Letters from Mark Robins (5 Viewers)

martcov

Well-Known Member
There are far too many Wasps apologists in Coventry at the moment, and a lot of them can be found on this thread.

Everyone knows SISU are cunts, no one argues that it wasn't largely their fault we've ended up in this mess. How on earth however people can argue stuff like 'you can't blame Wasps', 'the council did the right thing' and the rest of the shit you try to spiel. It's just clearly and attempt to justify what you know is an immoral trip to the Ricoh to watch 'premiership rugby'.

A lot of CCFC fans are now going to watch the rugby instead, but all that means, no matter how disillusioned you are with the football, is that you are a glory supporter. Something we were supposed to have grown up hating being a loyal, local football club. It makes me sick. Honestly, how can you jump into bed with them, the enemy? It's going against all the principles you should have growing up as a Coventry supporter.

Yes, SISU are pricks, but the introduction of Wasps taking advantage of a vulnerable situation, and the council supporting them throughout this just means that CCFC are collateral damage. The denial over that is astounding.

Wasps are in no means innocent in playing their part in the destruction of CCFC.

Wasps took advantage of a vulnerable situation- that is what businesses do. Cannot blame a business for acting in it's own interests. Except, of course, SISU because they took over a club with a loyal fan base and by acting in what they thought was in their interests, managed to screw the whole thing up. What businesses shouldn't do is put themselves in a vulnerable position. The fault in this case lies squarely by SISU.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It's proves that Hoffman who is very clued up in the financial sector believes the club can be ok on a rental deal that we do not have to have access to 24/7 income streams . Unless you are saying that is what he negotiated?

If he's so clued up he'd know full well the offer would be rejected out of hand by the clubs owners - so why offer it in the first place?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Wasps took advantage of a vulnerable situation- that is what businesses do. Cannot blame a business for acting in it's own interests. Except, of course, SISU because they took over a club with a loyal fan base and by acting in what they thought was in their interests, managed to screw the whole thing up. What businesses shouldn't do is put themselves in a vulnerable position. The fault in this case lies squarely by SISU.

They wouldn't have even looked at the place without the lease extension - something which will always raise the value.
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
They wouldn't have even looked at the place without the lease extension - something which will always raise the value.

Yes, they were in the driving seat and able to do that. SISU were in the driving seat when they were collecting people's shares at the takeover. Joy later wanted to play hardball with the bank to get the loan reduced. The time for SISU to play hard ball and get what Wasps got was at the beginning- before they signed the takeover contract. I am surprised they didn't.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Was the lease extension agreed before or after the sale of the Higgs share of the business?
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
If he's so clued up he'd know full well the offer would be rejected out of hand by the clubs owners - so why offer it in the first place?

My thought is that he is indirectly acknowledging it is worth 10 million by suggesting the add ons to bring it to that amount. If he had said 10 million cash, Joy would have said 20 - guess - and they may have gone for 15 ( something like that ). By starting low and hinting at a possible 10 he is suggesting that the haggling is about how much is cash up to the 10 million. Pure conjecture on my part, but I think his bid is reasoned and not just a figure.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
My thought is that he is indirectly acknowledging it is worth 10 million by suggesting the add ons to bring it to that amount. If he had said 10 million cash, Joy would have said 20 - guess - and they may have gone for 15 ( something like that ). By starting low and hinting at a possible 10 he is suggesting that the haggling is about how much is cash up to the 10 million. Pure conjecture on my part, but I think his bid is reasoned and not just a figure.

I don't think the consortium has anything like £10 million
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
I don't think the consortium has anything like £10 million

No, nor do I, but as you have said, if CCFC debt was bought out and preference shares were withdrawn/ counted as worthless through creation of a new holding company, then the company would have more assets than liabilities plus the brand. Someone would lend something against the - in this case - net assets. Additional security could be personal guarantees of the members of the consortium. But they would have to have some millions towards the purchase - and working capital which people seem to forget...
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
Wrong to distress ACL. Ok to distress the club. Wrong to move to Northampton. OK to move from Wycombe to Coventry. Doouble standards. Hypocrisy. Call it what you like. Our fans have it in abundance.

not the majority, they are just walking away. Again, this is the vocal minority
 

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
Wasps took advantage of a vulnerable situation- that is what businesses do. Cannot blame a business for acting in it's own interests. Except, of course, SISU because they took over a club with a loyal fan base and by acting in what they thought was in their interests, managed to screw the whole thing up. What businesses shouldn't do is put themselves in a vulnerable position. The fault in this case lies squarely by SISU.

So, SISU can't fuck a fan base over, but Wasps can?

If you're going to defend Wasps by saying 'they're just a business', then surely you can't blame SISU for acting in their business interests...

