Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
It is interesting how the heat is starting to increase around the subject of SISU owning the RICOH. I was not at Sixfields, but I understand that Mr Byng was there in attendance with Mr Waggot. Today he comes out in support of SISU and states that the CCC must sell to SISU. To quote the CT “Warwickshire businessman Michael Byng, who is seeking to attract Asian investors to buy Coventry City - said today Coventry City Councill must sell the Ricoh Arena to the club's owners Sisu” (Note I did not try to correct thier inability to proof read)
Well Mr Byng. You are wrong. They do not have to sell to anybody, unless they feel that the sale is in the best interest of all stakeholders. I agree, that all parties should be treated equally, that in my view means that it is a level playing field on Sale Price, Assessment of suitability to own a Civic Treasure, Past record on business capability etc.
If SISU stand up to such an assessment then the CCC should consider a sale, if not, they should be disbarred from bidding.
It is only my opinion, and I know I am a minority, but from my assessment SISU are far from being the most appropriate owners of our Stadium (as a tax payer, not a fan)
I would further suggest that any sale of the RICOH, should be leasehold only (To any bidder) and covenanted to stipulate that both CCFC and the Stadium remain on the same Balance sheet (that is the entity that has the Golden share and the players contracts is also in ownership of the lease) I am sure there are folk who understand the legally correct structure.
In that way SISU or anybody else could not put us in the same predicament we are in today. As Les Reid reported last week in the infamous JS interview, “Asked to be clear with fans and Coventrians if there were any hope of a Ricoh return, Ms Seppala said: “The club needs 100 per cent ownership of the freehold of the Ricoh. If you look back at the history of the club, you can see why this is important.” So she at least will be in full support of a legal tie between, the Club, the Golden share and the treasure that is the RICOH, if not the issue of Leasehold / Freehold.
Well Mr Byng. You are wrong. They do not have to sell to anybody, unless they feel that the sale is in the best interest of all stakeholders. I agree, that all parties should be treated equally, that in my view means that it is a level playing field on Sale Price, Assessment of suitability to own a Civic Treasure, Past record on business capability etc.
If SISU stand up to such an assessment then the CCC should consider a sale, if not, they should be disbarred from bidding.
It is only my opinion, and I know I am a minority, but from my assessment SISU are far from being the most appropriate owners of our Stadium (as a tax payer, not a fan)
I would further suggest that any sale of the RICOH, should be leasehold only (To any bidder) and covenanted to stipulate that both CCFC and the Stadium remain on the same Balance sheet (that is the entity that has the Golden share and the players contracts is also in ownership of the lease) I am sure there are folk who understand the legally correct structure.
In that way SISU or anybody else could not put us in the same predicament we are in today. As Les Reid reported last week in the infamous JS interview, “Asked to be clear with fans and Coventrians if there were any hope of a Ricoh return, Ms Seppala said: “The club needs 100 per cent ownership of the freehold of the Ricoh. If you look back at the history of the club, you can see why this is important.” So she at least will be in full support of a legal tie between, the Club, the Golden share and the treasure that is the RICOH, if not the issue of Leasehold / Freehold.
Last edited: