shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I mean technically Wasps don’t own the Ricoh either. Getting hung up on tenure is less important than the details of any lease is my point.
I think a lot of the time stadiums are held in separate holding companies, I don't think that would be unusual. Wasps certainly do it. The point is more the revenue it brings in. We aren't the only sports club to think it's important, Wasps bought the Ricoh for the same reason.
I think a lot of the time stadiums are held in separate holding companies, I don't think that would be unusual. Wasps certainly do it. The point is more the revenue it brings in. We aren't the only sports club to think it's important, Wasps bought the Ricoh for the same reason.
Don't think anyone should be in any doubt about that.I mean yeah. But equally don’t be under any impression we’ll get told anything other than what suits each sides agenda. None of the groups have to talk to anyone and will only choose to do so if they think it helps them further their aims. There’s a little naivety about that from some on here sometimes.
Don't think anyone should be in any doubt about that.
Use of PR companies at times highlights a cynical approach from various parties. Use of NDAs/ commercial confidentiality etc. (going all the way back to the original SISU purchase of the club) means all parties can continue to throw inane jibes at each other hoping some of it registers with the fanbase. Even a book on the subject has many gaps due to these clauses.
Too many egos involved and it has allowed the situation to get way too personal.
"he said, she said" mentality is almost playground stuff.
When a new stadium was first mooted years back (alongside pretty diagrams) Fisher was quite clear it would be a Propco.I think a lot of the time stadiums are held in separate holding companies, I don't think that would be unusual. Wasps certainly do it. The point is more the revenue it brings in. We aren't the only sports club to think it's important, Wasps bought the Ricoh for the same reason.
I think pressing Wasps on the indemnity issue is the right thing. Council should be footing that bill. In the interest of balance, can we press SISU on the new stadium?
It doesn't (or shouldn't) take six years to identify a site and tell us about it. Transparency from them seems a fair ask, especially if they want to convince folks that it's not just bullsh*t brinksmanship.
I think a lot of the time stadiums are held in separate holding companies, I don't think that would be unusual. Wasps certainly do it. The point is more the revenue it brings in. We aren't the only sports club to think it's important, Wasps bought the Ricoh for the same reason.
The business language is OpCo - PropCo
You keep the major assets in a less risky company (PropCo) and the day to day trading in OpCo
Standard practice these days
Pete and Mark - what are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get anywhere pushing the club to be more open re: new sites?
Yep. You should see the company diagrams from some property companies. I’ve seen one with a separate company for each property in their portfolio. “12 Acacia Avenue Ltd” “13 Acacia Avenue Ltd” for a couple of hundred properties.
I mean yeah. But equally don’t be under any impression we’ll get told anything other than what suits each sides agenda. None of the groups have to talk to anyone and will only choose to do so if they think it helps them further their aims. There’s a little naivety about that from some on here sometimes.
No, I don't think so. Completely unwilling to discuss location other than that they were within the radius defined by the EFL. Cited commercial confidentiality, worried that prices would be pushed up if they knew what land would be used for. I know this is always a concern for big developments. Companies like Disney have always hide that its them buying when they purchase land for the same reason, suspect similar is happening here where seller doesn't know its CCFC looking at land.
appropriate you should mention Disney in a post about sisu building a stadium!
No different from Highfield Road where itk companies bought up certain sites around the ground before the sale was announced.(supposedly to keep prices down)No, I don't think so. Completely unwilling to discuss location other than that they were within the radius defined by the EFL. Cited commercial confidentiality, worried that prices would be pushed up if they knew what land would be used for. I know this is always a concern for big developments. Companies like Disney have always hide that its them buying when they purchase land for the same reason, suspect similar is happening here where seller doesn't know its CCFC looking at land.
Pete and Mark - what are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get anywhere pushing the club to be more open re: new sites?
IMO it is imperative that the Club give the fans a little bit more information in relation to a new stadium.
For me and I’m sure many others, the talk of a new stadium cannot be taken seriously unless the Club has taken steps to progress these plans.
> Is there designs for a new stadium, based on the clubs vision of the new stadium?
> Has an offer been submitted for the land that has been identified as preferred?
> What is the Clubs timescale for proceeding with their preferred site option, can the timescale be shared and what is the alternative should the timescale not be met?
> How is the new stadium being funded?
While I wish to believe that Joy and Dave are being honest with Mark and Pete the fans demand more information than what is currently available.
Telling fans that the Club plans to stay at the Ricoh with an expectation to move into a new stadium afterwards doesn’t wash, a new stadium has been talked about for years and to this point, not delivered.
Communication lines are still open though via email. We'll get there eventually, just not as easy as we found the CCFC side. I can appreciate some reticence as we are CCFC fans and not Wasps fans. We need to see actions from all parties. Will be reaching out to CCFC side periodically to see if any signs of progress.
Let's get back to the Ricoh first on a fair deal and then demand things about a new stadium.... as others have said previously, not exactly great negotiation tatics to have a new stadium plan out in the open before you even have agreed the short term
Sisu are racists?
No potentially not, but the Club have outlined their ideas on what deal they would require from Wasps and the reasons behind the length of the tenancy.
What SISU and CCFC need to do is show that the talk of a new stadium is serious, because reality is other than a new stadium being mentioned publicly there isn’t anything to evidence that a new stadium is either a possibility or feasible.
Land can be identified, but what has the Club done to progress on this? More needs to be outlined to the fans, not so much Wasps, to highlight what is being done. Some people still believe that SISU dragging their heels is a distress tactic and while I don’t believe that personally, coming out with “We’ve done X, Y and Z. We’ve got 1, 2 and 3” shows their serious.
Boddy hides subtle sexual imagery on the cover of each program.
Got to say, I dont follow the “keep the stadium secret cos negotiations” line. Surely having other options is to your advantage in a negotiation rather than looking like it’s this or bust?
Not really, if they want the stadium within Coventry.
But why keep alluding to it without a bit more detail?
Either shut the fuck up or after all this time put a bit more meat on the bones.
It's a diversionary tactic as far as im concerned and one that suits wasps as much as it does them.
Oh I agree, I just meant it isn't really a bargaining tool if they say they are building a stadium in Coventry because that then involves CCC.
No it sisus fault and they need to sort it. I think a memorandum of understanding is a great thing to expect of duggjns and coA deal for the Ricoh is the only Coventry-in-Coventry option for the foreseeable future...unfortunately.
The question I’d like answering regarding long term is; Are the Council doing anyfuckingthing to assist with prospective sites for a new stadium?
I mean they’re already saying it and the council would have to be involved early as you say, but that kinda reenforces my point about it being unlikely to be being kept secret for negotiations.
Yep but they said it last time and Duggins denied it then confirmed it by mistake.
The issue there is that CCC have control over that.
Yep but they said it last time and Duggins denied it then confirmed it by mistake.
The issue there is that CCC have control over that.
No it sisus fault and they need to sort it. I think a memorandum of understanding is a great thing to expect of duggjns and co
Hope so mark has emailed him pretty much the same thing although his pa hasn’t arranged a date yetJust for shits and giggles can you ask him from me “Considering how schemes such as Friargate and CCS keep hitting the rocks and with Ikea leaving and high streets and city centres needing to find new non retail attractions, and the council has long been looking for a central mid sized music location, wouldn’t a city centre stadium actually be the best solution for central regeneration?”
Sorry you’ve lost me. Over what?
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?