Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Sorry I meant appeal... or the consideration of taking it further.
Sky Blues return is "essential" for businesses to survive (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
Sorry I meant appeal... or the consideration of taking it further.
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
As I understand it the cost were against SBS&L Arvo Master fund and CCFC Holdings, who made the application for the JR so SISU are not on the hook. But I would imagine JS would not want to fail paying what the court has said as that would damage her in the longer run.
The one thing that is certain is that the costs will have been funded through the sale of our better players.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Well according to Simon that is by no means certain, he said I believe that the funds are with SISU's solicitors, even though the FL does seem quite content by the current situation. Anyway this particular obstacle will hopefully be sorted within the next few days.
Provided SISU drop their legal threats , then ACL have said they are open to negotiations.
However it has long been my belief that whilst ACL may want CCFC back at the RIcoh, they don't want SISU back, and may simply wish to sit it out. As long as ACL can survive financially, and the £590,000 will surely secure their short/medium term, then they can just sit and wait. The onus is then on SISU ,they are the ones who are promising/threatening a new stadium. The trouble for SISU is practically no one believes a word they say anymore, and their bluff has well and truly been called.
As far as I know sisu have no legal actions 'on' and have not stated they are planning more. So this is the perfect time for 'peace talks'.
If that doesn't lead to a new deal, then sisu can move the state aid case to the EU commission. They haven't threaten to do it, but I am sure that will happen.
If ACL 'waits out' on sisu gone, then I fear they will have to wait quite a long time. Even if sisu did go, I suppose the new owner will be ARVO - who hold charges on all assets. So that wouldn't really change anything.
And I don't think the fans will be happy to have ACL block a return of the club.
After the JR ,didn't Fisher say they intend to appeal for the case to be held before 3 Appeal Court Judges, so yes unless it's bluff and bluster, then the clear indication was that they intend to appeal.
The trouble for SISU is they can't threaten a new stadium indefinitely can they. Even the FL won't wait forever, sooner or later the sands of time will run out. If SISU threaten another administration, then it is hard to believe that the FL, would yet again hand the Golden Share yet again back to yet another SISU company.
Quick edit, it's on the club's website dated the 30/06/14, that the club confirmed their intention,'we will apply for leave to appeal this decision'.
Last edited:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
No, I believe they have contested Judges Hickenbottoms decision to refuse them leave to appeal & it now goes to a panel of 3 judges in London, then there is potentially another stage after that in tthe UK courts. After that it may go to European courts. Not finished by a long way & I think we can assume the absence of a statement that proceedings have stopped that they are still ongoing.
Last edited by a moderator:
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
What do you think SISU will do, LOL Won't know for sure till 21 days after the Judges refusal (on 25th July), so a couple of weeks to go yet
Anyway unless SISU say they've stopped legal actions, it is unlikely anyone will talk with them & certainly not till this 21 days is up.
Here is an outline of the procedure.. http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/what-next-sisu-v-coventry-7363893
Last edited by a moderator:
we found out about it on the 25th but his Judgement is dated the 18th so hopefully the date is the 8th August not the 15th.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/in...Reasons for refusing permission to appeal.pdf
Rob S
Well-Known Member
It's not pointless. Assessments & surveys are done all the time to allow organisations to respond to actual situations rather than just pull numbers out of their arses & guess. So far in this thread we've had the likes of you & I saying it's hurting businesses financially and others saying it's having hardly any effect. Until a qualified professional (i.e. none of us) actually sits down and looks at the situation we have no idea if it is £5 a year or £5m.
A few years back Cardiff University Business School did a survey on Swansea FC's value to their city and came up with a figure of £58m. Now there's no way CCFC would get close to that for Cov at the moment but it gives and indication of just how much a city can benefit. (It also gives Swansea Council a good reason to have built the stadium off their own backs and split the management company 3-ways between themselves, the club & Ospreys RFC.)
The issue is with ACL & Sisu sitting down and negotiating a solution and that has always been our solution to fixing this. Every second they're not, CCFC are not coming home. I don't need to sit here and say they should talk about this contract or that valuation or this thing that happened 5 years ago or whatever biscuit that should be served with whoever's tea. They should just get together and talk, end of.
They can talk about what offers are reasonable. All we need to do is get them there and unfortunately, picking one side over another doesn't actually do that.
Ridiculous statement. Especially as I sat opposite her not so long ago and told her that I was going to continue trying to work against her stated aim of building a new stadium and try to get us back to the Ricoh.
Where on earth do you get this from? Show me anywhere our campaign has ever said we should 'give the Ricoh to sisu' and you'll be drinking all weekend on me.
The closest we ever got to that was to say that all options (e.g. rent, freehold, leasehold) should be on the negotiating table. A million miles away from 'giving it away'.
This is part of the problem with this whole mess. People dream up something and other people think it's true because they're either too lazy to think for themselves or it fits in with what they already think is right so it must be true. No wonder our club is going to be kicking off the new season in a shed 35 miles away...
They all know the location, they're not allowed to say due to confidentiality, or the fact there isn't going to be one
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
So lets say this study is done, firstly who is paying for it?
To do it properly is a pretty complex task. It's not just a case of assessing the money lost by businesses close to the Ricoh you have to study where that money is now being spent so you can have the full picture. For example if some chap used to buy 2 pints on the way to the Ricoh but now goes down the local and buys 3 pints instead he's actually spending more in the city but if the study only cover the Ricoh area it wouldn't see the real picture.
That's before you even consider the impact of events now at the Ricoh that couldn't have been there previously, the gaming festival for example couldn't have been scheduled to take place as they use the stadium bowl and its during the season, scheduling that and making the Ricoh unavailable to the club that weekend would breach league rules.
And once you have the study then what? Lets assume it shows the city benefits from having football team what do we do then? It's not like theres anyone who doesn't want a football team here so nothing is actually going to change.
To do it properly is a pretty complex task. It's not just a case of assessing the money lost by businesses close to the Ricoh you have to study where that money is now being spent so you can have the full picture. For example if some chap used to buy 2 pints on the way to the Ricoh but now goes down the local and buys 3 pints instead he's actually spending more in the city but if the study only cover the Ricoh area it wouldn't see the real picture.
That's before you even consider the impact of events now at the Ricoh that couldn't have been there previously, the gaming festival for example couldn't have been scheduled to take place as they use the stadium bowl and its during the season, scheduling that and making the Ricoh unavailable to the club that weekend would breach league rules.
And once you have the study then what? Lets assume it shows the city benefits from having football team what do we do then? It's not like theres anyone who doesn't want a football team here so nothing is actually going to change.
duffer
Well-Known Member
See what you're saying mate - but is it really worth CCC spending money to determine it, given that SISU don't even look interested in dropping the court case and ACL are demanding that, plus the £590k.
In truth, and forgive my cyncism, studies like this seem to find precisely what their sponsors want them to find. For an example, look at the Council's findings regarding the 50m pool and how their later investigations seemed to remarkably, completely and 100% support their earlier decision. (What, and you thought I liked the council?!)
Yep - no argument from me here. At the moment it seems like they're both putting things in the way that just don't need to be there. For SISU, the court case, for ACL the money due via the FL. Neither of those things needs to be in play, imho.
I'm sure you've said it mate, absolutely certain of it. My suggestion is that you stand me a few on tick until I can dig out the actual evidence.
Selective perception. It's human nature. When we do right, nobody remembers. When we do wrong, nobody forgets. Before you adopt that on your t-shirt you might want to ask the permission from the local Hells Angels btw.
Have a good weekend fella.
Last edited:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
In that case why don't SISU ask the ~10,000 paying customers they lost last year their view on where CCFC should be playing?
Last edited by a moderator:
I live outside the city and it's sad to say I haven't been in the city now we have stopped playing there. Used to pay for a car park in a local pub £3 buy a beer £3 then go on to the casino £20. Then after the match do some shopping £50. That is money that some other place is getting now.
They did ,admittedly the sample wasn't that large but from their own data base the response was 75% against ,courtesy of Dan Walker.
As It turned out that was a little conservative and buried until well after league approval to up sticks.
M&B Stand
Well-Known Member
Read two different articles, one about how much the local economy had been boosted by Swansea being in the Prem and the other about the financial impact of Liverpool having two teams in Europe this season. You do wonder if coventry council see any value in having a successful football team in the city. Maybe they just don't.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
One of the issues with SISU was that they consistently refused to present any business plan for the club.
We still are no clearer as everything they say seems little short of nonsensical.
In my view an organisation like SISU will never deliver a successful team, they didn't buy this club for football reasons.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Actually I would like the council to do a survey across all of coventry and ask would they care if the Ricoh arena was sold to a hedge fund for less than £10 million.
I think unless only people in here were surveyed then the results would never ever be published.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
So the question would be ...
Shall we sell the profitable £110M Ricoh Arena to an unknown offshore hedge fund for £10M?
... And you reckon the answer would be yes?
The survey for the biggest WUM is now closed
duffer
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. The council with all of those employees from Coventry, many of whom are fans, and a leader who used to be a season ticket holder, want the club to fail. And that's why they went to all the trouble of building the Ricoh.
Why do we just keep regurgitating the same old tired arguments. The fact is that there's a clear path ahead, that doesn't require a survey, or a valuation, or any more fiddling, or pissing around, or whining.
It starts with SISU dropping the court case, and ACL letting the FL sort out the money owed - and ends with them both sitting down and sorting out a short-term rent deal. Once that's done the club can negotiate for everything else, or build a new stadium if they can't get what they want. The rest, frankly, is just noise.
If we're going to start in on buzz-word bullshit bingo again, can I call dibs on "cash-cow", please.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I call "smoking gun"
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
"Local Childrens Charity".
answered in Bold
In truth, and forgive my cyncism, studies like this seem to find precisely what their sponsors want them to find. For an example, look at the Council's findings regarding the 50m pool and how their later investigations seemed to remarkably, completely and 100% support their earlier decision. (What, and you thought I liked the council?!)
If the councils numbers were right then I support the decision to go with a 25m pool but I struggle to believe their numbers are right. The telegraph article didn't drill into or question the numbers but I worked out that the 50m pool would need to lose 8000 a week more than the 25m pool for their numbers to be correct and that seems all sorts of unlikely.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So the question would be ...
Shall we sell the profitable £110M Ricoh Arena to an unknown offshore hedge fund for £10M?
... And you reckon the answer would be yes?
The survey for the biggest WUM is now closed
Well you could say if the council sold for £10 million and used that to support local services. Wonder what they'd say.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
what, so leave out the details that its worth a lot more ?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
The council seemed very happy to give ACL £50,000 to host the Davis Cup last year, about £6.00 per spectator.
Could they pay £6.00 per spectator to CCFC to play games at the Ricoh?
Sure that we'd be back pretty sharpish then.
Could they pay £6.00 per spectator to CCFC to play games at the Ricoh?
Sure that we'd be back pretty sharpish then.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
The appeal would probably count as a legal action wouldn't it?
If ACL can survive without our club and don't need the cash that we would bring by a return because other weekend events cover it, where does that leave us. Let's be clear ACL are a private company, don't have to take us back and if we leave it too late they 'might' be able to find someone or something to replace us. It would be frankly ridiculous if they didn't if they've got no one or nothing to replace us but there's been ridiculousness all round in the past. Sisu likewise don't have to take us back to the Ricoh although it would be frankly ridiculous if they didn't if they've got no new stadium to replace it. What the fans want is or certainly seems to be irrelevant.
Last edited:
