Firstly, well done to the City last night. Showed the grit and the 'we will not be beat' attitude that existed a few months ago. Mr. Fisher has now said 'it will take less than a year to build' the new stadium. I think people's fears of leaving Coventry for good should now be put to rest, and also, the idea we will never return to the Ricoh is also far off the mark. Point 1 - People have seen what happened at MKDons and think that situation will be the norm. Wrong. MK did not have a team and their council were looking for one. The situation was further esculated by the fact the Wimbledon public (major) and their council didn't want a 'successful' team on their doorstep. The good people of Wimbledon prefer their quaint 'tennis' town to be sleepy and not taken over every two week by football fans. Yhe Coventry public, on the other hand, want us back. Point 2 - A 'permanent' stadium would take more than a year to build so everything is now pointing to a 'temporary one', This makes good business sense because it leaves the club open to a return to the Ricoh at some point, dismantle the stadium and re-sell the land. So with the 80% pessimists who have taken over this site I say, 'have patience, enjoy your new Saturday life, and in a few years we will be back at the Ricoh'. Have a good day.
Are you for real ? Comparing Sky Blues to MK Dons/Wimbledon is silly as is building a stadium to pull it down again.
Firstly, well done to the City last night. Showed the grit and the 'we will not be beat' attitude that existed a few months ago. Mr. Fisher has now said 'it will take less than a year to build' the new stadium. I think people's fears of leaving Coventry for good should now be put to rest, and also, the idea we will never return to the Ricoh is also far off the mark. Point 1 - People have seen what happened at MKDons and think that situation will be the norm. Wrong. MK did not have a team and their council were looking for one. The situation was further esculated by the fact the Wimbledon public (major) and their council didn't want a 'successful' team on their doorstep. The good people of Wimbledon prefer their quaint 'tennis' town to be sleepy and not taken over every two week by football fans. Yhe Coventry public, on the other hand, want us back. Point 2 - A 'permanent' stadium would take more than a year to build so everything is now pointing to a 'temporary one', This makes good business sense because it leaves the club open to a return to the Ricoh at some point, dismantle the stadium and re-sell the land. So with the 80% pessimists who have taken over this site I say, 'have patience, enjoy your new Saturday life, and in a few years we will be back at the Ricoh'. Have a good day.
We should all have learnt to take anything Fisher says with a pinch of salt... Remember CCFC Ltd as a non-trading subsidiary, and the club as 'debt free'? When it comes to stating facts he is simply not someone to trusted.
I'm not sure your parallels with Wimbledon are actually correct however, I do accept that Merton Council didn't co-operate with the football club. Bear in mind neither will Coventry City Council cooperate with SISU. Relocating is relocating - it's just a matter of distance for us. For me, if we're outside Coventry we are no longer 'Coventry City'.
I have no reason to disbelieve the building of a temporary stadium and that it could be built in less than a year. SISU are looking at this for two reasons.
Reason 1 - The Sixfields boycott is costing them far more money than they anticipated and it's my guess that they don't want to make up the shortfall with equity - just loans (which might be repaid at some future date). There will also be the very real danger of more Football League sanctions next season as the club's turnover during this season will be a lot less than SISU originally forecast. Crowds will most likely go down next season - not up.
Reason 2 - A temporary stadium will lengthen the 'distress period' of ACL by the club not being there. Building a temporary stadium might add ten years to this as it is likely the Football League would give permission to use the temporary stadium for a number of years.
It looks a cleaver move by SISU as it buys even more time and will push up revenues which are so poor at Sixfields. SISU want the Ricoh - and this buys even more time for not much money. The club sacrificed nearly £2m a year of turnover going to Sixfields for up to 5 years. Add to that the clubs losses the figure is way over £10m. A quick land deal and a £5m temporary stadium and things might pick up (they think).
More than one more relegation and the temporary stadium remains. It will be fine for non-League football.
An interesting development though.
all boils down to location for me not build time.
if its v close then it can embraced as helping the club move forward i guess without a greedy council stopping us from making a profit
if its too far out its not really ccfc and just wont work imo
I think anyone who believes the club has plans to build a temporary stadium is misguided. Temporary no, cheap yes.
I think reason 2 is poppycock. ACL have been holding out up until now for the offchance that sisu grow up, and at the very least acknowledge if they want the Ricoh they must deal with ACL! Throughout this they have done no such thing. So to assume that they will hold out if by chance sisu finally decide to build a new stadium is absolutely crazy! Just look at the NEC. That is worth 2 billion per year to the local economy! Even if the Ricoh is only 1/10 of that (I would have thought more), that is £200 million per year to the economy! There is no way they will leave it lying dormant! There are cars every day outside the ricoh. It may not be rock concerts every week, but there aren't that many held at the NIA! Corporate gigs pay far better - (you might get say £100 from 2 attendees, but you will get far more from corporate attendees as it is all on expenses! Why do you think all the hotels around the NEC are Hiltons & high end hotels? Company directors don't stay in travellodge! This must be the reason sisu want the ricoh. No way their game plan is to maintain a league 1 club! sisu outWe should all have learnt to take anything Fisher says with a pinch of salt... Remember CCFC Ltd as a non-trading subsidiary, and the club as 'debt free'? When it comes to stating facts he is simply not someone to trusted. I'm not sure your parallels with Wimbledon are actually correct however, I do accept that Merton Council didn't co-operate with the football club. Bear in mind neither will Coventry City Council cooperate with SISU. Relocating is relocating - it's just a matter of distance for us. For me, if we're outside Coventry we are no longer 'Coventry City'. I have no reason to disbelieve the building of a temporary stadium and that it could be built in less than a year. SISU are looking at this for two reasons. Reason 1 - The Sixfields boycott is costing them far more money than they anticipated and it's my guess that they don't want to make up the shortfall with equity - just loans (which might be repaid at some future date). There will also be the very real danger of more Football League sanctions next season as the club's turnover during this season will be a lot less than SISU originally forecast. Crowds will most likely go down next season - not up. Reason 2 - A temporary stadium will lengthen the 'distress period' of ACL by the club not being there. Building a temporary stadium might add ten years to this as it is likely the Football League would give permission to use the temporary stadium for a number of years. It looks a cleaver move by SISU as it buys even more time and will push up revenues which are so poor at Sixfields. SISU want the Ricoh - and this buys even more time for not much money. The club sacrificed nearly £2m a year of turnover going to Sixfields for up to 5 years. Add to that the clubs losses the figure is way over £10m. A quick land deal and a £5m temporary stadium and things might pick up (they think). More than one more relegation and the temporary stadium remains. It will be fine for non-League football. An interesting development though.
If they do move the club back to the Ricoh the stadium will be a white elephant and more than likely get knocked down.
I think SISU's gameplan is to build a cheap multi use stadium & flog it or rent it for other sports use after acquiring a distressed Ricoh on the cheap.
I think reason 2 is poppycock. ACL have been holding out up until now for the offchance that sisu grow up, and at the very least acknowledge if they want the Ricoh they must deal with ACL! Throughout this they have done no such thing. So to assume that they will hold out if by chance sisu finally decide to build a new stadium is absolutely crazy! Just look at the NEC. That is worth 2 billion per year to the local economy! Even if the Ricoh is only 1/10 of that (I would have thought more), that is £200 million per year to the economy! There is no way they will leave it lying dormant! There are cars every day outside the ricoh. It may not be rock concerts every week, but there aren't that many held at the NIA! Corporate gigs pay far better - (you might get say £100 from 2 attendees, but you will get far more from corporate attendees as it is all on expenses! Why do you think all the hotels around the NEC are Hiltons & high end hotels? Company directors don't stay in travellodge! This must be the reason sisu want the ricoh. No way their game plan is to maintain a league 1 club! sisu out
Very loose argument.
You do realise that Sisu management take more out of the club than ACl did in rent.
We got a stadium from ACL whilst from SISU we got ..................................
Fed the brown stuff that stinks and is found in farmers fields .......................................................................... (Please fill in)
Are you for real ? Comparing Sky Blues to MK Dons/Wimbledon is silly as is building a stadium to pull it down again.
I'm not setting foot in a stadium that took "Less than a year to build" unless I wanted to come out of it in a bodybag.
We'll tell Timmy that we only need 14999 seats then.
Didn't it only take a year to put up the Greenhouse Meadow at Shrewsbury? Of course time was being consumed by buying appropriate land, planning permission, etc.
I think until land is bought by Sisu/CCFC there will be doubt over this new Stadium and even then there maybe doubt, I would prefer a deal for us to go back to the Ricoh however that looks a distant opportunity.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FFS when will you people realise that this new stadium will NEVER happen. All this talk is simply to put pressure on ACL
patccfc, I do agree with everything you say here. Distressing ACL is SISU's primary motive (poppycock yes!)- why else take the club away and sacrifice 90% of home support and their associated income?
If SISU win the judicial review and ACLs funding structure needs to change there is the chance that they might not be able to secure long-term capital which could (and I stress COULD) put ACL into severe problems and lead to administration down the line. Their original bank wanted out of their funding.
I think it's a long shot for SISU - and building a temporary stadium might add a few years to their timescales.
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?