Plus ça Change: The High Court Damning Of Coventry City (1 Viewer)

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It makes me laugh how some people on here use the new owners argument to want to keep Sisu at the helm !!
Some seem to believe that if we got new owners and returned to the Ricoh that automatically the rent would be 1.3million. Come on guys that deal is long dead !!!!

Or the 'access to revenues' line. Just how many pies do people think the embarrassingly small crowds at Sixfields go through, compared to the what, 8K more fans we got at the Ricoh?!?

It's just all about the Ricoh, we all know that, so why discuss anything else? And no other football club I can think of has been as raped as ours has to secure financial advantage for its owners. Can't think of one

 

---

[Grendel]

So you admit then that the 1.3million a year rent is long dead ?

Even ACL and the council know they can't get away with that anymore. Everyone talks about new tenants - rugby franchises etc. the only way this ground is attractive is if it generates additional revenue other than through the turnstiles. So any new tenant will want a piece of the action as part of the inducement to come. The council need now to see the club in that light.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It won't matter if its £400,000 - unless the revenues are offered as part of the package along with shares in the management company (for free) no one will want the club.

If there's one thing that will truly make the club unattractive, it's the disenfranchised, divided and ruined customer base. All else pales into insignificance. You're in business. You know that

 

[Grendel]

If there's one thing that will truly make the club unattractive, it's the disenfranchised, divided and ruined customer base. All else pales into insignificance. You're in business. You know that

If the club returned to Coventry its customer base will also return. Especially after a years absence - you know that. Football is not like a typical product. If your favourite ginger biscuit company stops producing you switch brands and may not return when they produce again. Football is different.

Stupot is entirely correct in his assertion that the club will not return unless it is enticed back. It needs to be viewed as an asset by the council as a way of increasing its worth. Whatever ACL's financial position its ludicrous to pretend that the ground itself is not now a burden rather than a benefit. The irony is if a real deal is there on the table sisu will more than likely look to sell as the asset value of the club would rise overnight.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

If the club returned to Coventry its customer base will also return. Especially after a years absence - you know that. Football is not like a typical product. If your favourite ginger biscuit company stops producing you switch brands and may not return when they produce again. Football is different.

Stupot is entirely correct in his assertion that the club will not return unless it is enticed back. It needs to be viewed as an asset by the council as a way of increasing its worth. Whatever ACL's financial position its ludicrous to pretend that the ground itself is not now a burden rather than a benefit. The irony is if a real deal is there on the table sisu will more than likely look to sell as the asset value of the club would rise overnight.

Come on Grendel old lad. You know there's no enticing SISU back. They want the impossible. The judicial review has revealed SISU's intent clearly. What they are doing is unparalleled in football. Find me an example of when any owner has stooped this low.

It's not about rent, renevues or anything else. It should be about every supporter now seeing this vile and reprehensible politik for what it is, and standing shoulder to shoulder until things change for the better. Others may take a view, but for me that should be a total boycott of the Sixfields farce, a huge peaceful yet forceful presence at next Saturday's march and anyone with any power and influence shouting about our position from the rooftops until things change.

I am convinced that a total, complete and absolute boycott of Sixfields would bring attention to our plight that would force a change in tact within all sides who can bring influence to bear

 

[Astute]

I am convinced that a total, complete and absolute boycott of Sixfields would bring attention to our plight that would force a change in tact within all sides who can bring influence to bear

Oh no it won't. Those that go to Northampton know it wouldn't help for sure.

 

[Grendel]

Oh no it won't. Those that go to Northampton know it wouldn't help for sure.

Explain why it would help.

 

[Snozz_is_god]

Explain why it would help.

I think you'll find Astute was being sarcastic.

So by your comment I take it you are 100% behind a full boycott of Sicfields.

 

[blend]

Even ACL and the council know they can't get away with that anymore. Everyone talks about new tenants - rugby franchises etc. the only way this ground is attractive is if it generates additional revenue other than through the turnstiles. So any new tenant will want a piece of the action as part of the inducement to come. The council need now to see the club in that light.

