New KCIC, NOPM Slogan? (8 Viewers)

chiefdave · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
Well we know the council's was, as was the one byng sent by email which didn't reach but then he said they didn't...

We know the other was haskell who is a property developer and promised to make Elliot chairman and don't know about the others.

What im saying is that we don't know the other options do we? People are saying get sisu out but aren't saying to get who in and why they will be better.

That's fair enough if that's your view but I really struggle to believe that at this stage any other option than SISU could leave us worse off. Personally I don't believe the new stadium will be built and even if it is I don't believe we'll own it. As far as I'm concerned we're enduring a slow lingering death at the moment and to me any other option is better than that.

Does that mean we should blindly follow any potential new owner, of course not, we should question their motives and examine their business plan but how much worse does it need to get from your perspective until SISU are no longer the best option?

skybluetony176 · Sep 29, 2013

chiefdave said:
That's fair enough if that's your view but I really struggle to believe that at this stage any other option than SISU could leave us worse off. Personally I don't believe the new stadium will be built and even if it is I don't believe we'll own it. As far as I'm concerned we're enduring a slow lingering death at the moment and to me any other option is better than that.

Does that mean we should blindly follow any potential new owner, of course not, we should question their motives and examine their business plan but how much worse does it need to get from your perspective until SISU are no longer the best option?

what he said Nick

Oh and Nick seriously, watch the documentary on Swansea its awe inspiring of what could be achieved at our club if we could unite.

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

chiefdave said:
That's fair enough if that's your view but I really struggle to believe that at this stage any other option than SISU could leave us worse off. Personally I don't believe the new stadium will be built and even if it is I don't believe we'll own it. As far as I'm concerned we're enduring a slow lingering death at the moment and to me any other option is better than that.

Does that mean we should blindly follow any potential new owner, of course not, we should question their motives and examine their business plan but how much worse does it need to get from your perspective until SISU are no longer the best option?

It just needs to be until another option is shown that is better, what do we know about haskell? We know he has tried to buy other clubs and he is a property developer.

It is all well and good planning on how to get sisu out but how will it be done?

People keep saying about the other options but don't state what these other options are?

Sterling Archer · Sep 29, 2013

I know what'll get us our club back, more baseless acronyms!

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
what he said Nick

Oh and Nick seriously, watch the documentary on Swansea its awe inspiring of what could be achieved at our club if we could unite.

So you are saying get sisu out and fans in?

skybluetony176 · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
So you are saying get sisu out and fans in?

be nice wouldn't it. no share holders to answer too, no one would think its a good idea to move the club 34miles away. i would be happy with that. anything but a hedge fund, if the FL had balls they would ban them from football club ownership as not fit and proper.

i'd settle for an abramovic as well.

anything other than shitsu, nothing could be worse and no one could ever convince me otherwise.

blueflint · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
Well we know the council's was, as was the one byng sent by email which didn't reach but then he said they didn't...

We know the other was haskell who is a property developer and promised to make Elliot chairman and don't know about the others.

What im saying is that we don't know the other options do we? People are saying get sisu out but aren't saying to get who in and why they will be better.

nick as an administrator shouldn't you be impartial as your not coming across that way

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

blueflint said:
nick as an administrator shouldn't you be impartial as your not coming across that way

Erm, I can have an opinion? What in that post was partial?

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
be nice wouldn't it. no share holders to answer too, no one would think its a good idea to move the club 34miles away. i would be happy with that. anything but a hedge fund, if the FL had balls they would ban them from football club ownership as not fit and proper.

i'd settle for an abramovic as well.

anything other than shitsu, nothing could be worse and no one could ever convince me otherwise.

It is easy enough to say anybody but them but you still haven't listed realistic alternatives or how?

blueflint · Sep 29, 2013

yes but dont be so pedantic with it

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

blueflint said:
yes but dont be so pedantic with it

How was it pedantic? I'm pretty sure you would be ok if I was shouting sisu out etc?

skybluetony176 · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
How was it pedantic? I'm pretty sure you would be ok if I was shouting sisu out etc?

at least you would start talking sense

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
at least you would start talking sense

If you can tell me alternatives

DazzleTommyDazzle · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
If you can tell me alternatives

It is obviously true that if SISU were to leave we would need new ownership.

In my view it is probable that there would be a number of interested parties. I base this on what has happened at other clubs, plus the interest in the club during the administration process, despite the very specific nature of our administration that I believe would have put off a number of parties.

Does this mean that I have documentary evidence that I can use to prove this to your 100% satisfaction.? Sadly not.

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
It is obviously true that if SISU were to leave we would need new ownership.

In my view it is probable that there would be a number of interested parties. I base this on what has happened at other clubs, plus the interest in the club during the administration process, despite the very specific nature of our administration that I believe would have put off a number of parties.

Does this mean that I have documentary evidence that I can use to prove this to your 100% satisfaction.? Sadly not.

Yes but the last.big idea was to have administration so we would get new owners, look how that turned out.

I would love New owners who would be better for the club, I don't deny that but my only question is who and how would they get sisu out?

DazzleTommyDazzle · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
Yes but the last.big idea was to have administration so we would get new owners, look how that turned out.

I would love New owners who would be better for the club, I don't deny that but my only question is who and how would they get sisu out?

That's two questions

For who, I can only refer you to my earlier comment.

For how, we need SISU to be prepared to sell at a sensible price. In my view, that will only happen once/if they realise that their current strategy is more likely to cost them additional money, rather than building a more valuable asset.

There are no guarantees, no 100% certainties, but in my view if we really do stay in Northampton for five years there won't be much of CCFC left.

fliterccfc · Sep 29, 2013

The majopr problem with using the swansea / Pompey analogies, is that their fans groups had mass funding drives and raised the relevant money to buy the club. This has been suggested here, but those supposedly driving this just do not seem either willing or able of any kind of serious fundraising activities. They seem to be utterly reliant on whoever owns / takes over in effect giving them a significant portion of the club, which lets face it is a ludicrous position to be in.

If you seriously want to own a club, or any business, you should at least be able to fund it! After all how are you going to fund the clubs day to day running if you cannot even be bothered to raise funds to buy the club!

Expecting a significant portion of the club for nothing is utterly ridiculous and is doomed to failure

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

fliterccfc said:
The majopr problem with using the swansea / Pompey analogies, is that their fans groups had mass funding drives and raised the relevant money to buy the club. This has been suggested here, but those supposedly driving this just do not seem either willing or able of any kind of serious fundraising activities. They seem to be utterly reliant on whoever owns / takes over in effect giving them a significant portion of the club, which lets face it is a ludicrous position to be in.

If you seriously want to own a club, or any business, you should at least be able to fund it! After all how are you going to fund the clubs day to day running if you cannot even be bothered to raise funds to buy the club!

Expecting a significant portion of the club for nothing is utterly ridiculous and is doomed to failure

This is what I mean, I would be all for fans ownership and probably invest some money but where are the plans for it?

Fans would need to raise money to buy the club or a share.

It is all well and good saying get sisu out and let's do a Swansea but has anything been put in place?

Hobo · Sep 29, 2013

Nick said:
This is what I mean, I would be all for fans ownership and probably invest some money but where are the plans for it?

Fans would need to raise money to buy the club or a share.

It is all well and good saying get sisu out and let's do a Swansea but has anything been put in place?

Agreed Nick, but I haven't seen any real plans from SISU yet?

Nick · Sep 29, 2013

Hobo said:
Agreed Nick, but I haven't seen any real plans from SISU yet?

I totally agree, I just think before saying "let's get them out" we should have an alternative in place because if not, it could get a lot nastier.

Hobo · Sep 29, 2013

Until they are prepared to go we won't know what is on offer. I'm sure people/syndicates are monitoring.

shmmeee · Sep 29, 2013

Grendel said:
I find it quite staggering that anyone makes comments like this. It's not even accurate.

The club sd it to the council as they were broke. Swansea when broke were given a ground which they paid minimal rent for a season and part ownership of the management company to get revenues.

