fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It's the emotive and unprofessional language from the council also. The constant references to a 'hedge fund'.
We need our elected representatives to have the balls to go public with all their behind closed door discussion and negotiate a plan that gets ccfc playing football again at the Ricoh we have what appears to be our best team for a long time and very few fans watching them I will be at sixfields tonight so the Northampton economy will benefit not Coventry surely the council need to do something???? Will they even discuss I today I doubt it.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Mayfair based, at that.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
They may not be able to do that legally if there were/are non disclosure agreements in place.
But will you be going in?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I agree entirely.
Without getting into a discussion about the invasion of Poland, I think it's fair to say that this was started by SISU - or to be more precise by TF - by the stance he took from the time of the rent strike - but should both sides take a metaphorical deep breath, try to forget what has gone before and try to behave in a more busnesslike manner - yes please.
On a more pessimistic note, I believe that you need at least a reasonable degree of trust on both sides to conclude a deal (particularly one with the complications of this) and I do worry that we are beyond the point where that trust can be recovered.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Skipping the risk of circles
I'll agree with this bit... and unfortunately probably the last bit, too! I'd hoped Mutton being replaced by lucas might see things move forward but... doesn't seem to have done so, yet.In which case, isn't the best call fans can make is to call for mediation/arbitration, rather than resumption of talks?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
Skipping the risk of circles
In which case, isn't the best call fans can make is to call for mediation/arbitration, rather than resumption of talks?
That might help to take some of the personal antagonism out of negotiations, but I think you still need the trust before you put pen to paper.
Re-risking circles
, don't you think that that's where things really started to go downhill fast. I remember that at the time, I simply couldn't believe TF's approach.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Re-risking circles
I had the (dis?)advantage of not really having much interest in the club as it all started blowing up, so it's meant I've been able to go back and read everything afterwards. I'd like to think
it means I'm a bit more detached from the history than as it plays out, but obviously synthesising two sides SHOUTING isn't the easiest!Being straight, what I see is disgraceful behaviour on both sides. I see Mutton's 'I was chanting SISU Out with the rest of them' as inexcusable for the council leader, pontificating about the club and its future. I also see Fisher's threats and (deliberate?) vagueries as unhelpful in the extreme.
Now, my own personal view in all this is nothing but a personal view, and as circumstancial evidence can't be used... but I'd like to know the answers
from my reading relations between Higgs(ACL) and the club were reasonably OK, and I suspect there was a deal to be done there. There's mentions of the club going off to meet the council and then their behaviour changing after that. *Something* happened in that council meeting to change it, and alas we don't (and won't) ever know what. So then it becomes ever more public (and open) war between council and club, with Higgs caught in the middle as collateral damage, thoroughly bemused about what the heck's going on... the club's biggest failing is probably packaging up Higgs and Council into one mass and then treating them the same. the deal to be done would have probably been to work on getting/keeping Higgs onside (who want out anyway I'd assume!) and then the club would have had the two-pronged attack to get whatever it was they wanted.To me, where it starts kicking off seriously is that toddling off to have a chat to the council. That's where flies on the wall would have been handy!
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You couldn't afford my rates - I make Appleton look like a cheapskate
Should I send you my CV then?
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I had the (dis?)advantage of not really having much interest in the club as it all started blowing up, so it's meant I've been able to go back and read everything afterwards. I'd like to think
Being straight, what I see is disgraceful behaviour on both sides. I see Mutton's 'I was chanting SISU Out with the rest of them' as inexcusable for the council leader, pontificating about the club and its future. I also see Fisher's threats and (deliberate?) vagueries as unhelpful in the extreme.
Now, my own personal view in all this is nothing but a personal view, and as circumstancial evidence can't be used... but I'd like to know the answers
To me, where it starts kicking off seriously is that toddling off to have a chat to the council. That's where flies on the wall would have been handy!
I'll bet the US secret service were bugging it (they seem to be bugging everything else) - wonder if we could get hold of a tape?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Would you prefer it we called them a pay day loan company?
The other alternative name for them is the Investment Refund Account, or IRA for short.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It is probably worth the point of order now that technically it's the Mayfair based Private Equity Fund as well as Hedge Fund
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I suspect that was when Sisu stated their intention of wanting the freehold or nothing. Or is my timing off?
I'd like to know exactly how the alleged deal with the council to distress ACL was concocted. Was it: "This is what we want or we'll do it ourselves" or "This is the best option for all" or "You don't really have any options".
I'd also like to know if the talks with the Higgs enabled Sisu to get a closer look at ACL's finances and that's when they saw a leverage point and went to see the council. From the Higgs account (arguably the most honest and open of all parties in this, and with the least to gain from taking sides, also the only one of the parties still talking to the club) Sisu seemed to be all about taking up the option, then went away and were never heard from. It's at this point they went to the council.
Seems to me either there was something they got from negotiations with the Higgs and they never wanted to buy their share, or they got a shock from what they saw as part of the deal and turned it into an opportunity.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I think your timing's off.
Personally, I suspect that in that meeting they were told no to ever owning the council half of ACL, and that the Higgs deal would be vetoed if they proceeded... so then the club went into nuclear meltdown and decided to move to KILL KILL KILL mode.
but of course that's idle speculation as much as anything else! The point about looking at ACL's finances is a point well made also.
Of course, it could have been all or none of the above! But if you can't beat the conspiracists, join them!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Will take your word for it.
Still, The Higgs say the Higgs deal was never put before the council and why go to the council at all and not tie things up with the Higgs and see where it went.
If we were here talking about how CCC denied the Higgs selling their share, I think we'd have a very different split of opinion. Then again PR has never been Joy's strong point.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
A private meeting giving a heads up as to how it'd go if it proceeds is rather different to it actually being put before council however.
A bit like formal and informal talks on planning permission
The logical conclusion would be that SISU wanted a deal tied up with Higgs, go off to see the council and say we've got this in the pipeline, we'd like your share too as it's our stadium really?
Ofcourse I don't intend to stand on a mound watching half of pitch and having the ordasity to tell someone else how they should spend their hard earned money.By the way I just listened to Ann Lucas in the council meeting once again say very little as she is supposedly constrained by further costly litigation threats she has again stated that the Ricoh is a viable business without football but again was not prepared publicly to back this up with any financial detail.So still nothing of any help from our elected councilors although Bob Ainsworth is about to say something in parliament at 4 could be hot viewing then again!!! Any way up the sky blues see you at sixfields.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
So the evidence is it'd make a loss without the club?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Not really. Made just under £1.1m with the club paying a rent of £1.2m. That £100k could be easily recuperated over the course of a year through alternative events.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
What alternative events?
You're also not including the takings from concessions etc
Those accounts show the Arena would make a loss without the club, no question. They don't show the future, which may or may not be able to be turned around without the club (OSB will be along to tell me this if I don't stick it in
)... but as evidence they show the club is fundamental to that profit in those accounts!They also, incidentally, show why rental negotiations would hit an impasse time and time again...
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Think I'm right in saying that since making £1.1m with the club paying a rent of £1.2m they have massively reduced costs. They've restructured their debt and changed the staffing of the company to reduce costs, hence why the could offer a much lower rent to SISU.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
What alternative events?
You're also not including the takings from concessions etc
Those accounts show the Arena would make a loss without the club, no question. They don't show the future, which may or may not be able to be turned around without the club (OSB will be along to tell me this if I don't stick it in
They also, incidentally, show why rental negotiations would hit an impasse time and time again...
As chiefdave says that was before the restructured loan with the council.
Within that set of accounts the club also missed two rental payments if my memory serves me right?
I think you might be over estimating how much they make off F&B's. Didn't OSB show it was probably no more than about £50k?