At least call them out on it, ask them what it means for the club even beyond SISU if Wasps have the lease for 240 odd more years. Will we always be at the mercy of them? Ask them why they misled fans, voters and tax payers. The trust cant do anything without pointing out fisher and his stadium, why not take that approach with others?
But its not about who is to blame
its about ensuring there is a club to support not season.
And if you truly believe that why have you and others spent pages upon pages debating the past instead of being productive and proactive about our future.
Really? Have you read this thread? It’s got everything from you blaming the council for SISU being here in the first place to Nick blaming the trust for things that they haven’t had the opportunity to do yet while they’ve already been doing a lot of the stuff Nick says they haven’t done. You should probably take your own advice before you start levelling it at others.
You have no idea what I have or haven't done. But as I have said many times on this and other threads it is firmly my belief that individuals forming more small fans groups is counter productive. Everyone needs to unite behind one figurehead and the trust are the obvious candidates.And if you truly believe that why have you and others spent pages upon pages debating the past instead of being productive and proactive about our future.
CCC are still the freeholder. They could have inserted whatever clauses they liked in to the lease.I'm not sure what they could realistically have set as a term of the deal with Wasps to indefinitely safeguard CCFC so it was always an empty statement.
Maybe he should just write some soft open letters every couple of months for you? Bet they are all shitting themselves.
Its bollocks though isn't it?! If the assurances on the future of Coventry only ever applied for the 4 year deal then the assurances for Cov Rugby were Completely worthless. Just shows it was empty rhetoric to try and dodge any real scrutiny from people of Coventry.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
There's been plenty of constructive comments, ideas for things that could be done or areas they could improve. For some reason you've chosen to ignore them and instead turn the thread into the usual argument.It’s got more chance of success than calling them twats on a football forum as if that makes you some sort of hero.
It’s got more chance of success than calling them twats on a football forum as if that makes you some sort of hero.
Realistically, given there have been protests before, during and after games home and away, disruption to matches, people on the pitch, local and national media pieces and protests at their London offices what do you think fans can do that will make Seppalla decide to cease all current and future legal action?Meanwhile you miss my point completely I am talking about SISU fixing a problem of their own making, If they did not pursue legal action then Wasps would cut a deal no problem.
Realistically, given there have been protests before, during and after games home and away, disruption to matches, people on the pitch, local and national media pieces and protests at their London offices what do you think fans can do that will make Seppalla decide to cease all current and future legal action?
Yes I saw and liked your weasel comment. It was more that they have further elaborated in their more recent statement.I already commented that the Council & Wasps effectively led all to believe there was no time limit on protecting the clubs residence at the Ricoh, but I'm sure you missed that, search for the word 'weasel' and you'll see.
Meanwhile you miss my point completely I am talking about SISU fixing a problem of their own making, If they did not pursue legal action then Wasps would cut a deal no problem.
Finally please tell me what the devil SISU get out of the legal action & if you think they should continue why do you think that as it clearly poses a risk to the clubs existence.
CCC are still the freeholder. They could have inserted whatever clauses they liked in to the lease.
No idea, wouldn't be my plan of action but possibilities are: they believe they will win; they hope it will send ACL bust; its not costing them anything (either legals on retainer or no win no fee); someone made Joy read the entire EU thread so now she's punishing us.Why do you think the legal action continues, what is in it for SISU?
I already commented that the Council & Wasps effectively led all to believe there was no time limit on protecting the clubs residence at the Ricoh, but I'm sure you missed that, search for the word 'weasel' and you'll see.
Meanwhile you miss my point completely I am talking about SISU fixing a problem of their own making, If they did not pursue legal action then Wasps would cut a deal no problem.
Finally please tell me what the devil SISU get out of the legal action & if you think they should continue why do you think that as it clearly poses a risk to the clubs existence.
Only way would be to have rates set by an independent 3rd party so nobody takes the piss either way.I meant in terms of getting a deal that a.n.other party would sign up to (their priority seeming at the time to have been to find owners for the stadium that weren't SISU) and that would actually be enforceable down the line. I doubt for example they could have insisted on a clause forcing Wasps to have CCFC as tenants for the life of the lease.
When can we expect you and the trust to start a new football team then? After all, if you don't like it just do it yourself. Not allowed to say anything no matter how constructive.
You and LAST seem to miss every time I post what I have tried to do to help the Trust. Strange that, same as how he didnt know board members were boycotting (neither did CJ).
Notice the difference when Schmee engages with something and people he may not always agree with and the difference in replies? He could be sat there doing wanker signs, but just simply engaging and saying "right, what can they do" gets a different response to "stand for the board", "they are writing letters, what are you doing"
So if it was impossible why say it? Don't think its much of an argument to say all local taxpayers should have knowledge of property law and what is and isn't allowed. If the council are saying it was a condition of sale then it should be in some form or another.I meant in terms of getting a deal that a.n.other party would sign up to (their priority seeming at the time to have been to find owners for the stadium that weren't SISU) and that would actually be enforceable down the line. I doubt for example they could have insisted on a clause forcing Wasps to have CCFC as tenants for the life of the lease.
Nobody has read that thread and remained sane... ahhh there you have an explanation.No idea, wouldn't be my plan of action but possibilities are: they believe they will win; they hope it will send ACL bust; its not costing them anything (either legals on retainer or no win no fee); someone made Joy read the entire EU thread so now she's punishing us.
WTF are you going on about now? Me and the trust start a new football team? You’re of your head.
Taking the piss by calling me a suffragette was that constructive? Providing links for councillors, MP’s, people at the telegraph ect that was constructive and you didn’t do that or want any part of it. Suggesting that everyone should send them emails stating that the pressure needs putting on Wasps asking the Telegraph to do a petition for Wasps to open talks, email councillors to remind them of the statement at time of sale, email MP’s asking for them to assist the club in support of Wasps opening talks. All that was constructive but yet again you want no part of that. How are you being constructive exactly? Trolling by opening old wounds? Not constructive. Trolling by bullshitting about what the trust hasn’t done? Not constructive.
So if it was impossible why say it? Don't think its much of an argument to say all local taxpayers should have knowledge of property law and what is and isn't allowed. If the council are saying it was a condition of sale then it should be in some form or another.
First step has to be to know what pressure the council can apply, then demand that pressure is put on. Similarly we need to make it clear that CCFC not being in Coventry (or god forbid not existing) isn’t an option.
What if Wasps say they’ll negotiate then we end up with he said/she said on the rental negotiations? That’s the issue I see. Ultimately a commercial deal has to be done, and let’s all be honest Sisu will use it as an opportunity to drive down the cost (as is their right) and Wasps to push it up (as is theirs). What would be the demands? Same terms as we have?
Do you mean why would the Council say it? If so then I'd imagine because it was an easy way of solving a political issue at the time, without actually promising anything meaningful. Very cynical but that's my take I guess.
Only way would be to have rates set by an independent 3rd party so nobody takes the piss either way.
It's about being realistic really isn't it. People would need to know the details.
I think ultimate fallback has to be continuing terms, perhaps adjusted for inflation.
I think the earlier we can be clear about what we want to happen and who has to do it the more chance we have of having an impact. We know it’s coming and what the deal is this time. We spent most of the time in shock last time and ended up flailing about like idiots.
Any group (or SBT?) needs a rational, clear line to push that removes as much blame and rhetoric as possible.
I think continued terms for however long the legals are likely to last should probably be the start and end of it.
You'd have to compare to what other clubs pay. The quality of the stadium wouldn't really come in to it as the money from all the non-ticketing revenue streams don't benefit the club. So you'd be looking for clubs at a similar level with similar attendances. No idea what that would be, or if there even are any.The lower the better for the club from our point of view but it needs to be realistic, how could it be valued? It's not like it's a standard 3 bed in Coundon with a drive to compare it against
Same terms has to be a given. If it was good enough for both last year to agree after negotiations (during legals!) then it's good enough this year.I think ultimate fallback has to be continuing terms, perhaps adjusted for inflation.
Same terms has to be a given. If it was good enough for both last year to agree after negotiations (during legals!) then it's good enough this year.
Agree that the thread that runs through is all is we don’t want CCFC to go under or leave.
The devils in the details though. All it’ll take is some twat with an letterhead allergy to get people’s hopes up and “what’s best for CCFC” takes a very divisive turn. You can’t control that. I think most people would want Sisu gone and a decent owner in, but some have, shall we say higher standards for owners than others.
Think after Dale Evans people need to start taking a step back and seeing how realistic it is rather than throwing all the chips in as soon as they say "sisu" and "takeover".
You would like to think nobody will disagree with a new owner who will love CCFC (even if we might not get to the premiership ever and runs us at break even) if it is straight down the line, genuine with no games or messing about. None of their mates giving a step by step on what's going on and how we will be taken over by the weekend. None of the "I was with him and he did the deal there and then".
The question then is who and how....
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?