The PR game (4 Viewers)

duffer · Sep 24, 2013

theferret said:
Well it couldn't have been that bad if all sides signed a headline agreement could it?

And no, the JR followed the breakdown of the deal TF was referring to, which concerned the purchase of the 50% stake owned by the council, not the Higgs share which was not part of those negotiations. The council agreed to sell THEIR share of ACL to SISU in return for SISU paying off the mortgage in full. They agreed, then changed their mind. Fine, people are allowed to do that, but that is happened is not really in doubt.

Erm... actually I think there's considerable doubt here. Where did it say they'd pay off the mortgage in full?

In fact, SISU's contention in their JR is that they would've paid off the mortgage at substantially less than the full rate, on the basis they could distress ACL and make Yorkshire Bank nervous.

That meeting happened in 2012.

In January 2013, Fisher had another meeting with ACL when they drew up an agreement for a rent of £400k. 'Gentlemen, we have a deal'. The JR actually followed when SISU reneged on that deal and everything came tumbling down. I wonder why.

Fisher can be proven to lie, simply and clearly and unambigously in the interview you've quoted.

. Do you feel you have a moral and/or legal obligation to pay ACL the rent you owe them, given that it is half-owned by the taxpayers of Coventry, many of whom are your supporters and customers? The monies owed will be made good.

Remind me again - what was the actual offer in the CVA? It certainly wasn't 100% of the accepted debt to ACL, was it?

The man seems incapable of telling the truth. You've said that yourself. How can you judge when he's being honest or not? I work on the basis that if I can see his lips moving, it's probably bullshit.

hill83 · Sep 24, 2013

theferret said:
ohitsaidwalker king power apologist.

Erm, I prefer rent boy actually.

*minces off in speedos*

ohitsaidwalker king power · Sep 24, 2013

hill83 said:
Erm, I prefer rent boy actually.

*minces off in speedos*

theferret · Sep 24, 2013

duffer said:
Erm... actually I think there's considerable doubt here. Where did it say they'd pay off the mortgage in full?

In fact, SISU's contention in their JR is that they would've paid off the mortgage at substantially less than the full rate, on the basis they could distress ACL and make Yorkshire Bank nervous.

That meeting happened in 2012.

In January 2013, Fisher had another meeting with ACL when they drew up an agreement for a rent of £400k. 'Gentlemen, we have a deal'. The JR actually followed when SISU reneged on that deal and everything came tumbling down. I wonder why.

Fisher can be proven to lie, simply and clearly and unambigously in the interview you've quoted.

. Do you feel you have a moral and/or legal obligation to pay ACL the rent you owe them, given that it is half-owned by the taxpayers of Coventry, many of whom are your supporters and customers? The monies owed will be made good.

Remind me again - what was the actual offer in the CVA? It certainly wasn't 100% of the accepted debt to ACL, was it?

The man seems incapable of telling the truth. You've said that yourself. How can you judge when he's being honest or not? I work on the basis that if I can see his lips moving, it's probably bullshit.

I used the phrase 'pay the mortgage off in full' - I was paraphrasing, whereas TF used the terms 'buy out the ACL debt' and 'leave ACL debt free'.

I am aware that the intention was to present ACL as distressed in order that YB would 'restructure' - but ACL (the accusation goes) were entirely complicit in that, and it doesn't escape the fact there is a signed agreement that neither ACL or CCC have ever denied the existence of. It was a deal they walked away from, and one which it appears would have been good for all parties.

I have never sought to argue that SISU are squeaky clean or ethical, I am merely challenging those who seem intent on denying the role played by the council in this sorry mess. I'm not clear on the numbers, but suspect the amount offered in the CVA, plus the monies drawn from the ESCROW account, were not that far short of the arrears owed at the point that CCFC Ltd went into administration.

fernandopartridge · Sep 24, 2013

Sky Blue Kid said:
@"Canyouhearthedrums"....One more tiny, little, minute, miniscule thing to finish........."We can't afford the rent"....but we will come up with £25-35m for a Stadium!

The rent over 50 years of the lease is twice that.

Godiva · Sep 24, 2013

theferret said:
I used the phrase 'pay the mortgage off in full' - I was paraphrasing, whereas TF used the terms 'buy out the ACL debt' and 'leave ACL debt free'.

I am aware that the intention was to present ACL as distressed in order that YB would 'restructure' - but ACL (the accusation goes) were entirely complicit in that, and it doesn't escape the fact there is a signed agreement that neither ACL or CCC have ever denied the existence of. It was a deal they walked away from, and one which it appears would have been good for all parties.

I have never sought to argue that SISU are squeaky clean or ethical, I am merely challenging those who seem intent on denying the role played by the council in this sorry mess. I'm not clear on the numbers, but suspect the amount offered in the CVA, plus the monies drawn from the ESCROW account, were not that far short of the arrears owed at the point that CCFC Ltd went into administration.

I admire your tenacity.
I have tried to explain all that for months, but I think the whole deal is too complex to grasp if you come from a pov that sisu is all bad and not to be trusted.

Yes, sisu and CCc did a HOT that included sisu buying the CCc shares in ACL, buying the mortgage at distressed value (£6m-8m has been suggested) and discharge it completely and finally would buy the Higgs shares at the secret formular value (believed to be around £8m). But something happened - like Hoffman popping up again(!) and the ACL chairman leaving to become director at Yorkshire Bank. Then everything start tumbling down - the rent agreement, CCc bought the mortgage way above distressed value (this is part of the JR) and all communications broke down leading to administration.

And yes, ACL would have gained all debt owed through the CVA - but now they have rejected it they may not get it (according to OSB) ... though FL have set it as a condition to grant Otium the GS. We'll see in a year or so how much they actually get.

Jack Griffin · Sep 24, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The rent over 50 years of the lease is twice that.

Again you use the fantasy £1.3M figure, which we all know is not going to be used.. I've redone your sums on the basis of a more realistic 400K average rent (assuming championship status) and the actual 40 years of the lease left, and the number I come up with is £16M...

theferret · Sep 24, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
Again you use the fantasy £1.3M figure, which we all know is not going to be used.. I've redone your sums on the basis of a more realistic 400K average rent (assuming championship status) and the actual 40 years of the lease left, and the number I come up with is £16M...

Cool. Now you can factor is all the lost revenues that arise from not earning a penny from the rented stadium 340 days a year over 40 years.

Grendel · Sep 24, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
Again you use the fantasy £1.3M figure, which we all know is not going to be used.. I've redone your sums on the basis of a more realistic 400K average rent (assuming championship status) and the actual 40 years of the lease left, and the number I come up with is £16M...

That's nice. Do the club get back the overpayments for 5 years that the robbing filth took off them (and us as supporters)?

Danceswithhorses · Sep 24, 2013

theferret said:
and it doesn't escape the fact there is a signed agreement that neither ACL or CCC have ever denied the existence of.

Or, to be fair, SISU have ever proven the existence of either.

Grendel · Sep 24, 2013

Danceswithhorses said:
Or, to be fair, SISU have ever proven the existence of either.

Oh I think PWKH and the ACL publicity machine would be in full flow if not....don't you?

theferret · Sep 24, 2013

Danceswithhorses said:
Or, to be fair, SISU have ever proven the existence of either.

..or to be fair, have ACL ever proven that famous 'handshake'. Which of course can't be proved, unless it was filmed, which I suspect it wasn't. The document can be produced (if it exists), and I suspect it will be if it's existence is ever denied (which is won't be).

Jack Griffin · Sep 24, 2013

theferret said:
Cool. Now you can factor is all the lost revenues that arise from not earning a penny from the rented stadium 340 days a year over 40 years.

16: Did the club sell the right to car park income?

ACL: No they retained 900 spaces for use on match-days, these remain part of the new overall proposed deal. This is approximately 50% of all available car parking at the stadium.

The car park income they retain needs adding in & the rights to F&B income was agreed in principle by ACL, though Compass still needed to be involved in discussions, it is a fallacy to say that ACL are inflexible on F&B, they may not be able to provide 100% of profit, but I think a maximum of 85% of it.

fernandopartridge · Sep 24, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
Again you use the fantasy £1.3M figure, which we all know is not going to be used.. I've redone your sums on the basis of a more realistic 400K average rent (assuming championship status) and the actual 40 years of the lease left, and the number I come up with is £16M...

The fantasy figure is the only reality figure here. The rent has only ever been £1.2m per year.

fernandopartridge · Sep 24, 2013

Grendel said:
That's nice. Do the club get back the overpayments for 5 years that the robbing filth took off them (and us as supporters)?

If a council is found to have over charged on business rates (because the RV is set too high) - do you know what happens?

theferret · Sep 24, 2013

Jack Griffin said:
The car park income they retain needs adding in & the rights to F&B income was agreed in principle by ACL, though Compass still needed to be involved in discussions, it is a fallacy to say that ACL are inflexible on F&B, they may not be able to provide 100% of profit, but I think a maximum of 85% of it.

Why have you quoted my response here, which was specifically about the 340 days a year when the football club effectively don't exist. But if you want to talk about all those lost matchday revenues too, go ahead (but I'll allow you to deduct 50% for parking and a bit of F&B money too if you insist).

Let's deal with a few facts.

Our last season at HR the turnover was £8.6 million. Our average gate was 16,000 (with ticket prices starting at £16 in the WT), and we made a loss of £880,000.
Year one at the Ricoh, the turnover was £9.9 million. Our average gate was 22,000 (with ticket prices £23 across the board), and we made a loss of £3.3 million (this despite having 32 few employees on the books).

Given that 22K represented the peak in terms of average gate, it is fair to say we were much better off with smaller gates at HR. We may not have owned it, but we were able to operate it on a daily basis. Those year round incomes a stadium can generate are vital. It's what other clubs get when they rent their ground. We pop in for a few hours a fortnight and are then locked out again. Some people think this is great though.

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Sep 24, 2013

Grendel said:
That's nice. Do the club get back the overpayments for 5 years that the robbing filth took off them (and us as supporters)?

No I should imagine that Sisu will keep that.

BrisbaneBronco · Sep 25, 2013

bigfatronssba said:
But they have never answered as to why they just didn't stay at the Ricoh until this mythical new ground is built?

The fundementals are the club is over £2m a year worse off than had it stayed at the Ricoh.

Pretty sure that the reason was ACL would not agree to this.
Before the admin process started, TF wanted ACL to agree to a run off period of 3 years.

Paxman II · Sep 25, 2013

Frankly getting back to the OP point....I think the PR from all sides has and is abysmal.

bigfatronssba · Sep 25, 2013

BrisbaneBronco said:
Pretty sure that the reason was ACL would not agree to this.
Before the admin process started, TF wanted ACL to agree to a run off period of 3 years.

Well what could they have done about it?

valiant15 · Sep 25, 2013

theferret said:
Cool. Now you can factor is all the lost revenues that arise from not earning a penny from the rented stadium 340 days a year over 40 years.

If the revenue streams are so important why don't sisu buy them back?

Was it not the club that sold them in the first place?

Sky Blue Kid · Sep 25, 2013

"Canyouhearthedrums".....The rent over 50 years of the lease is twice that.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And you really think SISU/Otium will still be here until then? lmfao.

Danceswithhorses · Sep 25, 2013

Grendel said:
Oh I think PWKH and the ACL publicity machine would be in full flow if not....don't you?

Hardly a watertight argument that one...not sure the non existence of proof would stand up in court of law

Sky Blue Kid · Sep 25, 2013

@ Grenduffy....I don't lie, there are plenty on here will remember your famous "Estimated Facts". I think you need a reality check. You even told us all the name of the website you used. lmfao!

oldskyblue58 · Sep 25, 2013

guys the thread was about the current PR strategies of the main parties involved, to try to show how each was approaching things in terms of PR today. There has been a definite change in approach by both sides in my opinion - why the change? what does it say if anything about their respective positions today?

Danceswithhorses · Sep 25, 2013

theferret said:
..or to be fair, have ACL ever proven that famous 'handshake'. Which of course can't be proved, unless it was filmed, which I suspect it wasn't. The document can be produced (if it exists), and I suspect it will be if it's existence is ever denied (which is won't be).

If the document exists, let us see it-result being argument won by SISU and good PR for them showing CCC in poor light.
The lack of said document, just leads people to believe it's just another lie from the super reliable (not) Tim Fisher

italiahorse · Sep 25, 2013

valiant15 said:
If the revenue streams are so important why don't sisu buy them back?

Was it not the club that sold them in the first place?

All true.
ACL would need to pay back compass the stadium part of the business. SISU could then either provide there own or buy into Compass to get benefits of scale.

Godiva · Sep 25, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
guys the thread was about the current PR strategies of the main parties involved, to try to show how each was approaching things in terms of PR today. There has been a definite change in approach by both sides in my opinion - why the change? what does it say if anything about their respective positions today?

It got to around post 19 before the subject changed ... not bad on this forum.

Sky Blue Kid · Sep 25, 2013

@ theferret.....You're as bad as Grendel the troll, No proof, yet you believe every word the slimey Fishface says! ACL have been quiet, I agree with that. SISU have been on the whole silent for the majority of their tenure, so in your way of thinking, this is proof of their guilt!.......and you tell me to "Grow up"!!!

theferret · Sep 25, 2013

Sky Blue Kid said:
@ theferret.....You're as bad as Grendel the troll, No proof, yet you believe every word the slimey Fishface says! ACL have been quiet, I agree with that. SISU have been on the whole silent for the majority of their tenure, so in your way of thinking, this is proof of their guilt!.......and you tell me to "Grow up"!!!

What proof? What do you want me to do exactly? I am merely repeating what has been claimed by one side in the dispute, citing the complete lack of a denial by the other side (who have never been slow to issue denials) as evidence that (on this specific issue at least), TF is probably telling the truth (or at least a slightly spun version of it).

That is all I am saying, that it was the breakdown of those buy-out talks that really set in motion the events that have led us to this point. It is key to where we are now, in fact it is probably THE most pivotal point and yet I have to argue with people who suggest it never even happened such is the extent of the conspiratorial bullshit that flies around here.

hill83 · Sep 25, 2013

That's pretty much where I was before I got bored of repeating myself. Letting people know when they have totally made things up or missed things out completely. Unfortunately this is usually the rampant shouty anti Sisu at all costs types, so they beleive I am pro Sisu, when in fact this isn't the case at all. I do the same both ways.

Sky Blue Kid · Sep 25, 2013

theferret.....What proof? What do you want me to do exactly? I am merely repeating what has been claimed by one side in the dispute, citing the complete lack of a denial by the other side (who have never been slow to issue denials) as evidence that (on this specific issue at least), TF is probably telling the truth (or at least a slightly spun version of it). That is all I am saying, that it was the breakdown of those buy-out talks that really set in motion the events that have led us to this point. It is key to where we are now, in fact it is probably THE most pivotal point and yet I have to argue with people who suggest it never even happened such is the extent of the conspiratorial bullshit that flies around here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You are "merely repeating" a statement made by TF as is it was the whole truth. Some of you lot have got a "Bloody nerve" when someone posts a (For want of a better word) what could look like a Pro ACL/CCC statement, you are "on it" quicker than "Brad Pitt on Angelina Jolie".....Aren't you in fact doing what we are all doing?..."Backing our favoured corner"

covmark · Sep 25, 2013

Sky Blue Kid said:
theferret.....What proof? What do you want me to do exactly? I am merely repeating what has been claimed by one side in the dispute, citing the complete lack of a denial by the other side (who have never been slow to issue denials) as evidence that (on this specific issue at least), TF is probably telling the truth (or at least a slightly spun version of it). That is all I am saying, that it was the breakdown of those buy-out talks that really set in motion the events that have led us to this point. It is key to where we are now, in fact it is probably THE most pivotal point and yet I have to argue with people who suggest it never even happened such is the extent of the conspiratorial bullshit that flies around here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You are "merely repeating" a statement made by TF as is it was the whole truth. Some of you lot have got a "Bloody nerve" when someone posts a (For want of a better word) what could look like a Pro ACL/CCC statement, you are "on it" quicker than "Brad Pitt on Angelina Jolie".....Aren't you in fact doing what we are all doing?..."Backing our favoured corner"

why in God's name would anyone be pro ACL. I just cannot get my head round this at all.

As for your other point, if PWKH was here denying any such paperwork existed I suspect you and quite a few others would be lapping it up.

Sky Blue Kid · Sep 25, 2013

@covmark.......................................Aren't you in fact doing what we are all doing?..."Backing our favoured corner" Don't you ever read ALL of what someone has posted?

Deleted member 5849 · Sep 25, 2013

skybluekid@covmark.......................................Aren't you in fact doing what we are all doing?..."Backing our favoured corner" Don't you ever read ALL of what someone has posted?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;What if the corner's a circle?

The PR game (4 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency