no one else is waiting to take over) but what we also know is, we pay too much rent, which SISU inherited, they didn't agree to this, their predecessors did. We've paid too much, for too long ACL enjoy 500k profit per year (give or take) so they can afford to drop the rent, they're also a 'non-profit' organisation so would it be fair to say they are immoral for burdening the club?

Point is, desperate times, call for desperate measures and if CCFC had paid their rent, would ACL be willing to renegotiate? I'm not convinced tbh, so it seems logical we stop paying to force our way to the negotiating table.

Morality? Doesn't exist in the business world! There's no point in taking the moral high ground.

Something tells me you will be bleating from the trees when SISU shaft CCFC next

I don't view CCFC as a business nor should they be, or any football club for that matter! No to mod£rn football!

They won't 'shaft' CCFC, they would've done that long ago, they've dug themselves too deep.

 

[valiant15]

They've been shafting us for 5 years.

 

[cloughie]

I don't fully understand why people are taking ACL's side over CCFC's side!? Yes, the owners aren't great as we know (but no one else is waiting to take over) but what we also know is, we pay too much rent, which SISU inherited, they didn't agree to this, their predecessors did. We've paid too much, for too long ACL enjoy 500k profit per year (give or take) so they can afford to drop the rent, they're also a 'non-profit' organisation so would it be fair to say they are immoral for burdening the club?

Point is, desperate times, call for desperate measures and if CCFC had paid their rent, would ACL be willing to renegotiate? I'm not convinced tbh, so it seems logical we stop paying to force our way to the negotiating table

Morality? Doesn't exist in the business world! There's no point in taking the moral high ground.

you answered it yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I don't fully understand'

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

you answered it yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I don't fully understand'

I'll explain it, some people hate the owners more than they love the club. If you gave them a choice between SISU failing and CCFC succeeding they would likely choose for SISU to fail. People would sooner let the club die than see Fisher and SISU win the rent battle

It is odd for a supporter to be so against something that will benefit the club which is why people don't understand

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Lets be clear about one thing - as Linnel made this mistake yesterday; SISU did not inherit an agreement 'carte blanche' with regards the rent.

If they didn't like it, they could have renegotiated it before taking over - this is what the due diligence process is all about. To ensure the clubs financial obligations can be met robustly moving forwards.

They didn't have to blindly accept the terms, and as such they 'inherited' nothing if the sort. To claim so is ignorant beyond words

 

[cloughie]

sisu will never benefit the the club long term only themselves

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Lets be clear about one thing - as Linnel made this mistake yesterday; SISU did not inherit an agreement 'carte blanche' with regards the rent.

If they didn't like it, they could have renegotiated it before taking over - this is what the due diligence process is all about. To ensure the clubs financial obligations can be met robustly moving forwards.

They didn't have to blindly accept the terms, and as such they 'inherited' nothing if the sort. To claim so is ignorant beyond words

I agree, lets keep on paying it

Bring on Luton Town and Plymouth Argyle until we have no club at all

 

[stupot07]

Lets be clear about one thing - as Linnel made this mistake yesterday; SISU did not inherit an agreement 'carte blanche' with regards the rent.

If they didn't like it, they could have renegotiated it before taking over - this is what the due diligence process is all about. To ensure the clubs financial obligations can be met robustly moving forwards.

They didn't have to blindly accept the terms, and as such they 'inherited' nothing if the sort. To claim so is ignorant beyond words

You are right, however they were initially advised by RR who had his plan to build a young talented side and go for promotion, the banking crises happened they lost their nerve RR departed, then they left KD and OI in charge who slashed the wage bill as a measure to save costs and we got relegated.

Now we have TF and Joy herself is now involved, their priorities have changed and now they are looking at things they had not previously looked at on the backdrop of reduced income streams. Actually when you think about it, this is exactly what local councils are doing, reviewing departments looking for anyway to make savings both big things (e.g redundancies) and small things (e.g. Stopping teas and coffees for meetings, etc).

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

sisu will never benefit the the club long term only themselves

Yes but lowering the rent will benefit the the club but people don't want to it to happen because they do not wish to share a common goal with Fisher and the owners, if it was anyone else trying to lower the rent they would be hailed as visionaries

 

[cloughie]

yet £400.000 is a good offer and kilban is now off the books thats at least 150,000 a year saved so whats the problem? ,,,,,,,,,,,,, maybe it's not just about the rent J'm sure you have read the threads about weakening ACL

 

[Godiva]

Lets be clear about one thing - as Linnel made this mistake yesterday; SISU did not inherit an agreement 'carte blanche' with regards the rent.

If they didn't like it, they could have renegotiated it before taking over - this is what the due diligence process is all about. To ensure the clubs financial obligations can be met robustly moving forwards.

They didn't have to blindly accept the terms, and as such they 'inherited' nothing if the sort. To claim so is ignorant beyond words

Yes, the rent could have been renogtiated as part of the due dilligence leading to the take over. But a few things were quite different back then.
First of all - the business plan was made by Ranson. Not sisu. And his focus was to take us to PL and so I think he didn't even think about the rent.
Next - nobody really understood the reality of the financial crunch. How different almost everything was going to be.
Also - The yearly budget was so much bigger back then than it is now, and so the rent was a smaller percentage of the overall cost.

 

[stupot07]

yet £400.000 is a good offer and kilbam is now off the books thats at least 150,000 a year saved so whats the problem? ,,,,,,,,,,,,, maybe it's not just about the rent J'm sure you have read the threads about weakening ACL

Sounds good but We don't know the detail behind it though, for example the incremental increases on promotion, etc.

 

[wingy]

Sounds good but We don't know the detail behind it though, for example the incremental increases on promotion, etc.

3yrs fixed even with promotions .

 

[cloughie]

3yrs fixed even with promotions .

and the outstanding debt spread over 10 years

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

you answered it yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I don't fully understand'

I never said I don't understand the situation... I'm saying I don't understand how you could side with ACL over CCFC!? If you're a 'supporter' surely you'd want the club to win!?

We're not buying a share in RICOH, we're reducing rent? Wha is the problem!?

Do yourself a favour and take off those blinkers.

 

[Grendel]

Lets be clear about one thing - as Linnel made this mistake yesterday; SISU did not inherit an agreement 'carte blanche' with regards the rent.

If they didn't like it, they could have renegotiated it before taking over - this is what the due diligence process is all about. To ensure the clubs financial obligations can be met robustly moving forwards.

They didn't have to blindly accept the terms, and as such they 'inherited' nothing if the sort. To claim so is ignorant beyond words

I have had a rethink. You are right. Lets keep paying 1000% more than the market rate. Seems reasonable. Let's go bankrupt and lets go and watch ACL Utd v Higgs City. At least we can all feel good about ourselves that we have done the right thing.

 

[SkyBlueUkeman]

I just came here to play tetris.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I have had a rethink. You are right. Lets keep paying 1000% more than the market rate. Seems reasonable. Let's go bankrupt and lets go and watch ACL Utd v Higgs City. At least we can all feel good about ourselves that we have done the right thing.

You have finally seen the light, your redemption begins now