All parties agreed that the rent was not sustainable, unfortunately our owners had no appetite to negotiate properly. Discussions were had, agreements made, only for Joy to veto the proposal.

 

[Astute]

Explain why it would help.

Explain why it wouldn't help.

It would help as it would keep our plight in the spotlight. This puts more pressure on Joy but mainly more pressure on the FL. It might not bring us home by itself, but how long can the FL keep brushing everything under the carpet?

It has been about 18 months since SISU went to the FL with their plans for a new stadium. So far all they have come up with is a few pictures. They will know what the judge said about them. They will have read the newspaper articles. They will know about the rent offers. Put none of us turning up on top of that.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Explain why it would help.

You know it would. A few less fans gets us headlines. Zero fans would make headlines week in, week out. In anything would embarrass the FL into action it would be this

 

[torchomatic]

Rubbish. I think SISU and the FL are above embarrassment and unfavourable headlines.

You know it would. A few less fans gets us headlines. Zero fans would make headlines week in, week out. In anything would embarrass the FL into action it would be this

 

[bigfatronssba]

Rubbish. I think SISU and the FL are above embarrassment and unfavourable headlines.

Why then did sisu threaten to sue The Guardian for printing a factually correct article??

 

[torchomatic]

I thought SISU were damned in court, not Coventry City?

 

[torchomatic]

Wanting zero fans - and suggesting it would solve everything - is wide of the mark. It would make no difference and would nevber happen as people would always attend. As for SISU threatening to sue; you'd have to ask them. As I stated if bad headlines/publicity was going to work then we'd already be back at the Ricoh.

Why then did sisu threaten to sue The Guardian for printing a factually correct article??

 

[NorthernWisdom]

You know it would. A few less fans gets us headlines. Zero fans would make headlines week in, week out. In anything would embarrass the FL into action it would be this

It wouldn't help.

a) We've seen how ridiculously divisive such a boycott is. It detracts from actual issues and allows people to turn against those who haven't caused this - that's utterly pointless and ridiculous and, indeed, falls helps out the protagonists rather than hinders;

b) You'll never get 100% for anything; why badger people with a different view?

c) It looks like apathy. Have to always consider not what you want it to look like, but what it might look like also.

d) Proactive looks better. A better pressure would be if thousands were milling around Northampton, Coventry... London. Desperate to watch a football match but unable to do so even if they wanted to, as the capacity is finite and below what it should be.

Pragmatically, a far more constructive protest would be one that seeks to include as many as possible (next Saturday, for example) rather than exclude.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Why then did sisu threaten to sue The Guardian for printing a factually correct article??

Frankly, anybody who threatens to sue anybody else re: CCFC in these misty and murky times is an utter loon and should be roundly condemned.

 

[Astute]

Rubbish. I think SISU and the FL are above embarrassment and unfavourable headlines.

I agree with half of this.

SISU are after one thing only and know that they can't hide what they are doing anymore. Whereas the FL are trying to cover up the hole they have dug themselves into. They have given three years to SISU and know that there would be a good chance of litigation if they changed the terms.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I don't support sisu, and I haven't got Stockholm syndrome. It's about context. Piling in money (not as much as some owners) to fund losses year in year out, lack of sustainable plan (judges words) leads to the only option (get the Ricoh and revenues). We should have slashed out wage bill earlier, and we should have bought back our half of ACL or at the very least renegotiated a lower rent at the beginning.

Virtually all football team lose money, it's wrong and would be allowed to happen in any other industry.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

We went from 0-60 on that. We made no effort to negotiate access to revenues or a rent reduction until after we had boycotted paying the latter. The reality is that Joy gambled on ACL's ability to survive without the club as that would offer the fastest way of securing the Ricoh. Her gamble has failed and she now has to either make a serious effort to get a stadium built or to get around the table with ACL and the Council.

Neither looks all that likely.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It wouldn't help.

a) We've seen how ridiculously divisive such a boycott is. It detracts from actual issues and allows people to turn against those who haven't caused this - that's utterly pointless and ridiculous and, indeed, falls helps out the protagonists rather than hinders;

b) You'll never get 100% for anything; why badger people with a different view?

c) It looks like apathy. Have to always consider not what you want it to look like, but what it might look like also.

d) Proactive looks better. A better pressure would be if thousands were milling around Northampton, Coventry... London. Desperate to watch a football match but unable to do so even if they wanted to, as the capacity is finite and below what it should be.

Pragmatically, a far more constructive protest would be one that seeks to include as many as possible (next Saturday, for example) rather than exclude.

The substantial away followings do go some way towards showing that. However what you're suggesting falls down on c), for a packed Sixfields could very easily be seen as an endorsement of playing in Northampton (we all know it isn't) and lend more justification to the club higher-ups to continue playing there.

 

[shmmeee]

To be fair, the same people telling us no fans will ever work are the same ones that tend to be quite negative about anything, including the Why protest and last year's march (arguably our two most successful protests).

The logic is fairly sound: 1500 fans can be explained as a few bad apples and difficulty getting to the ground. 0 fans says that the fans as a whole reject the idea. The argument of "not everyone will do it" is silly and could apply to any co-ordinated action.

I'm not saying it'll work, as people are dug into their positions (as post JR verdict has proven), but I don't think those who wish for such a thing should be condemned.

I still favour the idea of one big protest at Sixfields inside and out, everyone together. But I think the point for that was the end of last season, would need to be a TV game or something now.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Sorry if I missed this elsewhere, but I mentally clocked that the judge was due to apportion costs last Friday (post JR). Did it happen, was it delayed, or just not revealed ?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

To be fair, the same people telling us no fans will ever work are the same ones that tend to be quite negative about anything, including the Why protest and last year's march (arguably our two most successful protests).

The logic is fairly sound: 1500 fans can be explained as a few bad apples and difficulty getting to the ground. 0 fans says that the fans as a whole reject the idea. The argument of "not everyone will do it" is silly and could apply to any co-ordinated action.

I'm not saying it'll work, as people are dug into their positions (as post JR verdict has proven), but I don't think those who wish for such a thing should be condemned.

I still favour the idea of one big protest at Sixfields inside and out, everyone together. But I think the point for that was the end of last season, would need to be a TV game or something now.

Don't necessarily need the game televised if we get sufficient media sources up for covering it. Our league is sponsored by Sky after all...

 

[NorthernWisdom]

It's not silly, it's realistic. It's also eminently sensible to look for an inclusive effort rather than the battering of opposition.

What's nonsensical is to push for disruptive confrontation amongst the pockets of people who are certainly not to blame.

I've also suggested alternatives, so it's not like I haven't but, well... people seem negative about my alternatives.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It's not silly, it's realistic. It's also eminently sensible to look for an inclusive effort rather than the battering of opposition.

What's nonsensical is to push for disruptive confrontation amongst the pockets of people who are certainly not to blame.

I've also suggested alternatives, so it's not like I haven't but, well... people seem negative about my alternatives.

Just playing devil's advocate NW. If crowds of 0 suggest apathy then crowds of 7,500 can be seen to show support for what the club's doing.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Don't necessarily need the game televised if we get sufficient media sources up for covering it. Our league is sponsored by Sky after all...

You'd be, errrm.... silly not to do it for a TV game though.

Thing is, things need a build-up though, and anything we do is on the fly. Should be, now, thinking about what the Christmas event is.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Just playing devil's advocate NW. If crowds of 0 suggest apathy then crowds of 7,500 can be seen to show support for what the club's doing.

Wasn't actually meaning you or, for that matter, this particular example tbh and yes, I agree it conceivably could. Afterall, surely the whole point is flaws are tested first and seen if they can be worked around and, if not, move on to something else.

I'd be making sure the focus was on those locked out and thus unable to see their side through no choice of their own however, and the focus was on those who whether they wanted to or not, weren't able to make the journey.

Actual physical people unable to see a game is a lot easier to convey through the mediums of TV and print than an idea... Likewise, the walking out offers an image that grabs attention, it offers action to demonstrate something, closes down the areas for doubt.

 

[Grendel]

We went from 0-60 on that. We made no effort to negotiate access to revenues or a rent reduction until after we had boycotted paying the latter. The reality is that Joy gambled on ACL's ability to survive without the club as that would offer the fastest way of securing the Ricoh. Her gamble has failed and she now has to either make a serious effort to get a stadium built or to get around the table with ACL and the Council.

Neither looks all that likely.

You don't know how the gamble has worked as you don't know the timescale she will be prepared to work to. Say its 4 years -what then?

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Then she loses that much money that she will never recover.

Who/how many will be left to go to the lego stadium or the Ricoh after that amount of time?

Sorry She Bet on red should have been sky blue.

You don't know how the gamble has worked as you don't know the timescale she will be prepared to work to. Say its 4 years -what then?

 

[torchomatic]

Really, I can't recall anyone being negative about those.

To be fair, the same people telling us no fans will ever work are the same ones that tend to be quite negative about anything, including the Why protest and last year's march (arguably our two most successful protests).

The logic is fairly sound: 1500 fans can be explained as a few bad apples and difficulty getting to the ground. 0 fans says that the fans as a whole reject the idea. The argument of "not everyone will do it" is silly and could apply to any co-ordinated action.

I'm not saying it'll work, as people are dug into their positions (as post JR verdict has proven), but I don't think those who wish for such a thing should be condemned.

I still favour the idea of one big protest at Sixfields inside and out, everyone together. But I think the point for that was the end of last season, would need to be a TV game or something now.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Really, I can't recall anyone being negative about those.

tbf I was negative about the Arsenal thing, really didn't think it'd work. It did surprise me however. I will admit that part of the negativity was I expected the anti-SISU RAWR behind it of other efforts

The two most successful ones however have had positive inclusive generalised 'doing' messages, as opposed to negative specific 'not doing' messages.

 

[Grendel]

Then she loses that much money that she will never recover.

Who/how many will be left to go to the lego stadium or the Ricoh after that amount of time?

Sorry She Bet on red should have been sky blue.

The real money lost is far less. It's a daunting stat that the cost of being in sixfields is probably £2 million tips and with proper financial management the club could lose less money than they had at the Ricoh.

As soon as the administration order was raised I said Pandora's box has opened and no one knows the hell that will be unleashed. This will run and run.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

As soon as the administration order was raised I said Pandora's box has opened and no one knows the hell that will be unleashed.

Interestingly, PWKH said the same...

 

[martcov]

You don't know how the gamble has worked as you don't know the timescale she will be prepared to work to. Say its 4 years -what then?

We know that SISU bought CCFC with a view to making a quick buck. It didn't come off. We know that Joy tried to beat down the price of the Higgs' share. It didn't come off. We know that Joy tried to buy out the YB loan. It didn't come off. We know that Joy said we don't negotiate - take my offer or I will involve you in litigation. It didn't come off. We know that Joy thought she could present a dossier including photos before the court. It didn't come off. We know that SISU countersued Higgs' to get damning evidence against CCC. It didn't come of. And so on and so on.

I would say that Joy's gamble/s has/have not come off and that she is up Sxxt Street without a paddle.

Last hope/ gamble is that they get leave to appeal. If they lose that it's "check mate". Bye Joy. Quite frankly, Tim may have a point, if he did actually say that Joy is bonkers.

 

[martcov]

The real money lost is far less. It's a daunting stat that the cost of being in sixfields is probably £2 million tips and with proper financial management the club could lose less money than they had at the Ricoh.

As soon as the administration order was raised I said Pandora's box has opened and no one knows the hell that will be unleashed. This will run and run.

You may be right about the club losing less at sixfields with their reduced costs ( and a bit of luck - Arsenal away, selling Leon Clarke and Callum Wilson ). But the 50 million - even if maybe some is a tax loss/ shuffle - will not come back and will hurt.

There is no chance though, of building a football team capable of promotion in this low budget scenario.