They still have the same deal now in the premiership.

It didn't matter who the owners of Swansea were. They had a council that wanted them to succeed as opposed to one that saw them as a way of making a fast buck. I'm afraid while people like you remain entrenched in your views the club has no future.

The club didn't sell to the council, it sold to the Higgs Charity, and at a very good deal considering the option to buy back.

The club also got free rent for the first year, and as it turned out the last year too. The council stepped in repeatedly when the club failed to keep to it's own plans and up until Sisu stopped paying rent, the club had the option to get all that back at a more than fair price. An option they have repeatedly refused to take up. The council were prepared to drop the rent to virtually nothing considering the arena quality when the club actually entered serious negotiations and even after all this they are the only side who are still willing to talk.

The point you miss, as always, is that it's not about how much the council will move, it's about how little the club will. And you have a cheek to talk about accuracy.

chiefdave · Sep 29, 2013

fliterccfc said:
The majopr problem with using the swansea / Pompey analogies, is that their fans groups had mass funding drives and raised the relevant money to buy the club. This has been suggested here, but those supposedly driving this just do not seem either willing or able of any kind of serious fundraising activities. They seem to be utterly reliant on whoever owns / takes over in effect giving them a significant portion of the club, which lets face it is a ludicrous position to be in.

There's a big difference at least between what Pompey did and our situation. They got the club for basically nothing. They had to agree to using future parachute payments to cover salaries owed to former players (not paying full salaries either, they've all been knocked down massively). Their former owner had a charge over the ground which their council lent them the money to pay off, again at a greatly reduced rate and again secured against parachute payments. And they had to pay off money owed off the CVA. All said the amount they had to raise is peanuts compared to what we'd need to offer SISU, remember Joy wants their £60m back. Even then around 50% of the money Pompey have raised has come from what they call high net worth individuals, basically local business people who have put in larger sums but aren't rich enough to buy them the club outright and they've also taken a loan from a property developer who gets Fratton Park should they miss a payment. The biggest single factor in their trust taking ownership was the Football League refusing to issue the golden share to anyone other than the trust.

In my opinion fan ownership at Coventry would require either SISU walking away with the club going into administration or another new owner first who is prepared to sell a small percentage to the Trust with that percentage being increased as and when the money can be raised.

Grendel · Sep 29, 2013

shmmeee said:
The club didn't sell to the council, it sold to the Higgs Charity, and at a very good deal considering the option to buy back.

The club also got free rent for the first year, and as it turned out the last year too. The council stepped in repeatedly when the club failed to keep to it's own plans and up until Sisu stopped paying rent, the club had the option to get all that back at a more than fair price. An option they have repeatedly refused to take up. The council were prepared to drop the rent to virtually nothing considering the arena quality when the club actually entered serious negotiations and even after all this they are the only side who are still willing to talk.

The point you miss, as always, is that it's not about how much the council will move, it's about how little the club will. And you have a cheek to talk about accuracy.

OK let's get accurate. The council were not prepared to drop it to nothing at all were they? The final declared offer was £400,000 - that is hard'y nothing especially given the fact the club was totally ripped off for the previous 6 years. The "quality" means nothing if you have no benefit from the proceeds does it? As for the outstanding debt to ACL / the Council in reality it's about £200,000 isn't it if you factor in Erscow and the Rate issues? £20,000 a point - no doubt a price worth paying in you and your trusts eyes.

Love it how you ignored any reference to the issues raised about our beloved council versus Swansea's. Face it they have ripped us off from the start and you and your chums continual acceptance of their treatment has contrinuted to where we now are.

Grendel · Sep 30, 2013

waafun said:
How could it get worse?

utterly naive and ignorant stance as per.

pathetic

We could cease to exist - sounds worse to me.

letsallsingtogether · Sep 30, 2013

carry on as we are and we probably

will.

Grendel said:
We could cease to exist - sounds worse to me.

New KCIC, NOPM Slogan? (8 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

fliterccfc

Guest

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency