Grendel
Well-Known Member
I'm no fan of sisu but tell me which board in recent times has performed any better?
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.
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..
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
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.
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.
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
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 unreasonableNo. 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
When we had transfer embargo were we still paying our debts then? Will we if we go into administration
When we had transfer embargo were we still paying our debts then? Will we if we go into administration
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
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
Originally Posted by SkyBlue_TaylorI 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 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.
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 battleyou answered it yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I don't fully understand'
I agree, lets keep on paying itLets 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
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 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 visionariessisu will never benefit the the club long term only themselves
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
Sounds good but We don't know the detail behind it though, for example the incremental increases on promotion, etc.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.
3yrs fixed even with promotions .
you answered it yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'I don't fully understand'
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 have finally seen the light, your redemption begins nowI 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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?