Nobodies Happy! (3 Viewers)

Forums New posts
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
Moff said:
Yes they do, as they get full revenues and were not ripped off by their local council. It would be nice if we had ever been offered that model, as we would have moved on.
WE WERE NOT OFFERED THAT MODEL.

And as for getting over it, I abhor franchise teams, clearly you dont, and wont mind if SISU move the club out of the city again.
Click to expand...

I thought we sold our revenue rights with the Higgs share. We are still at the wait and see stage. None of us know the details of the deal. I see it as a chance to put up new ideas and try and get a good deal for CCFC. A deal with Wasps to stay at the Ricoh is preferable to the current TF stance. The game has just started regarding CRFC, and I hope that CCFC will be in talks for the Ricoh. If they are not talking to Wasps, then we've had it.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
I'm going to cut both my legs off. It's an opportunity to get a parking space nearer the door in Tescos' car park.

italiahorse said:
It looks a positive statement from them IMHO
Looking at it as an opportunity.
Click to expand...
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Remind me how many went on the hill out of our total support.
Remind me how many went on the march.
Remind me how many signed the petition.

Sky Blue Dal said:
Remind me how many CovRU fans came to protest on Tuesday.
Click to expand...
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
Like it or not, the stadium is now more rather than less likely, and it's almost certain to be outside Coventry. Is that something to celebrate?
Click to expand...


Out of interest - what justification would the council have for not to give planning permission inside the city boundaries?
 
S

Sky Blue Dal

Well-Known Member
torchomatic said:
Remind me how many went on the hill out of our total support.
Remind me how many went on the march.
Remind me how many signed the petition.
Click to expand...



Remind me how many went on the hill out of our total support - more than what we seeing from CRU and Wasps

Remind me how many went on the march - Again more than what we seeing from CRU and Wasps

Remind me how many signed the petition - and again more than what we seeing from CRU and Wasps


Get the drift??
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
Out of interest - what justification would the council have for not to give planning permission inside the city boundaries?
Click to expand...

... because they already have use of a stadium (possibly including football related revenues) and they are doing CCFC a favour by stopping them going bankrupt financing a new smaller stadium.
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
Out of interest - what justification would the council have for not to give planning permission inside the city boundaries?
Click to expand...

I would imagine that the residents would have a say and that could go as in Wycombe where there were protest marches against the stadium Plans. Let's Face it no-one is going to give SISU the chance to shaft the council in their own city. I would imagine that there would be a long list of reasons- as many as they could find. A good working relationship is necessary to get things done. pursueing the JR to the bitter end won't get SISU anywhere in Cov.
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
At this stage the biggest reason any council would have for rejecting it is that no one has actually seen the business case for it, the business plan or how it would be financed. Unless that stacks up properly then it isn't going to happen especially as any development is going to involve some element of Council expenditure in terms of infra structure. I would imagine there would need to be an awful lot of work done on all that..... and linked in to that they would need to prove viability in terms of fans numbers - history proves CCFC fans do not follow blindly to another location.

Interesting that TF says he wants to extend the CCFC deal at the Ricoh to 5 years - why? They only did the deal 8 weeks or so ago and already they want to change the terms. Is that because of the Wasps deal or is it something else?
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
At this stage the biggest reason any council would have for rejecting it is that no one has actually seen the business case for it, the business plan or how it would be financed. Unless that stacks up properly then it isn't going to happen especially as any development is going to involve some element of Council expenditure in terms of infra structure. I would imagine there would need to be an awful lot of work done on all that..... and linked in to that they would need to prove viability in terms of fans numbers - history proves CCFC fans do not follow blindly to another location.

Interesting that TF says he wants to extend the CCFC deal at the Ricoh to 5 years - why? They only did the deal 8 weeks or so ago and already they want to change the terms. Is that because of the Wasps deal or is it something else?
Click to expand...
Of course the business case doesn't need much scrutiny.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
Interesting that TF says he wants to extend the CCFC deal at the Ricoh to 5 years - why? They only did the deal 8 weeks or so ago and already they want to change the terms. Is that because of the Wasps deal or is it something else?
Click to expand...

Didn't hear that - busy day!
But I take it the club is no longer in any rush to build (if they decide to). The agreement with the FL is probably void now the club is back and that leaves time to explore opportunities with the new ACL owner and even look for a site inside the city boundaries if CCC will allow it.
Of course the business plan need to be sound and everything else you and others mention. But I think that now an application will be looked at a bit more ... ehm ... friendly?
 
duffer

duffer

Well-Known Member
Godiva said:
Out of interest - what justification would the council have for not to give planning permission inside the city boundaries?
Click to expand...

Other than all of the usual loss of amenity clauses, there's probably the point that there's a perfectly adequate stadium elsewhere in the city. All of this could be overcome in time, probably, but the bigger problem is - where could the site actually be?

Also, if it's SISU, I think there will be a marked reluctance to even consider staying in the city, because of having to deal with CCC. I think they've already said that elsewhere.
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
Other than all of the usual loss of amenity clauses, there's probably the point that there's a perfectly adequate stadium elsewhere in the city. All of this could be overcome in time, probably, but the bigger problem is - where could the site actually be?

Also, if it's SISU, I think there will be a marked reluctance to even consider staying in the city, because of having to deal with CCC. I think they've already said that elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Yep, true. Never mind about CCC not approving a stadium here, you have to think Sisu don't want a stadium here either.

Oh happy days.
 
duffer

duffer

Well-Known Member
italiahorse said:
... because they already have use of a stadium (possibly including football related revenues) and they are doing CCFC a favour by stopping them going bankrupt financing a new smaller stadium.
Click to expand...

The existing stadium argument might have some effect, but whether a plan is financially realistic or not is not relevant to planning permission as far as I'm aware.
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
The existing stadium argument might have some effect, but whether a plan is financially realistic or not is not relevant to planning permission as far as I'm aware.
Click to expand...

Can't Sisu not get involved with the development around the Ricoh and make some money that way?

The land around the complex has been a key issue in all this.
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle said:
Plenty on here who are absolutely fucking delighted.
Click to expand...

I don't think I have seen a single person on here say I am glad Wasps brought ACL.
I think everyone is gutted its not the football club who did it.

I just think most people understand why it ended up been Wasps and not the football club.
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Dongo, I have to say after all Lucas has said in the past, I don't understand it.
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
I don't think I have seen a single person on here say I am glad Wasps brought ACL.
I think everyone is gutted its not the football club who did it.

I just think most people understand why it ended up been Wasps and not the football club.
Click to expand...

I would say a few are glad. Not seen anyone delighted. May have missed it though.

Most, like you say Don, have just accepted it and can understand why the council did what they did.

I don't believe that the council acted in the correct manner myself, so though I understand why they took the decision, it still sits uncomfortably with me.

As some are saying though, it's done. Unless some successful legal challenge can be made to nullify the deal, it looks like we are stuck with Wasps.

Therefore for me, we need to look forwards rather than backwards and make the most of the opportunity that is in front of us and that of course is a future at the Ricoh, for the short term at least.

Following Wasps' approach to Waggott today, I am now very interested as to whether Sisu will come out and state that they can work in tandem with Wasps, without mentioning the need to get out and own their own stadium.

Just think we need a clear statement saying they are concentrating on a future at the Ricoh for the next 5 years.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
Other than all of the usual loss of amenity clauses, there's probably the point that there's a perfectly adequate stadium elsewhere in the city. All of this could be overcome in time, probably, but the bigger problem is - where could the site actually be?

Also, if it's SISU, I think there will be a marked reluctance to even consider staying in the city, because of having to deal with CCC. I think they've already said that elsewhere.
Click to expand...

The problem is that I believe the club need all revenue streams a stadium can generate.
For all sorts of reasons. FFP is obvious. Isn't ACL generating a yearly revenue around £7m? Not all would count towards FFP, but still ...
 
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
torchomatic said:
Dongo, I have to say after all Lucas has said in the past, I don't understand it.
Click to expand...

Franchise is wrong mate
However the council have to secure jobs, investment, regeneration, development.

It is not their job to police morals in sport.

They can pass comment as they did when some of their electorate was shafted.

However their primary responsibilities are as above.

I am sure they would all agree franchise is distasteful and shame in the RFU for not blocking it.

However the council would be neglecting their duty to turn this deal down.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
Franchise is wrong mate
However the council have to secure jobs, investment, regeneration, development.

It is not their job to police morals in sport.

They can pass comment as they did when some of their electorate was shafted.

However their primary responsibilities are as above.

I am sure they would all agree franchise is distasteful and shame in the RFU for not blocking it.

However the council would be neglecting their duty to turn this deal down.
Click to expand...

So a company that's consistently lost millions a year for the past 3 years is going to suddenly deliver is it?

Stop talking bollocks.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
I love the replies that say franchising is wrong, then the next word is but or however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top