Mean while back in court (1 Viewer)

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

Grendel said:
Do you think Eastwood would have accepted conditions relating to their funding strategy to purchase the arena.

It's a dumb idea.

As I said before calling someone you don't know a c##t on a football forum for having an opinion different to your don't is a bit sad and chavy.
(The post you are trying to defend.)

Also it's s good idea SISU get ACL over time. Council get trust and confidence in them as they are running the football club professionally. SISU get trust and confidence in the council as each period of time they are getting ownership of ACL.

I would say the way it has good is not the greatest idea. The proof is in the pudding.

skybluetony176 · Feb 10, 2016

Captain Dart said:
Wierd isn't it that SISU can't/won't to buy ACL but yet can afford millions on litigation. I'm with OSB on this, it is questionable just what the end game is? On the face of it that could have made an offer as good as Wasps several years ago and paid out little more than they will end up paying by the way they are doing things right now. Do they really believe they will get £M's relief, it is a huge gamble if that is their strategy.

You certainly have to question their logic. When you consider the cost of the counter case against Higgs forcing it to crown court with the size of the counter claim and then turning up with five QC's IIRC, the cost of the JR itself remembering it's been a long road for them, it was initially turned down, they appealed, it went to court, they lost with no right to appeal, they appealed the right to appeal and lost, then appealed again to a panel and won, then the two day appeal itself and whatever happens next. What it cost them to put Ltd in administration and then buy it back as Otium. Not to mention the losses that they had to cover from the self imposed exile to Northampton. Also didn't the FA make them write off a load of historical debt to OK the transfer of the golden share.

Someone tell me how it wouldn't have been easier, cheaper and less risky to have just brought the Higgs share even at the formula price?

Also if they had the Higgs share they'd have been in a stronger position to take control of the debt and also protect the Ricoh from takeover by a third party.

I made the point earlier that they always seem to be successful when they do what they do from within not from the sidelines as they have in the case of the Ricoh.

It's almost as if there's something else going on.

stupot07 · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
As I said before calling someone you don't know a c##t on a football forum for having an opinion different to your don't is a bit sad and chavy.
(The post you are trying to defend.)

Also it's s good idea SISU get ACL over time. Council get trust and confidence in them as they are running the football club professionally. SISU get trust and confidence in the council as each period of time they are getting ownership of ACL.

I would say the way it has good is not the greatest idea. The proof is in the pudding.

Makes no sense.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

stupot07 said:
Makes no sense.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Yes heaven forebid who would have wanted a gradual sale of ACL to CCFC as CCFC is ran soundly
Crazy idea.
The alternative has worked so well

stupot07 · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Yes heaven forebid who would have wanted a gradual sale of ACL to CCFC as CCFC is ran soundly
Crazy idea.
The alternative has worked so well

Sorry Don, I can't see how it would have worked.

Running ccfc soundly does not give you anything but a decent league one club. That's not what you mean though, you mean funding a competitive team in the championship, we lost £6-7m pa treading water, so that would mean significantly more investment. That would have escalated the debt and ccc would have been concerned we'd mortgage the ground (lol), and we'd end up getting in the same mess as we got in at HR.

That was one of the excuses the council always used, he mess we got ourselves in at HR as a reason we shouldn't get the Ricoh. So by running the club "well" and being competitive in the championship wouldn't have had the desired affect you believe it would.

And that's before you factor in what would happen to all of the finance, losses, rent, buying a share, revenues, etc.

And also the fact back then the council did not want to entertain selling their share.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Nick · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Yes heaven forebid who would have wanted a gradual sale of ACL to CCFC as CCFC is ran soundly
Crazy idea.
The alternative has worked so well

The sale of all of it to a London team with no history here or trust built up?

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

stupot07 said:
Sorry Don, I can't see how it would have worked.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I am sure they could have sorted out a incremental deal between them.

25% of ACL sold each year over 4 years. First year rent dropped to 400k and access to revenues. Rent will then drop £100k a year. Revenue access will naturally increase.
As long as over these 4 years both sides are happy with the following areas.

Competitive championship team.
(You cannot say promotion but relegation due to a lack of decent running would be a clear issue)

Community Projects and fan engagement

Running of ACL as the transfer of ownership happens.

Investment in the academy.

If any of these areas are disputed then an independent panel of three look at the facts and their decision is indisputable.

Halfway through the year if the council/higgs have an area that is concerning them so much they may veto the sale. Then they must bring it up at the earliest possibility allowing SISU time to address it.

Price set by independent value.

There will be flaws in that it's just off the top of my head. But it's a model that could be tinkered and adapted

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

Nick said:
The sale of all of it to a London team with no history here or trust built up?

No it didn't I would have done the same model. I would have been suspicious Richardson saw the Ricoh at a bargain price. Move Wasps in instantly increase the value sell it on.

Nick · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
I am sure they could have sorted out a incremental deal between them.

25% of ACL sold each year over 4 years. First year rent dropped to 400k and access to revenues. Rent will then drop £100k a year. Revenue access will naturally increase.
As long as over these 4 years both sides are happy with the following areas.

Competitive championship team.
(You cannot say promotion but relegation due to a lack of decent running would be a clear issue)

Community Projects and fan engagement

Running of ACL as the transfer of ownership happens.

Investment in the academy.

If any of these areas are disputed then an independent panel of three look at the facts and their decision is indisputable.

Halfway through the year if the council/higgs have an area that is concerning them so much they may veto the sale. Then they must bring it up at the earliest possibility allowing SISU time to address it.

Price set by independent value.

There will be flaws in that it's just off the top of my head. But it's a model that could be tinkered and adapted

So effectively just giving way too much control of the club over to the council? Not only do they have the power by owning the ground but they can dictate everything the club does?

fernandopartridge · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
As I said before calling someone you don't know a c##t on a football forum for having an opinion different to your don't is a bit sad and chavy.
(The post you are trying to defend.)

Also it's s good idea SISU get ACL over time. Council get trust and confidence in them as they are running the football club professionally. SISU get trust and confidence in the council as each period of time they are getting ownership of ACL.

I would say the way it has good is not the greatest idea. The proof is in the pudding.

You talk absolute drivel.

stupot07 · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
I am sure they could have sorted out a incremental deal between them.

25% of ACL sold each year over 4 years. First year rent dropped to 400k and access to revenues. Rent will then drop £100k a year. Revenue access will naturally increase.
As long as over these 4 years both sides are happy with the following areas.

Competitive championship team.
(You cannot say promotion but relegation due to a lack of decent running would be a clear issue)

Community Projects and fan engagement

Running of ACL as the transfer of ownership happens.

Investment in the academy.

If any of these areas are disputed then an independent panel of three look at the facts and their decision is indisputable.

Halfway through the year if the council/higgs have an area that is concerning them so much they may veto the sale. Then they must bring it up at the earliest possibility allowing SISU time to address it.

Price set by independent value.

There will be flaws in that it's just off the top of my head. But it's a model that could be tinkered and adapted

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

Nick said:
So effectively just giving way too much control of the club over to the council? Not only do they have the power by owning the ground but they can dictate everything the club does?

After 4 years of non mismanagement Club get total control of everything.
Independent panel would also ensure the council don't take the michael.

SISU admitted prior to recently the club hadn't been ran correctly so a model like this may have prevented that.

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

fernandopartridge said:
You talk absolute drivel.

You have a potty mouth but at least you didn't use it this time

Grendel · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
After 4 years of non mismanagement Club get total control of everything.
Independent panel would also ensure the council don't take the michael.

SISU admitted prior to recently the club hadn't been ran correctly so a model like this may have prevented that.

If you really believe what you are actually proposing would ever be possible you need help.

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

Grendel said:
If you really believe what you are actually proposing would ever be possible you need help.

7 years ago if I told you we would be in the situation we are now.....

3rd division
Wasps Rugby club owning ACL
A law suit that may go to European courts involving the Government, State Aid, the council and SISU.
Joe Cole playing in the third division for Cov for the love of the game as he has too much money.
Les Reid evicted from the CET surrounded by
Conspiracy campaigns about the CET and the Council.
Chairmen sitting on the bench and others suggesting text a sub.

I think you would have also told I need help. I think my proposal back then would have been more likely and less absurd compared to what has actually happened .

Grendel · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
7 years ago if I told you we would be in the situation we are now.....

3rd division
Wasps Rugby club owning ACL
A law suit that may go to European courts involving the Government, State Aid, the council and SISU.
Joe Cole playing in the third division for Cov for the love of the game as he has too much money.
Les Reid evicted from the CET surrounded by
Conspiracy campaigns about the CET and the Council.
Chairmen sitting on the bench and others suggesting text a sub.

I think you would have also told I need help. I think my proposal back then would have been more likely and less absurd compared to what has actually happened .

What you can't seem to get through your thick head is the salient point made by FP

Namely the club was overspending on its budget. So either your suggestion was wholesale reductions in wage revenue or that Mutton and Lucas pick the players.

It's mind boggingly stupid and mostly because if we'd paid the price the council wanted they wouldn't have given a fuck if we'd gone bust the next day.

They care less about this club than sisu.

Get your head out of the councils arse

dongonzalos · Feb 10, 2016

Grendel said:
What you can't seem to get through your thick head is the salient point made by FP

Namely the club was overspending on its budget. So either your suggestion was wholesale reductions in wage revenue or that Mutton and Lucas pick the players.

It's mind boggingly stupid and mostly because if we'd paid the price the council wanted they wouldn't have given a fuck if we'd gone bust the next day.

They care less about this club than sisu.

Get your head out of the councils arse

Ignoring the points made again!!
So so you can have your anti council rant

Price by independent valuer
Rent straight away £400k going down every year. Acces to revenues going up.
You can tun a competitive championship side without going tens of millions into debt.
A competitive fans friendly ran club would have had bigger crowds.

Nick · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
You can tun a competitive championship side without going tens of millions into debt.

What would the plan for that be?

I can picture it now.

The council say we can't own it until we are a competitive side, while the rent is silly, we get no revenues.

In other words, money has to be pumped in or lots of player sales. We sell players to make money like other teams, the council decide there is no ambition and don't let us buy in.

Awful idea, I don't want the council anywhere near the club. A perfect scenario would be new owners, new stadium with nobody being able to interfere / no landlords to adhere to etc.

chiefdave · Feb 10, 2016

Nick said:
The council say we can't own it until we are a competitive side, while the rent is silly, we get no revenues.

Didn't they pretty much say that. Sure there was some comment about the club needing to sort out running at a loss before they worried about the stadium. Of course Orange Ken then cut the budget so we weren't running at a loss and we promptly got relegated!

Moff · Feb 10, 2016

fernandopartridge said:
You talk absolute drivel.

Careful or Dongo will call you a chav.

Dongo cant quite see the irony of lamenting the position we are in now, which started due to massive financial orverspending in the PL, and yet criticising you for succinctly pointing this fact out to another poster.

Sky Blue Kid · Feb 10, 2016

Moff said:
Careful or Dongo will call you a chav.

Dongo cant quite see the irony of lamenting the position we are in now, which started due to massive financial orverspending in the PL, and yet criticising you for succinctly pointing this fact out to another poster.

Do you mean succinctly calling him a c**t?

Moff · Feb 10, 2016

Sky Blue Kid said:
Do you mean succinctly calling him a c**t?

That bit was a joke. I appreciate it wasnt in anyway succinct

fernandopartridge · Feb 10, 2016

Sky Blue Kid said:
Do you mean succinctly calling him a c**t?

You're agreeing with the assertion and that it was succinct. Good lad.

Sky Blue Kid · Feb 10, 2016

fernandopartridge said:
You're agreeing with the assertion and that it was succinct. Good lad.

Read it again, I was also joking.:facepalm:

Sick Boy · Feb 10, 2016

dongonzalos said:
7 years ago if I told you we would be in the situation we are now.....

3rd division
Wasps Rugby club owning ACL
A law suit that may go to European courts involving the Government, State Aid, the council and SISU.
Joe Cole playing in the third division for Cov for the love of the game as he has too much money.
Les Reid evicted from the CET surrounded by
Conspiracy campaigns about the CET and the Council.
Chairmen sitting on the bench and others suggesting text a sub.

I think you would have also told I need help. I think my proposal back then would have been more likely and less absurd compared to what has actually happened .

I'm not sure why being in the 3rd division would be such a shock, we were fighting relegation from the Championship well before SISU came in. Looking back the best thing that could have happened to us was being relegated that awful day at the Valley; you'd like to think that the money would have been invested a lot more shrewdly and wisely by Ranson & Coleman and we would have bounced back a lot stronger.

dongonzalos · Feb 11, 2016

Moff said:
Careful or Dongo will call you a chav.

Dongo cant quite see the irony of lamenting the position we are in now, which started due to massive financial orverspending in the PL, and yet criticising you for succinctly pointing this fact out to another poster.

Nah saying you think what someone says is drivel on a footy forum is fine.
Calling them a C**T for having a different opinion to you is the chavy bit for me.

dongonzalos · Feb 11, 2016

Nick said:
What would the plan for that be?

I can picture it now.

The council say we can't own it until we are a competitive side, while the rent is silly, we get no revenues.

In other words, money has to be pumped in or lots of player sales. We sell players to make money like other teams, the council decide there is no ambition and don't let us buy in.

Awful idea, I don't want the council anywhere near the club. A perfect scenario would be new owners, new stadium with nobody being able to interfere / no landlords to adhere to etc.

your hatred of the council means you struggle to analyse the idea.

An independent panel would decide if the Council/Higgs believe that certain key criteria was not adhered to was valid it not.
That panels decision is undisputable.

Nick · Feb 11, 2016

dongonzalos said:
your hatred of the council means you struggle to analyse the idea.

An independent panel would decide if the Council/Higgs believe that certain key criteria was not adhered to was valid it not.
That panels decision is undisputable.

I don't think it is stupid because it is hatred of the council, I think it is stupid because it is pretty much stupid whether it was the council or a private landlord.

dongonzalos · Feb 11, 2016

Nick said:
I don't think it is stupid because it is hatred of the council, I think it is stupid because it is pretty much stupid whether it was the council or a private landlord.

Well that's that then. If you just say it's a stupid idea it must be.

SkyBlueZack · Feb 11, 2016

It's the height of stupidity. Ironic you say hatred of the council. Your idea is born out of hating sisu. Ask yourself this. The city centre is full of shops owned and leased out by the council. Do they tell the shops how to run their business? Should they tell the shops how to run their business? Another thing worth considering. If the council are business experts, why didn't the ricoh make a profit without the football club? You don't trust sisu. I get that and most do and agree. Doesn't give the local council right to tell a private company how to run their operations.

Sick Boy · Feb 11, 2016

SkyBlueZack said:
It's the height of stupidity. Ironic you say hatred of the council. Your idea is born out of hating sisu. Ask yourself this. The city centre is full of shops owned and leased out by the council. Do they tell the shops how to run their business? Should they tell the shops how to run their business? Another thing worth considering. If the council are business experts, why didn't the ricoh make a profit without the football club? You don't trust sisu. I get that and most do and agree. Doesn't give the local council right to tell a private company how to run their operations.

You are wasting your time with the mouth frothers pal

Nick · Feb 11, 2016

SkyBlueZack said:
It's the height of stupidity. Ironic you say hatred of the council. Your idea is born out of hating sisu. Ask yourself this. The city centre is full of shops owned and leased out by the council. Do they tell the shops how to run their business? Should they tell the shops how to run their business? Another thing worth considering. If the council are business experts, why didn't the ricoh make a profit without the football club? You don't trust sisu. I get that and most do and agree. Doesn't give the local council right to tell a private company how to run their operations.

I am just waiting for the council to start putting the rates up for Starbucks because they don't pay tax or Primark because they use child labour.

Sky Blue Kid · Feb 11, 2016

SkyBlueZack said:
It's the height of stupidity. Ironic you say hatred of the council. Your idea is born out of hating sisu. Ask yourself this. The city centre is full of shops owned and leased out by the council. Do they tell the shops how to run their business? Should they tell the shops how to run their business? Another thing worth considering. If the council are business experts, why didn't the ricoh make a profit without the football club? You don't trust sisu. I get that and most do and agree. Doesn't give the local council right to tell a private company how to run their operations.

Agree in as much as one business shouldn't tell another how to run it. However, how many councillors are football, and in particular Coventry City fans on the CCC? The Ricoh was built specifically to be the home of CCFC, but the owners(SISU) cba to buy the share, deciding to gamble on getting into the premiership straight away. Then came the selling of our best players and the inevitable decline down the league into the 1st division. Meanwhile the owners try every trick in the book to what is tantamount to practically stealing something they hadn't paid for. Remember, SISU took on CCFC knowing the price of the rent. It then took some 3-4 years before the rent strike and deliberate action of trying to force another business, out of business. The CCC in later years are complicit in this matter, there's no denying that, but imho SISU have a lot to answer for.

dongonzalos · Feb 11, 2016

SkyBlueZack said:
It's the height of stupidity. Ironic you say hatred of the council. Your idea is born out of hating sisu. Ask yourself this. The city centre is full of shops owned and leased out by the council. Do they tell the shops how to run their business? Should they tell the shops how to run their business? Another thing worth considering. If the council are business experts, why didn't the ricoh make a profit without the football club? You don't trust sisu. I get that and most do and agree. Doesn't give the local council right to tell a private company how to run their operations.

It shouldn't be an issue for the club
The deal would be agreed by club and council. So the aims would be ones the club believe they could achieve.

(Removes the council hating responses to this post)

As long as

Competitive championship team
Investment in academy
Fan engagement community work

Why would a football club not feel they can do that and why would they not want to do that.

If there is an issue whether this was achieved or not a three person independent panel make a decision. Either way.

The negative responses are all born out of an entrenched hatred by some to anything council.

At that time the council half owned the product the club wanted to buy.
The two could not negotiate or it seems trust each other.
This would have forced the council to honour any sale. It would have also forced the owners to run the club responsibly
Win win.

When people start talking about child slavery and star bucks taxes as the reasons why this wouldn't work. You know you have a valid point.

dongonzalos · Feb 11, 2016

Also this insane idea that could never happen.
I take it most of you realise it already happened.
However it was done without any safeguards so you have SISU saying we held up our end now council you hold ip yours.
There was no independent assessor in place to see did SISU uphold their side.
No contract signed agreeing what would happen if SISU did run the club responsibly.
So you just get JS saying we have done our bit. The council not replying.

Mean while back in court (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency