Questions for the day (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

...with no real purpose other than curiosity...

Why the gasworks site in the first place? Surely more expensive to build on/clean up than other sites? (I saw Parkside mentioned, that would have been far better!)

What happened to the group who wanted to spend more cash taking us over, but who wanted the council to give them some land to go with it, and the club to have all its debts written off before they took over?

Did we really value Julian Darby at £300k?

Why the silence from Geoffrey Robinson over all this? Even Bryan Richardson spoke out!

Why are ACL/Council viewed by the masses as being too incompetent to negotiate a deal for the Ricoh that ensures the ground has to stay with the club?

Is Nick ever going to patch things up with Leanne?

Where are Frankie Muniz, Brian McFadden and Eddie Jordan when we need them?

James Smith · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
...with no real purpose other than curiosity...

Why the gasworks site in the first place? Surely more expensive to build on/clean up than other sites? (I saw Parkside mentioned, that would have been far better!)

I thought because they were trying to regenerate a depressed area of the city.

Deleted member 5849 said:
Where are Frankie Muniz, Brian McFadden and Eddie Jordan when we need them?

Well I've no idea who the first one is, the second probably spending his cash, and the third is wearing 'tasteful' shirts on BBC F1.

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

Not sure there were other options, but the regeneration of North Coventry was certainly was reason. I know a man who might know the answer, will ask when I see him next. I also think (if memory serves me) that the cleanup bill for the gasworks ended up containing a few surprises (and a few gypsies) that weren't foreseen (and couldn't have been).

Question 2: do you mean the Manhattan group? If not, I don't remember such a group.

Robinson has been the quietest of all the the Coventry MPs hasn't he? The latest news article I can find is him saying we need new owners in January 2012. Is he anyone's MP? Maybe give him a shout?

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Question 2: do you mean the Manhattan group? If not, I don't remember such a group.

Nope.

City council leader Ken Taylor revealed that two other "derisory" bids had been received from two other firms.

One, called Sisu, had offered £15million.

The other was from a firm called Shapiro, which offered £26million but wanted the club to pay off its debts and the city council to give it a longer lease on the Ricoh Arena and some spare land to the north of the site.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-face-bleak-future-3105889

fernandopartridge · Oct 22, 2013

James Smith said:
I thought because they were trying to regenerate a depressed area of the city.

Well I've no idea who the first one is, the second probably spending his cash, and the third is wearing 'tasteful' shirts on BBC F1.

The greater part of the job creation / regeneration of that part of the city has happened as a result of Tesco. Not the Ricoh.

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The greater part of the job creation / regeneration of that part of the city has happened as a result of Tesco. Not the Ricoh.

Tesco only happened because of the Ricoh, you can't seperate the two, the development as a whole relied on each part.

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Nope.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-face-bleak-future-3105889

Not seen/forgotten that. Thanks.

How would the club have paid off it's debts though?

fernandopartridge · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Nope.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/sky-blues-face-bleak-future-3105889

If only the council could get such an offer now. I suspect they would absolutely bite their hands off. As it turned out, the deal from SISU was no better than either of those 2 bids. I don't believe SISU paid any of the clubs major debts.

fernandopartridge · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Tesco only happened because of the Ricoh, you can't seperate the two, the development as a whole relied on each part.

Erm, no. Tesco happened because they bought the land. Who submitted the planning application for the Ricoh Arena?

Joy Division · Oct 22, 2013

Frankie Muniz is only a fan because his cousin played for us.

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
Erm, no. Tesco happened because they bought the land. Who submitted the planning application for the Ricoh Arena?

The land was only for sale as part of the regeneration of North Coventry. Tesco only wanted it at that value because of the footfall a new stadium complex would give them.

Honestly, it was all one big deal. If the Ricoh didn't happen, neither would Tesco, that's how these regeneration projects work.

You could just as well say the same about the Stadium of Joy, why would ASDA/Morrison, etc. not just buy the land? Same reason, they need an anchor tenant for footfall.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Not seen/forgotten that. Thanks.

How would the club have paid off it's debts though?

As the last paragraph says, in the main with Robinson writing everything off!

To an extent though, isn't their opening gambit similar at face value to what you'd want now? Clean slate, and all that?

The interesting thing as well is the claim it was derisory because they wanted land and a longer lease on the Ricoh too. Both of which would surely have been better for the club, long term, and thus by extension the taxpayer and Higgs long term? i know hindsight's a wonderful thing and all that, and I know it's just an article that mentions things in passing... but it does show how (we had similar with Haskell) alternatives are maneuvered into the position of ONLY ALTERNATIVE when they're really not.

It's more... only alternative that's worthwhile to certain interested parties, that suits those parties to make it an only alternative.

More further reading btw, Sheldon Yellon of Manhatten. he's certainly open about himself. I know it's all propaganda so maybe completely partial, but we might just have been close to actually getting our lucky break there.

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
If only the council could get such an offer now. I suspect they would absolutely bite their hands off. As it turned out, the deal from SISU was no better than either of those 2 bids. I don't believe SISU paid any of the clubs major debts.

I imagine they would, as they say hindsight is 20/20.

If Sisu didn't pay off debts, where the hell did the current debt to Sisu come from?

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
As the last paragraph says, in the main with Robinson writing everything off!

To an extent though, isn't their opening gambit similar at face value to what you'd want now? Clean slate, and all that?

The interesting thing as well is the claim it was derisory because they wanted land and a longer lease on the Ricoh too. Both of which would surely have been better for the club, long term, and thus by extension the taxpayer and Higgs long term? i know hindsight's a wonderful thing and all that, and I know it's just an article that mentions things in passing... but it does show how (we had similar with Haskell) alternatives are maneuvered into the position of ONLY ALTERNATIVE when they're really not.

It's more... only alternative that's worthwhile to certain interested parties, that suits those parties to make it an only alternative.

More further reading btw, Sheldon Yellon of Manhatten. he's certainly open about himself. I know it's all propaganda so maybe completely partial, but we might just have been close to actually getting our lucky break there.

Hands up, I didn't read the attached article.

Yeah you're right, would've been a better deal all round. Was all our debt to Robinson then?

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Hands up, I didn't read the attached article.

Yeah you're right, would've been a better deal all round. Was all our debt to Robinson then?

Someone better informed will correct me There was a large chunk to the Co-op too, and they effectively forced the SISU takeover.

I *think* Robinson was guarantor on that debt too however. I do know he did move to take the Higgs option into his name shortly before all this happened... obviously his efforts to do that failed.

rodders · Oct 22, 2013

I think it's probably the other way around the stadium only got built because of Tesco and thanks to them the area has been revitalized except now the stadium is a big white elephant when are the council going to admit this and. Do something. about it

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

rodders said:
I think it's probably the other way around the stadium only got built because of Tesco and thanks to them the area has been revitalized except now the stadium is a big white elephant when are the council going to admit this and. Do something. about it

Potato Potahto

They needed each other, The Ricoh needs a successful sports team. CCFC needs a stake in a successful arena.

Let's stop the emotive language and look at how everyone can get what they need.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
I imagine they would, as they say hindsight is 20/20.

If Sisu didn't pay off debts, where the hell did the current debt to Sisu come from?

Think that's his point though. Ranson always claimed we were debt free, but it was more external debt free. The 'old' debt still lay around (and I'd guess if we write anything off now after admin, that'll be it?).

If OSB's lurking I'd like that clarified however, as I'm no accountant. (or even Mr. Dazzle could do it as a job share? ) but if so it'd explain why our debt's so large now, wouldn't it.

Prosaically the way the club's set up, it does need an external financier to exist, it's not surprising that over 6-7 years that debt grows..

What we need is a surprising move such as Al Fayad, who wrote off Fulham's (near £200mil!!) debt and converted it to equity.

rodders · Oct 22, 2013

Perhaps a busy stadium helps tescos but I doubt that their take has suffered that much this year the arena and surrounding pubs and clubs are dead the council must act support lobby of council

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

rodders said:
Perhaps a busy stadium helps tescos but I doubt that their take has suffered that much this year the arena and surrounding pubs and clubs are dead the council must act support lobby of council

Lobby for what though? What is the action you are asking them to take? And if it's "sell the Ricoh", at what price?

I agree, I doubt it has suffered too much (though I imagine their game day take is down by tens of thousands, so maybe £0.5m/year), but the point we were talking about was the creation of the project, how did it come about. Not where we are now.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

shmmeee said:
Lobby for what though? What is the action you are asking them to take? And if it's "sell the Ricoh", at what price?

I agree, I doubt it has suffered too much (though I imagine their game day take is down by tens of thousands, so maybe £0.5m/year), but the point we were talking about was the creation of the project, how did it come about. Not where we are now.

Of course that was always Tesco partly playing the politics, in that the only way they could get planning permission for their super super stores was to sugarcoat it by linking them to projects such as the Ricoh.

Something, incidentally, that if Byng ever shows himself as more than a man who can't send an email, needs to be asked of him. What's he wanting sugarcoating elsewhere, and what happens to the club once his backers get that?

davebart · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
If OSB's lurking I'd like that clarified however, as I'm no accountant

I thought you knew everything?

rodders · Oct 22, 2013

The council as they have used our money to support a now empty stadium need to make something happen instead of doing nothing and blaming sisu they are just as responsible and as much to blame for the loss of ten points and no football being played in coventry.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

davebart said:
I thought you knew everything?

I know enough to know I know little

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

rodders said:
The council as they have used our money to support a now empty stadium need to make something happen instead of doing nothing and blaming sisu they are just as responsible and as much to blame for the loss of ten points and no football being played in coventry.

Again. What do you want them to do?

