Peter Knatchbull-Hugessen (1 Viewer)

The Penguin

Well-Known Member
Not taking either side but this is such a stupid argument. Just of to rape your mum, hope I'm entitled to make my choices without abuse or judgement.

Abuse and judgement is how humans show disapproval and enforce societal norms. They were invented for a reason: to make those outside of societal norms conform.

You have a right to an unpopular opinion, you don't have the right for your opinion to be welcomed.

I think rape and giving money to a football club are hardly comparative.

I also think you can show disapproval without abusing someone personally. Attack the argument by all means, but why attack the person?
 

RPHunt

New Member
I'm interested that SISU have always said they would bring in external events management experts to run the facility. I guess that doesn't sit well with ACL employees who have a vested interest in keeping their job - even if they are not very good at it.

We have seen the SISU "experts" - Igwe, Dulieu, Brody etc. You can't seriously think ACL employees could be less competent than that bunch of clowns.
 

Noggin

New Member
So if owning the stadium is what is required to break even... what's the problem??

SISU buying the stadium is what everyone wanted uniting the club and the stadium is what everyone wants until it became clear that sisu have no interest in what's best for the club, until it became clear that sisu use complex business structure to avoid their debts and keep their assets. no one wants sisu to get the stadium because they don't believe ccfc will get it, they believe once again a different company will own it or have a charge over it to make sure sisu get to keep the stadium and not the football club.
 

GaryPendrysEyes

Well-Known Member
On any business measure Sisu have failed totally over a 5 yr plus term, revenue generation, profit/debt, core assets on the field, fan and stakeholder relations, professional and ethical practice.
And yet people like Ferret still act as if Sisu would do a fine upstanding professional business job with the Ricoh. Do some people learn nothing? We have seen them in action for years they are an apalling business. Unbelievable.
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
The Coventry Telegraph reported on November 27th 2012, more than a month before the £14m council mortgage deal, that talks over buying the 50% stake had broken down.

The article said:

Yes, and at that point two things had happened:
1) The ACL chairman had become director at Yorkshire Bank
2) Hoffman and Elliott were back in town and very loudly promoting an potential investor (no, not PH4 - the chinese).

But of course ... that's all just coincidences!
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Have there ever been a statement from sisu/ccfc that they want the freehold? Or is it words from another stakeholder? Or leaked info from behind scene negotiations?
Wouldn't they be satisfied with 100% ownership of ACL and a 125 year lease?

About the charges over assets ... you make it sound as something evil. Isn't it simply to protect investments? And ... to some degree ... to protect against a hostile takeover?

Ownership of ACL is not on the table a long lease might be. Do you really think that is what SISU are after ........ really???? You do not go to all this planning effort and cost to take second offerings :facepalm:

Been reading too many fairy tales Godiva? Never implied it was wrong or evil to have a charge was just explaining what would be/is the situation.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Yes, and at that point two things had happened:
1) The ACL chairman had become director at Yorkshire Bank
2) Hoffman and Elliott were back in town and very loudly promoting an potential investor (no, not PH4 - the chinese).

But of course ... that's all just coincidences!
No coincidence. Acl & CCc don't want to deal with sisu and are actively attempting to work with potential new owners and have done for some time.

The difference between them and sisu is sisu do not have the interests of Coventry city football club and its future as a priority
 

blueflint

Well-Known Member
(Do what is right and sell a 50% stake in the Ricoh Arena too Otium Entertainment Ltd (SISU). This will not be a popular post, but the stand-off between ACL/CCC and SISU has gone on for long enough. I am not a doubter that yourself, other members of ACL and senior members of the Council, have the best interets of the people of Coventry at heart, however as I can see it there is a heavy dark cloud lingering over the City and something needs to happen to lift the spirits again.)


as you can see you are in a minority so sorry it shouldn't happen
 

Sky Blues

Active Member

Sky Blues

Active Member
Yes, and at that point two things had happened:
1) The ACL chairman had become director at Yorkshire Bank
2) Hoffman and Elliott were back in town and very loudly promoting an potential investor (no, not PH4 - the chinese).

But of course ... that's all just coincidences!