You should change your 'Refugees Welcome' banner to a 'Wasps Welcome' one instead!
 

Earlsdon-Loyal-Blue

Well-Known Member
There are far too many Wasps apologists in Coventry at the moment, and a lot of them can be found on this thread.

Everyone knows SISU are cunts, no one argues that it wasn't largely their fault we've ended up in this mess. How on earth however people can argue stuff like 'you can't blame Wasps', 'the council did the right thing' and the rest of the shit you try to spiel. It's just clearly and attempt to justify what you know is an immoral trip to the Ricoh to watch 'premiership rugby'.

A lot of CCFC fans are now going to watch the rugby instead, but all that means, no matter how disillusioned you are with the football, is that you are a glory supporter. Something we were supposed to have grown up hating being a loyal, local football club. It makes me sick. Honestly, how can you jump into bed with them, the enemy? It's going against all the principles you should have growing up as a Coventry supporter.

Yes, SISU are pricks, but the introduction of Wasps taking advantage of a vulnerable situation, and the council supporting them throughout this just means that CCFC are collateral damage. The denial over that is astounding.

Wasps are in no means innocent in playing their part in the destruction of CCFC.

This thread is full of Wasps apologists....but I really think SISU have had their opportunities since coming in to buy the Ricoh but never put their money where their mouth is. That's not to say that Wasps aren't conniving, selfish, Tory pricks, who make it abundantly clear they don't have a lot of time for us.
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
So, SISU can't fuck a fan base over, but Wasps can?

If you're going to defend Wasps by saying 'they're just a business', then surely you can't blame SISU for acting in their business interests...

You should change your 'Refugees Welcome' banner to a 'Wasps Welcome' one instead!

If SISU had acted properly in their own interests- making CCFC a valuable asset to sell on at a profit, I wouldn't be complaining. They have acted like tossers from day one in a way that they thought was in their own interests, but they ended up with a disaster through their own incompetence. If CCFC were now in the Ricoh with SISU as owners and playing in the premiere league, (as Wasps are in Rugby ), would you need to call me a SISU apologist? No, because that is what businesses are supposed to do - create value. Just because ours hasn't done that, doesn't make me an apologist for those who have added value. It is just a fact that Wasps are in the position we should have been in - SISU's fault not Wasps.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Longer lease means it wouldn't have been able to get distressed. The value of ACL would have also been 40+m wouldn't it?

Extending the lease would still mean it would be distressed eventually, if it didn't have its anchor tennant. It would need to find a new tennant. Plus the charity were always saying they wanted out.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
It was a question, does anyone not think SISU will say that to the FL to justify any action they take? When will people wake up, it's not supporting SISU, it's working out ways to not give them excuses. Wasps have agreed for Hoffman to have a team there, but refuse to negotiate with the team he wants to play there. It's a green light for SISU and the FL.

Oh, and I assume based on your logic, he has also spoken to just sports and the people that do the programmes? Ticketmaster?

Bit in bold. Haha. Thought SISU were OK at the start didn't he? Why if he is such a top boy didn't he know what they were all about?

Yes he did there was a plan in place which he agreed with which they deviated away from and then he left.
 

Nick

Administrator
Extending the lease would still mean it would be distressed eventually, if it didn't have its anchor tennant. It would need to find a new tennant. Plus the charity were always saying they wanted out.

Extending the lease would have taken off a lot of pressure wouldn't it?
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
There are far too many Wasps apologists in Coventry at the moment, and a lot of them can be found on this thread.

Everyone knows SISU are cunts, no one argues that it wasn't largely their fault we've ended up in this mess. How on earth however people can argue stuff like 'you can't blame Wasps', 'the council did the right thing' and the rest of the shit you try to spiel. It's just clearly and attempt to justify what you know is an immoral trip to the Ricoh to watch 'premiership rugby'.

Never been to a Wasps game in my life and have no intention to. I think franchising is wrong and despite the fact it doesn't seem to be such a no no in Rugby as it is in football Indont understand why the RFC have not banned it

A lot of CCFC fans are now going to watch the rugby instead, but all that means, no matter how disillusioned you are with the football, is that you are a glory supporter. Something we were supposed to have grown up hating being a loyal, local football club. It makes me sick. Honestly, how can you jump into bed with them, the enemy? It's going against all the principles you should have growing up as a Coventry supporter.

A lot of Cov fans are going to watch CRFC instead and a most are doing neither. What does that make them?

Yes, SISU are pricks, but the introduction of Wasps taking advantage of a vulnerable situation, and the council supporting them throughout this just means that CCFC are collateral damage. The denial over that is astounding.

Wasps are in no means innocent in playing their part in the destruction of CCFC.

As you said back at the start of your post SISU are the primary cause of this stituation. Non of this was possible if they negotiated in a different manner. Yes Wasps have taken full advantage and no, moving clubs should not be allowed. It is bizzare that their governing body allows it.
The Council had two choices let ACL go bust or sell up. They choose the second one. My sky blue tinted glasses does not mean I am not capable of understanding why they did that.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
It would not have solved the issue of getting Higgs some money. Allowing Higgs to leave.
It would not have solved the problem of finding a replacement anchor tennant which many on here were keen to point out was not possible.
Also ACL would continue to be distressed.
It also may have made finding an alternative impossible.
Don't forget we were building our own stadium at the time and were not negotiating or coming back under any circumstances.
 

ajsccfc

Well-Known Member
I still haven't got this letter asking me to renew my season ticket. An email from them advertising UB40 though, straight in the inbox.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It would not have solved the issue of getting Higgs some money. Allowing Higgs to leave.
It would not have solved the problem of finding a replacement anchor tennant which many on here were keen to point out was not possible.
Also ACL would continue to be distressed.
It also may have made finding an alternative impossible.
Don't forget we were building our own stadium at the time and were not negotiating or coming back under any circumstances.

When Higgs sold their share there was an anchor tenant wasn't there?
 

Nick

Administrator
It would not have solved the issue of getting Higgs some money. Allowing Higgs to leave.
It would not have solved the problem of finding a replacement anchor tennant which many on here were keen to point out was not possible.
Also ACL would continue to be distressed.
It also may have made finding an alternative impossible.
Don't forget we were building our own stadium at the time and were not negotiating or coming back under any circumstances.

No, a longer lease to ACL would mean it would relieve a bit of pressure. That would then mean they weren't reliant on the anchor tenant to pay all of their bills with huge rent, which means it's more attractive to an anchor tenant.

If they had also given it a longer lease pre-sale it means it would be worth a lot more as an asset for Higgs.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It's under nonsense to suggest that ACL would not have been better with a long lease from the outset. It would have increased valuation, length of borrowing terms and one would assume a sensible payment and revenue deal for the club.

To blame sisu for the charities failings is just absurd - if the club had gone into administration at the time the lease would have had to have been renegotiated and another buyer could easily have forced ACL under - that's what would have happened if Richardson and wasps were around in 2007
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
It's under nonsense to suggest that ACL would not have been better with a long lease from the outset. It would have increased valuation, length of borrowing terms and one would assume a sensible payment and revenue deal for the club.

To blame sisu for the charities failings is just absurd - if the club had gone into administration at the time the lease would have had to have been renegotiated and another buyer could easily have forced ACL under - that's what would have happened if Richardson and wasps were around in 2007

Yes, but in all these points it was the parties that signed and agreed to the short lease and high rents that caused the problems, including SISU not questioning these things before taking on all liabilities. It shows amazing naivety by all parties.
 

Nick

Administrator
Yes, but in all these points it was the parties that signed and agreed to the short lease and high rents that caused the problems, including SISU not questioning these things before taking on all liabilities. It shows amazing naivety by all parties.

It also shows a valid way to resolve the issues easily?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Yes, but in all these points it was the parties that signed and agreed to the short lease and high rents that caused the problems, including SISU not questioning these things before taking on all liabilities. It shows amazing naivety by all parties.

The council wanted ACL on a short lease. The club had to sign to whatever it was offered as to an extent did Higgs.
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
The council wanted ACL on a short lease. The club had to sign to whatever it was offered as to an extent did Higgs.

Yes, the circumstances being CCFC had fucked up completely and the council had got too involved... a mess then as now...
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Now this is all very confusing.

Grendel used to say ACL will find no other anchor tenant. They have to sell to SISU there is no other option, it is a white elephant. He also used to say that SISU should continue to distress ACL as much as possible.
Never back in those days did Grendel suggest ACL extend their lease.

The judge says SISU were distressing ACL so they were in no hurry to do any deal.

ACL were heading towards going under.

ACL did the impossible and found an alternative buyer.

Yet we are now saying that if ACL extended the lease. The value of the business would have gone up.

Yet they would have still had no anchor tenant, they would have still been trouble but just at a slower pace. They would then have been a. less attractive proposition to the impossible (an alternative buyer).

Sorry folks all that would have done would have frightened off Wasps and delay the inevitable of SISU picking ACL from admin or buying it for next to nothing.

I know as a Cov fan there is a chance that may have worked out better for us depending on what SISU did. However you would have to be looking at it massively through skyblues glasses to not understand why the Council did what they did.
 

Adge

Well-Known Member
I still haven't got this letter asking me to renew my season ticket. An email from them advertising UB40 though, straight in the inbox.
Well at least it wasn't in the dirt box!:facepalm:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top