Here we go the Council apologists....
everyone knows council have a alot of blame to shoulder...well those with brain cells do.[/QUOTEAs you obviously have brain cells who exactly are the council ?
From a SISU apologist....
They played a role in providing a venue for the football club they couldn't afford to complete themselves. Yes, the rent thereafter was too high; but in the entire term of SISU's tenure it amounted to £6m.
If the totality of our debt was only £6m; I don't think we'd be in the position we're in now
Here we go the Council apologists....
oh i should add that while your boss is saying he cant pay he's already talking to other people about your job that will cost him more than if he pays you.
They played a role yes - and for that (and it was a very small financial commitment in the scheme of things) they assumed total ownership of the freehold of the stadium and a half stake in the management company. They got an awful lot for not very much (about £2 million), and having done so then proceeded to charge the football club £1.2 million a year for partial use of the facility around 25 times a year. But not only that, on those few occasions that the club used the facility, they had to give up a significant proportion of the revenues they generated from their own activities. It was an awful deal, and you have to point the finger at the likes of Robinson and McGinnity for signing up to it, and at SISU for not addressing the issue very early on in their tenure.
I blame SISU for the mess we are in, but you do wonder how different things would be had we all rallied behind the club when the rent dispute first started.
They played a role yes - and for that (and it was a very small financial commitment in the scheme of things) they assumed total ownership of the freehold of the stadium and a half stake in the management company. They got an awful lot for not very much (about £2 million), and having done so then proceeded to charge the football club £1.2 million a year for partial use of the facility around 25 times a year. But not only that, on those few occasions that the club used the facility, they had to give up a significant proportion of the revenues they generated from their own activities. It was an awful deal, and you have to point the finger at the likes of Robinson and McGinnity for signing up to it, and at SISU for not addressing the issue very early on in their tenure.
I blame SISU for the mess we are in, but you do wonder how different things would be had we all rallied behind the club when the rent dispute first started.
Let's be clear, CCC don't charge 'the club' £1.2m per annum. It's ACL. Related, but different.
I certainly and absolutely agree with your latter sentence. If SISU's ultimate ambition wasn't to distress ACL into submission; but to pay a fair rent, or pay a fair value for the arena and unify all income streams; I'd be right behind them. That ambition, clearly stated and articulated the fans would have everyone marching on the council buildings.
But it's not. It's clearly just not
I can only speak for myself, but the reason that I didn't "rally behind the club when the rent dispute first started" was because of the appalling way SISU handled the "negotiations".
I think that's perfectly fair. I'm not denying that for one minute, and that is the frustrating thing. They had a very good case, and had they gone about things in a reasonable and non-confrontational manner, they might have kept everyone onside.
Their instinct though is to bully and threaten, and they are clearly the architects of their own downfall in this case.
Why? He was the manager he wasnt a director or one of the board of the club or Sisu why would he know any more than me or you?Robins probably knew a lot more than any member on here (apart from PWKH)
I guess he was going on what he has been told by Fisher & never had access or knowledge of negotiations.
Timmy has been seen to be economical with the truth time after time.
Personally I want to see the truth exposed in court.. we'll only be expressing our opinions & feelings otherwise.
everyone knows council have a alot of blame to shoulder...well those with brain cells do.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the council have the club's best interests at heart
Most of them are City fans and several were season ticket holders - can you tell me if Joy and Fisher were regulars at the City for the last 30+ years?? They have desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club with the interests of the the Tax payers - may I remind you that even at our best we werent getting more than 20K attending - the council are trying to take account of the other 300K+ residents too.
But seeing as little or no taxpayers money ever went in to the stadium, why should that be of concern? Of course they need to keep it viable because they need to be sure that ACL can continue to meet their obligations in terms of repayments, but otherwise what responsibility do they have to council tax payers? The stadium was built for CCFC, and they were the driving force behind it right up until the last minute, having done much of the legwork and helped put in place much of the funding. It was just unfortuante that there was a funding shortfall at the end and the council secured a loan to bridge it - and for that the club lost complete control of a project they had taken from nothing to very nearly the point where the first spade entered the ground. It was a travesty really.
I can't really see much evidence of the council having 'desperately tried to balance the long term stability of the club'. That some key figures on the council support the club is undeniable, that SISU acted appallingly during negotiations is undeniable. That said, when all this is done and dusted, I very much hope there is some sort of internal investigation at CCC that asks if things could have been done differently because as far as I am concerned they have a lot of questions to answer.
Oh, and a minor point, we averaged over 20K in our first 2 seasons, suggesting we were regularly getting over 20K.
Thanks for pointing that out - my mistake.
I understand what you are saying but I had dealings with some of these people (to be clear I don't work for CCC - I live and work in London and have since 2000) and they seemed to be agonising about what to do. They were prepared to sanction the Higgs Trust half to be sold at cost to CCFC but they started to be very concerned about SISU and every dealing with them reconfirmed their fears (as well as lack of faith in discussing reduced rent, failure to submit accounts, transfer embargoes etc etc) - to the point that they didnt feel SISU had the best interests of CCFC at heart and were actually a dangerous and dodgy bunch of sharks only interested in the stadium. I see that as responsible and trying to balance the needs of CCFC and the wider population. I have it on authority that should someone more worthy get CCFC then a deal is there to be done to put the club on a sustainable footing - it just wont be with SISU (and I for one agree with them on that)!!
Thanks for pointing that out - my mistake.
I understand what you are saying but I had dealings with some of these people (to be clear I don't work for CCC - I live and work in London and have since 2000) and they seemed to be agonising about what to do. They were prepared to sanction the Higgs Trust half to be sold at cost to CCFC but they started to be very concerned about SISU and every dealing with them reconfirmed their fears (as well as lack of faith in discussing reduced rent, failure to submit accounts, transfer embargoes etc etc) - to the point that they didnt feel SISU had the best interests of CCFC at heart and were actually a dangerous and dodgy bunch of sharks only interested in the stadium. I see that as responsible and trying to balance the needs of CCFC and the wider population. I have it on authority that should someone more worthy get CCFC then a deal is there to be done to put the club on a sustainable footing - it just wont be with SISU (and I for one agree with them on that)!!
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?