And it was probably just a coincidence that concerns were being raised about ACL's financial viability shortly after discussions began with Sisu over buying a half-share in the Ricoh...
 

thaiskyblue

New Member
(Do what is right and sell a 50% stake in the Ricoh Arena too Otium Entertainment Ltd (SISU). This will not be a popular post, but the stand-off between ACL/CCC and SISU has gone on for long enough. I am not a doubter that yourself, other members of ACL and senior members of the Council, have the best interets of the people of Coventry at heart, however as I can see it there is a heavy dark cloud lingering over the City and something needs to happen to lift the spirits again.)


as you can see you are in a minority so sorry it shouldn't happen
so you think the dark cloud will go if sisu get 50%, I THINK THE DARK CLOUD WILL BURST UNLEASHING TOTAL CARNAGE.
NOPM, SISU OUT, PUSB!
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
not about the rent, not about the ownership of 50% of ACL ............ this is now simply about ownership of the stadium complex and development land...... got to ask do CCFC need that ownership to survive?

Probably not to survive....but to thrive?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Ownership of ACL is not on the table a long lease might be. Do you really think that is what SISU are after ........ really???? You do not go to all this planning effort and cost to take second offerings :facepalm:

Been reading too many fairy tales Godiva? Never implied it was wrong or evil to have a charge was just explaining what would be/is the situation.


Actually they were all genuine questions and never intended to be anything but exactly genuine questions:

Have there ever been a statement from sisu/ccfc that they want the freehold? Or is it words from another stakeholder? Or leaked info from behind scene negotiations?

This one wasn't answered.
It's important if this was ever stated by sisu or if it's a myth created by a stakeholder with a different agenda.


Wouldn't they be satisfied with 100% ownership of ACL and a 125 year lease?

You wiped that off as being a 'second offer', but surely combined with developing rights owning ACL should increase the value of the club as well as set good conditions for a viable future?
And if sisu never expressed interest in buying the freehold, then it is not a 'second offering'.


About the charges over assets ... you make it sound as something evil. Isn't it simply to protect investments? And ... to some degree ... to protect against a hostile takeover?

Again ... the way you worded your post it could be interpreted as something very bad showing how evil the owners intentions are. I just wanted a confirmation that a charge is a common way to protect an investment.
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
And it was probably just a coincidence that concerns were being raised about ACL's financial viability shortly after discussions began with Sisu over buying a half-share in the Ricoh...

Well, according to sisu/fisher(!) it was all part of a joint plan with the ccc todistress the ACL mortgage at Yorkshire Bank. This way sisu could buy the mortgage at a very low price (£5-£8m) and discharge it as part of the deal to buy the Higgs shares.
 

theferret

Well-Known Member
Do you have a link to a source for this? I have been looking without success.

I have dug up Coventry Telegraph reports that there were talks in May 2012 (http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-owners-sisu-talks-3024826) but the paper reported on November 27, 2012, that these had broken down...

The dates are quite fuzzy on this. The CT reported as early as September that a deal had been reached - http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/exclusive-sisu-strikes-coventry-city-3019922 - but then as time went on there were suggestions talks were breaking down. SISU seem pretty clear though that (in their view) that deal - for which they state there was a signed headline agreement, was still live up until the point of the council bail out which killed it. It was at this point that talks over rent reduction began. The terms of the deal SISU have outlined several times in public, and there has never been a denial by the other side that I am aware of.
 
Last edited:

Sky Blues

Active Member
Well, according to sisu/fisher(!) it was all part of a joint plan with the ccc todistress the ACL mortgage at Yorkshire Bank. This way sisu could buy the mortgage at a very low price (£5-£8m) and discharge it as part of the deal to buy the Higgs shares.

That was the allegation in Sisu's judicial review statement wasn't it? If memory serves me correctly, just before the judge gave his verdict on that I'm sure I saw a tweet from Les Reid saying he had been informed a couple of weeks earlier that a statement had been submitted by the other side and he was going to ask for a copy, but I don't recall seeing any story published from it. Maybe the story became out-of-date once the judge's decision was handed down.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
just to humour you Godiva

TF said the following Monday "“The club was expecting the council to consider whether it wished to renew discussions on the basis on a transaction, but no response has been received.The club simply needs all the revenue which comes from owning its own stadium" It doesnt say renting its own stadium

sure there are other quotes etc if you care to look
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
That was the allegation in Sisu's judicial review statement wasn't it? If memory serves me correctly, just before the judge gave his verdict on that I'm sure I saw a tweet from Les Reid saying he had been informed a couple of weeks earlier that a statement had been submitted by the other side and he was going to ask for a copy, but I don't recall seeing any story published from it. Maybe the story became out-of-date once the judge's decision was handed down.