"make something happen" sounds like you're asking for a magic wand. What deal do you want offered?

davebart · Oct 22, 2013

My question would be this:

assume the council sell their bit of the Ricoh to SISU for say £7m.
assume Higgs sell their bit for £4m to SISU
assume SISU buy ACL and the mortgage so they can control revenues.

Q: If SISU then make a shed load of money would they use it to improve CCFC as a team or would they reward their investors?

DazzleTommyDazzle · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
If OSB's lurking I'd like that clarified however, as I'm no accountant. (or even Mr. Dazzle could do it as a job share? ) but if so it'd explain why our debt's so large now, wouldn't it.

You couldn't afford my rates - I make Appleton look like a cheapskate

shmmeee · Oct 22, 2013

davebart said:
My question would be this:

assume the council sell their bit of the Ricoh to SISU for say £7m.
assume Higgs sell their bit for £4m to SISU
assume SISU buy ACL and the mortgage so they can control revenues.

Q: If SISU then make a shed load of money would they use it to improve CCFC as a team or would they reward their investors?

To be fair, there's two ways Sisu can make a shedload of money from that deal:

1) Sell the Ricoh and club for a profit

2) Build a successful team that creates a rising tide that carries all ships

1 is not only more likely, but makes the answers to your question "reward their investors". 2 is possible, but would take a lot longer and be less certain.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

Yeah, it's also worth not making it an ideological issue also.

Fan-ownership poster boy Swansea paid out a nice dividend to their shareholders on profits after all.

(Something I'd not be happy with if I were a Swansea fan, mind you!)

Warwickhunt · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
...with no real purpose other than curiosity...

Why the gasworks site in the first place? Surely more expensive to build on/clean up than other sites? (I saw Parkside mentioned, that would have been far better!)

What happened to the group who wanted to spend more cash taking us over, but who wanted the council to give them some land to go with it, and the club to have all its debts written off before they took over?

Did we really value Julian Darby at £300k?

Why the silence from Geoffrey Robinson over all this? Even Bryan Richardson spoke out!

Why are ACL/Council viewed by the masses as being too incompetent to negotiate a deal for the Ricoh that ensures the ground has to stay with the club?

Is Nick ever going to patch things up with Leanne?

Where are Frankie Muniz, Brian McFadden and Eddie Jordan when we need them?

Cos Richardson was the only twat who said that CCFC would do the cleanup of the Site and remove the frigging Squating Gypoe's which consumed all of our cashflow because it was grossly underestimated

DazzleTommyDazzle · Oct 22, 2013

davebart said:
My question would be this:

assume the council sell their bit of the Ricoh to SISU for say £7m.
assume Higgs sell their bit for £4m to SISU
assume SISU buy ACL and the mortgage so they can control revenues.

Q: If SISU then make a shed load of money would they use it to improve CCFC as a team or would they reward their investors?

Can I start by admitting that one of the many areas of life that I know virtually nothing about is the valuation of non-standard commercial property such as the Ricoh.

However - (and I think I said this at the Brighton conference*) if a vaguely sensible value for the Ricoh is anything less than £25m, why were SISU ever contemplating building a much smaller ground for £25m (before cost overruns)? Surely they'd have made this vaguely sensible offer to the Council?

* For those old enough to remember Mike Yarwood/Harold Wilson

James Smith · Oct 22, 2013

rodders said:
The council as they have used our money to support a now empty stadium need to make something happen instead of doing nothing and blaming sisu they are just as responsible and as much to blame for the loss of ten points and no football being played in coventry.

Sorry but the council didn't stop us negotiating a better rent deal at the Ricoh, they didn't stop us paying the rent, they didn't kick us out of the Ricoh, they didn't move us to Northampton etc. They were one half of the two shareholders of the company (ACL) that charged us an extremely high rent but they didn't move us to Northampton.

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
However - (and I think I said this at the Brighton conference*) if a vaguely sensible value for the Ricoh is anything less than £25m, why were SISU ever contemplating building a much smaller ground for £25m (before cost overruns)? Surely they'd have made this vaguely sensible offer to the Council?

Well at the risk of going over old ground, isn't this where the council's 'It's not for sale, and even more not for sale to SISU' approach probably colours that? Isn't it yet another example of where extreme rhetoric polarises and stops discussion?

davebart · Oct 22, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Yeah, it's also worth not making it an ideological issue also.

it's not an idealogical issue. its a question. which would they do?

Did their investors invest in CCFC because they loved the club or because they were led to believe there were big bucks to be made?

Click to expand...

Deleted member 5849 · Oct 22, 2013

It becomes an ideological issue when SISU are automatically condemned as being certain to do dastardly things (as opposed to finding a way where their and club's interests can intersect) while, meanwhile, Swansea are held up as an ideal model...

Yet in that ideal model, they do exactly that, and pay out dividends to their investors!

So following a Swansea model to the letter would have the effect people are afeared of from SISU.

Questions for the day (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Active Member

New Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Active Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency