Latest CCFC letter on planning application - Planning Meeting (11 Viewers)

italiahorse · Aug 5, 2016

Moff said:
Do you read the posts on here? Do you read the Telegraph comments? or do you keep your blinkers on, and avoid those that are glad this has happened to get one over on SISU. Why don't you read the thread rather than posting questions that you could answer yourself.

So what is the 'SISU are useless but contingent. Please enlighten me, as you obviously know me so well from an internet forum that you can speak for me.

Perhaps if you weren't trying to disparage what I said when you either clearly didn't read it/didn't understand it/or were just being pathetic, then you would have read that I blame SISU, but I also don't want my football club to go out of business and that is where they are headed. This is down to SISU, but now aided and abetted by other parties. People like you cant see that when the club is gone, SISU wont be, but I am beginning to wonder if you will be really bothered, as you will sit there telling everybody you told them so, whilst watching Wasps play. You are all talk.

Are they 'hand on heart' fans though or just people who support and never attend ?
I can't say I read all the posts but I do pick up on the main ones.
The 'Sisu are to blame but .... ' fans are those that just mention Sisu at the start then go at great lengths to blame everybody else.
It's simple for me, Sisu need to give us a plan for the future and then we can take the fight to whoever. But I'm not really sure what they 'really' want at the Ricoh or the Higgs.
This may be an inconvenience for us fans but organisations like Higgs, CSF and CCC need to plan for the future and Sisu bravado means they can't take chances.
I think a few people on here blindly believe that because it's CCFC that all these organisations should wait for Sisu to go and then make their plans.
I have never said I agree with it but I'm saying I understand what is happening and why.

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

ccfcway said:
Just watched the fisher 3 mins. What a mess.

It's not good is it. His opening gambit is to tell them that he's not there to oppose the development. Did no one brief them on the point of being there? He didn't say one thing relevant to the process and starts by telling them that he won't be either. Complete waste of time.

Did people really give me a hard time for suggesting he might as well not bothered? Go and watch it, you may just see why I was right.

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
Being seen to be wavering is what I meant really.... Just a better way of putting it.

As in if they keep saying "we will drop it", "we wont drop it", "it doesnt matter", "it does matter" then it makes it look like they aren't serious and don't believe in it and weaken their case.*

*Somebody is bound to pop up in about 5 hours saying that is me saying they have a strong case. I think they will lose.

No different from saying "we've moved on", "we're staying", "we've moved on, "we're staying".

They don't say anything to help themselves, the club or us fan's fight for the club.

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
No different from saying "we've moved on", "we're staying", "we've moved on, "we're staying".

They don't say anything to help themselves, the club or us fan's fight for the club.

That isn't in a court though is it?

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
That isn't in a court though is it?

Does it matter? They're judged by it anyway from the people they need to deal with to the fan base. They don't set themselves up as someone anybody would rush to deal with because of the ever changing goal posts and a lack of a tangible plan. That's before you even consider the litigation risk. How many people have they done business with that hasn't ended up in court? I mean away from CCFC. They pride themselves on it don't they?

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Does it matter? They're judged by it anyway from the people they need to deal with to the fan base. They don't set themselves up as someone anybody would rush to deal with because of the ever changing goal posts and a lack of a tangible plan. That's before you even consider the litigation risk. How many people have they done business with that hasn't ended up in court? I mean away from CCFC. They pride themselves on it don't they?

To them it would surely? As wavering would make a difference in the court case.

Brylowes · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
There's the door is open line... Kicking barn... Check....

People will lap it up.

Predictable.

So would it' make you feel better

duffer said:
This should not come as a surprise to anyone. From the moment the Ricoh was sold to Wasps, the Council have got in bed with them. They had to, because if for anyone reason Wasps fail, the council end up looking like complete idiots.

The only thing that amazes me is why anyone who has CCFC at heart goes to support Wasps. The one small lever we've got as fans in all this is to say that if Wasps go ahead with this plan, then as fans of Coventry City we will actively boycott them.