I have completely forgotten about Les Reid and his quest to get his hands on the ccc replies. Are you on Twitter? Maybe you ... or someone using Twitter ... could ask him if ever he received a copy?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
you can read les reids twittter....... just google it

You just can not contribute to it without signing up
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Have there ever been a statement from sisu/ccfc that they want the freehold? Or is it words from another stakeholder? Or leaked info from behind scene negotiations?
Wouldn't they be satisfied with 100% ownership of ACL and a 125 year lease?
However SISU haven't said that statement is incorrect, a downright lie or started defamation proceedings against ACL which you would think they would do given how much they like resorting to lawyers.
 

lewys33

Well-Known Member
I agree Penguin, I am not saying that SISU are exempt from this, but the tweet from Nikki Sinclaire yesterday showing that SISU are willing to meet, but the Council aren't? They all need someone to mediate a deal and bang their fookin heads together.

Nikki Sinclaire is an idiot. Ignore that woman. She is an MEP trying to get people on her side for HER OWN GAIN. Nothing else. What is the point of getting around a table and "trying to bash something out" they have been around enough times and not sorted something. It is simple. Joy Seppafuck wants 100% of the Ricoh at her price. Council do not want to sell to her, let alone at her price!! There will be no negotiation on "rent". They are well within their rights to not sell it to them in my opinion!

All SISU will do is keep the Ricoh for themselves. Use it as an asset against their business(es), BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY DO! Even if they build a new stadium CCFC will not own it, and will have to pay rent to SISU/Otium etc.

It also makes me laugh when people moan about the council rejecting the CVA and "turning down £590,000 of tax payers money"

Well 1. It turns out they could still get that back
2. Why are people not having a go at SISU for not paying the £1.whatever million that they technically owe of "tax payers money"
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Oh and just a though could PWKH be on holiday at the mo? Tis the season for it and all that.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The dates are quite fuzzy on this. The CT reported as early as September that a deal had been reached - http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/exclusive-sisu-strikes-coventry-city-3019922 - but then as time went on there were suggestions talks were breaking down. SISU seem pretty clear though that (in their view) that deal - for which they state there was a signed headline agreement, was still live up until the point of the council bail out which killed it. It was at this point that talks over rent reduction began. The terms of the deal SISU have outlined several times in public, and there has never been a denial by the other side that I am aware of.

We don't know why CCC backed out of the deal. Could be political (don't want to deal with Sisu) could be commercial (deal wasn't as good as it seemed) Could be as simple as the council negotiators not having authority. Either way its irrelevant.

Sisu tried to engineer a deal to get the arena cheaper than the agreed offer (Higgs share), one side backe out. They should respect that, just because they initially agreed doesn't hold CCC to anything.

Sisu should pay the agreed formula to Higgs if they want to make the club sustainable IMO. AFAIK that deal is on the table until Ltd is liquidated and despite rumours to the contrary I'm sure I remember PWKH saying CCC couldn't touch that agreement. After all the club owning that half was always the understanding.
 

davebart

Active Member
It is no good going over old ground.

Sisu are hedge fund managers. People do not seem to realise what that entails. They do not RUN businesses. They divide them up to get the biggest return out of the good parts and ditch the bad parts.

In terms of CCFC - the bad part is the team, it will always make a loss - the good part was supposed to be the stadium and more importantly the land around it. They were only ever going to make money by owning the stadium, and when I say they I mean SISU and not CCFC.

That has been the reality from day 1. What I can't understand is why they weren't prepared to offer a fair price for it. where has it got them?

Their only out now is to distress the owners of the stadium to such an extent that it HAS to be sold. It is a bit difficult to distress a council.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
They don't need the Higgs stake, all they need is ACL's stake in IEC and a nominal lease to play at the stadium. They don't need to starve ACL out to achieve this either.
 

rondog1973

Well-Known Member
But it's not working, where is the quick fire sale of all our better players that was expected? Nowhere.

This won't work what we need is for CCC/ACL & SISU to be reasonable, listen to the public and accept that the current warring isn't getting anyone in any aspect anywhere.
Way too hasty. We've played 1 game at Northampton, so long as everyone recognizes this is a war of attrition that I'm convinced we can win if we stick to the boycott, then SISU have to yield at some point surely.

Hold your nerve folks. NOPM.
 

skybluehugh

New Member
WW2 is not even similar to this situation.

Sometimes it takes the bigger man to stop the fighting than continue.

And why is it always ACL/CCC who have to back down? Answer me that without the owner slant. And in reply to a earlier post from you on this thread, WHO was it who ripped the heart out of the city. The bastards who took us to NT, that's who.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
And why is it always ACL/CCC who have to back down? Answer me that without the owner slant. And in reply to a earlier post from you on this thread, WHO was it who ripped the heart out of the city. The bastards who took us to NT, that's who.

Don't the majority of Coventry residents support Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top