Don't fall for all of the "we're happy to work with the club" stuff, because it's utter rubbish. Wasps could have built this facility elsewhere, but they chose the Higgs Centre because it was the easiest and cheapest option for them - much like buying the Ricoh. It helps, of course, that the Council, the CSF, and the Higgs Charity have fallen over themselves to make it all happen.

Anyone who thinks that Wasps give a toss about CCFC needs to pause and look at the overwhelming evidence here; if you support Wasps then you are supporting an organisation that has gone out of its way to permanently harm Coventry City Football Club.

i wouldn't dream of going to a Wasps match, I don't know anyone who does though I
accept some probably do. I know Wasps couldn't give a toss about us but then again
Why would they, it angers me far more that our owners not only couldn't give a toss
about us but consistently lead us down a path that can only bring us harm.

Bruce the Boot · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
It's not good is it. His opening gambit is to tell them that he's not there to oppose the development. Did no one brief them on the point of being there? He didn't say one thing relevant to the process and starts by telling them that he won't be either. Complete waste of time.

Did people really give me a hard time for suggesting he might as well not bothered? Go and watch it, you may just see why I was right.

Bizarre performance to say the least . What a buffoon . Totally embarrassing for the Club .

Bruce the Boot · Aug 5, 2016

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/future-coventry-city-academy-doubt-11706651

For those have nt seen it ...........

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
To them it would surely? As wavering would make a difference in the court case.

Wavering has made a difference in every aspect except court where the club is concerned. The case clearly has no merit, being seen to be wavering isn't going to effect the court case one iota. It's more likely to be about reputation than the outcome of the case. If they drop it how can they say that "they batter people in court" if they give up? That's assuming that they are in a position to give up.

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Wavering has made a difference in every aspect except court where the club is concerned. The case clearly has no merit, being seen to be wavering isn't going to effect the court case one iota. It's more likely to be about reputation than the outcome of the case. If they drop it how can they say that "they batter people in court" if they give up? That's assuming that they are in a position to give up.

I think the results will do that more than them dropping it though won't it?

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
I think the results will do that more than them dropping it though won't it?

Not really. They need to be seen to stay the coarse. I made a comment a long time ago that do they actually batter people in court or do they use the courts to batter people. People from what I've read on line seem to give up before process comes to a conclusion for whatever reason. Don't have the fight, don't have the money or possibly don't have a case to defend it. How many of their court cases have actually run the full coarse until every process is exhausted? Will this be a first?

Brylowes · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Does it matter? They're judged by it anyway from the people they need to deal with to the fan base. They don't set themselves up as someone anybody would rush to deal with because of the ever changing goal posts and a lack of a tangible plan. That's before you even consider the litigation risk. How many people have they done business with that hasn't ended up in court? I mean away from CCFC. They pride themselves on it don't they?[/QUOT
That's a good question, would be interesting to find out just' how many they have battered in court,
Do they have anything going on at the moment, other than ours of course ?

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Not really. They need to be seen to stay the coarse. I made a comment a long time ago that do they actually batter people in court or do they use the courts to batter people. People from what I've read on line seem to give up before process comes to a conclusion for whatever reason. Don't have the fight, don't have the money or possibly don't have a case to defend it. How many of their court cases have actually run the full coarse until every process is exhausted? Will this be a first?

No idea how much they have actually won. Would be interesting to know their fight stats like a boxer.

I know they were trying to buy Welcome Break, in partnership with another motorway services company.

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-113193485.html

It cuts off, but says:

SISU, which specialises in distressed equities and bonds, is known to hold a substantial position in Welcome Break's junior Class B bonds, which total [pounds sterling]67m. …

£67 million into Welcome Break? No idea about bonds though!

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

How still don't see how people are still gloating that SISU took a beating, in CET world it was JS that took a beating yesterday and not CCFC.

I wonder where JS actually was and if she felt beaten.

High court judges clearing everybody but SISU of damaging CCFC... What??

sbadey · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
It's not good is it. His opening gambit is to tell them that he's not there to oppose the development. Did no one brief them on the point of being there? He didn't say one thing relevant to the process and starts by telling them that he won't be either. Complete waste of time.

Did people really give me a hard time for suggesting he might as well not bothered? Go and watch it, you may just see why I was right.

Maybe after JS and co at Sisu HQ see what a mess that 3 mins was they may at last be thinking bye bye Mr Fisher

Sent from my Versus TouchPad 9 using Tapatalk

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
No idea how much they have actually won. Would be interesting to know their fight stats like a boxer.

I know they were trying to buy Welcome Break, in partnership with another motorway services company.

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-113193485.html

It cuts off, but says:

£67 million into Welcome Break? No idea about bonds though!

I recall reading about it years ago. I don'y know what the final outcome was but IIRC it was concerning debt restructuring. Something along the lines of Welcome Break being deep in debt, the senior management had arranged a deal with banks and creditors to allow them to trade through the debt, SISU were trying to block the restructuring of the debt so they could take control of it with others and therefore I assume take control of Welcome Break also. Something like that anyway.

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

It says they already owned a fair whack, I wonder if they still do. Shame we can't see everywhere else they dabble!

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
It says they already owned a fair whack, I wonder if they still do. Shame we can't see everywhere else they dabble!

Some more details here

http://www.risk.net/credit/feature/1522975/unwelcome-breakdown

Sounds like it never made it to court and the owners paid the bonds up. This is an interesting comment, Sisu Capital’s chief executive Joy Seppala says: “We have all along believed that Welcome Break is a valuable business and we are disappointed that there will not now be an opportunity for the assets.”

Begs the question. Did SISU take up any of the Wasps bonds?

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Some more details here

http://www.risk.net/credit/feature/1522975/unwelcome-breakdown

Sounds like it never made it to court and the owners paid the bonds up. This is an interesting comment, Sisu Capital’s chief executive Joy Seppala says: “We have all along believed that Welcome Break is a valuable business and we are disappointed that there will not now be an opportunity for the assets.”

Begs the question. Did SISU take up any of the Wasps bonds?

Imagine that, the bondholders pull their masks off Scooby Doo style!

Do people get to choose who buys the bonds?

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
Imagine that, the bondholders pull their masks off Scooby Doo style!

Do people get to choose who buys the bonds?

No Idea. Although this is also interesting from the article "Before one starts to feel too sympathetic towards Welcome Break’s bondholders, it’s worth noting that several investors profited from the bond’s recovery to par. In particular, hedge funds that bought the B-notes after they hit distressed levels have cleaned up. In fact, many institutional investors were frustrated at being forced to sell their B-notes early". Was this what SISU was trying to stop?

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

A bit over my head if I am honest so wont pretend to try and guess!

Moff · Aug 5, 2016

italiahorse said:
Are they 'hand on heart' fans though or just people who support and never attend ?
I can't say I read all the posts but I do pick up on the main ones.
The 'Sisu are to blame but .... ' fans are those that just mention Sisu at the start then go at great lengths to blame everybody else.
It's simple for me, Sisu need to give us a plan for the future and then we can take the fight to whoever. But I'm not really sure what they 'really' want at the Ricoh or the Higgs.
This may be an inconvenience for us fans but organisations like Higgs, CSF and CCC need to plan for the future and Sisu bravado means they can't take chances.
I think a few people on here blindly believe that because it's CCFC that all these organisations should wait for Sisu to go and then make their plans.
I have never said I agree with it but I'm saying I understand what is happening and why.

Fair enough Italia. We don't always agree, but I cant fault the fact we always get there in the end, sometimes in agreement but if not at least understanding each others point of you.

Just for clarification, I think you already know I am not one of those that go to great lengths to blame everyone else, SISU are the number one priority to chase out of town. I also agree with the bit in bold. I think you like I, cant understand why they are still at the club, nor what their end game is.

Captain Dart · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
No Idea. Although this is also interesting from the article "Before one starts to feel too sympathetic towards Welcome Break’s bondholders, it’s worth noting that several investors profited from the bond’s recovery to par. In particular, hedge funds that bought the B-notes after they hit distressed levels have cleaned up. In fact, many institutional investors were frustrated at being forced to sell their B-notes early". Was this what SISU was trying to stop?

Sounds like having bought bonds at a significant discount they were trying to force Welcome Break to sell of its assets to pay off the bonds at or near the coupon rate (full interest) thereby making a huge profit. The unacceptable face of capitalism.

ccfcway · Aug 5, 2016

Nick said:
How still don't see how people are still gloating that SISU took a beating, in CET world it was JS that took a beating yesterday and not CCFC.

I'd stop reading that forum if I was you. Its a few muppets who would argue black is white.

Luckly we don't get that on here

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

ccfcway said:
I'd stop reading that forum if I was you. Its a few muppets who would argue black is white.

Luckly we don't get that on here

Yes we do...

clint van damme · Aug 5, 2016

CCFC said:
Frankly I'd be amazed if Coventry has a football league club in 10 years.

We have to enjoy the small wins whilst we can. Just hoping Mowbray can deliver a promotion so I can experience it before the clubs extinction is complete, time is running out though.

and if he does, the same Councillors who are trying to kill the club will be falling over themselves to put on a civic reception and get them selves on TV shaking TMs hand.

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Captain Dart said:
Sounds like having bought bonds at a significant discount they were trying to force Welcome Break to sell of its assets to pay off the bonds at or near the coupon rate (full interest) thereby making a huge profit. The unacceptable face of capitalism.

I'll have to take your word for it. I'm with Nick, way above my head.

clint van damme · Aug 5, 2016

Sky Blue Harry H said:
I think it would be good if our owners could put before the fans a clear roadmap/timeframe of how they wish to proceed (new stadium, rent agreement with Wasps, whatever) - at the very least if they then followed that plan we could galvanise as a set of fans behind their 'vision' and hold them to account if they deviate. Of course it still strikes me as being difficult to envisage negotiations with Wasps re: the Ricoh whilst Court cases abound. for the record )I've not looked elsewhere for comments) but I thought Tim Fishers 3 minute delivery earlier today lacked any passion and he came across really deflated (probably as he felt it would be to no avail?)

definitely, I know this is something Otis bangs on about and I have to say I agree.
There is too much ambiguity surrounding SISUs plans for the club and it's allowing the cartel to get away with their scheming aided and abetted by the CET, SISU need to be a bit more street wise.

Nick · Aug 5, 2016

clint van damme said:
definitely, I know this is something Otis bangs on about and I have to say I agree.
There is too much ambiguity surrounding SISUs plans for the club and it's allowing the cartel to get away with their scheming aided and abetted by the CET, SISU need to be a bit more street wise.

The thing is now, the position there are in I don't think they can put any plans for the club out there. As 99% of them are going to rely on 3rd parties..

Grendel · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
Some more details here

http://www.risk.net/credit/feature/1522975/unwelcome-breakdown

Sounds like it never made it to court and the owners paid the bonds up. This is an interesting comment, Sisu Capital’s chief executive Joy Seppala says: “We have all along believed that Welcome Break is a valuable business and we are disappointed that there will not now be an opportunity for the assets.”

Begs the question. Did SISU take up any of the Wasps bonds?

Councils can invest reserves in Bonds can't they?

Captain Dart · Aug 5, 2016

Grendel said:
Councils can invest reserves in Bonds can't they?

Good point, write a suitable FOI request then.

skybluetony176 · Aug 5, 2016

Grendel said:
Councils can invest reserves in Bonds can't they?

I don't know. Can they? You tell me. You clearly have something you want to get off your chest. Just spit it out.

Grendel · Aug 5, 2016

Captain Dart said:
Good point, write a suitable FOI request then.

Can't see FOI applying to the Investment guidelines for Councils. Can't you just pop out of the PR office and go down to Finance or have you packed up for the weekend?

Grendel · Aug 5, 2016

skybluetony176 said:
I don't know. Can they? You tell me. You clearly have something you want to get off your chest. Just spit it out.

I would say looking at the guidelines they can and do

Latest CCFC letter on planning application - Planning Meeting (11 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency