thought it was better at sixfields (1 Viewer)

He will imo. Ive said many a time Sisu cant keep losing circa 3 million a year for 3 to 5 years. It wont happen. 2 options Jack either sisu sell up and cut their losses or they go back to the ricoh.

As for the sixfields crew, I wouldn't be seen dead in there but it cant help I assure that. 2,000 or 12,000.....NO BRAINER!!

We will be back at the Ricoh next season IMO after the outcome go the JR regardless of whether any of them appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

stupot07 said:

We will be back at the Ricoh next season IMO after the outcome go the JR regardless of whether any of them appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Click to expand...

I think that also.

Why do you think that Stupot07?

stupot07 said:

We will be back at the Ricoh next season IMO after the outcome go the JR regardless of whether any of them appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Click to expand...

But the problem as I see it, is that the only way we'll get back is if:

(a) SISU are given the ground and all the freehold for nothing - not gonna happen, or
(b) SISU sign a new long term rent deal - not gonna happen

jas365 said:

But the problem as I see it, is that the only way we'll get back is if:

(a) SISU are given the ground and all the freehold for nothing - not gonna happen, or
(b) SISU sign a new long term rent deal - not gonna happen

Click to expand...

Why? SISU have hinted a number of times recently that a long leasehold is not out of the question and that they would be happy to get independent valuations.

The truth is, ACL do not want to sell, freehold or leasehold - they only want a new rent deal. In which case, come out publicly and admit that instead of hiding behind the 'SISU only want freehold and we don't sell freeholds' bollocks.

You've not been listening Ferret, Ann Lucas has spelt it out. Not for sale. Rent only.
You want that the council part bailed the club out nearly ten years ago and then hand it over to this bunch of sharks for a pittance?
Sisu change their minds everyday, it all depends where they can make the most money.
Rent or nothing.

theferret said:

Why? SISU have hinted a number of times recently that a long leasehold is not out of the question and that they would be happy to get independent valuations.

The truth is, ACL do not want to sell, freehold or leasehold - they only want a new rent deal. In which case, come out publicly and admit that instead of hiding behind the 'SISU only want freehold and we don't sell freeholds' bollocks.

Click to expand...

Didn't Seppala say recently we would only return to the club with an unencumbered freehold?

Don't get me wrong, no one wants to come home more than me, but I just can't see it happening. I fully expect us to still be at Sixfields come August.....

If it's Rent or nothing, we might as well let Timmy build our own ground...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Spionkop said:

You've not been listening Ferret, Ann Lucas has spelt it out. Not for sale. Rent only.
You want that the council part bailed the club out nearly ten years ago and then hand it over to this bunch of sharks for a pittance?
Sisu change their minds everyday, it all depends where they can make the most money.
Rent or nothing.

Click to expand...

I thought she'd said nothing was ruled in or out?

If it is rent or nothing, not exactly surprising the choice is nothing.

jas365 said:

Didn't Seppala say recently we would only return to the club with an unencumbered freehold?

Don't get me wrong, no one wants to come home more than me, but I just can't see it happening. I fully expect us to still be at Sixfields come August.....

Click to expand...

That was the statement, yes. But there have been a couple of times recently where SISU have hinted at leasehold, something was said at the SCG meeting along the lines of 'a long enough leasehold is as good as freehold'. Is that out of the question too? Because EVERYTHING she has said in recent statements (Lucas) has been about the reluctance to sell the bricks and mortar (i.e. freehold).

The only way we will see city return to the Ricoh is if they have at least partial ownership. That is the reality, but yet we still have the council cheerleaders who'd rather the club stayed where it is and the Ricoh lay empty.

The only definite in all of this is that none of us plebs really know what either side are after or would accept in any deal as we are being told nothing. I see nothing other than next season kicking off at Sixfields and a much tougher season than this due to further squad weakening. Also wonder whether that being the case would be the point at which Pressley decides he can do way better (club, division and no doubt salary) and doesn't need the hassle any more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Make no mistake, Sisu are losing and will have lost circa 3 million this year alone due to massively wrongly predicted attendances as we know and surely lower commercially sales due to supporter and club loss of interest and trust. Are they really going to do this for 5 years? NO CHANCE. I don't care how much they hate the fans they wont cost themselves another 15mil and for what? End of 5 years something must happen. They are not going to wait 5 years and then come back to ricoh after losing approx 15mil and we all new stadium is a load of crap so has to be a return to the ricoh imminently.

I cant help feel if sixfields only had attendances of 100 or 150 then we would be back already and I do remember ML saying numerous times "a long leasehold is as good as freehold" also TF says on every occasion "Ricoh is plan A" put two and two together I think.

attendances should fall even more next year one would imagine(hope)

its imperative we are back at ricoh next season, lots of die hard fans just losing the faith

i am ashamed to say that i forgot cov were playing till 9.10pm last night when i checked the score.

covcity4life said:

attendances should fall even more next year one would imagine(hope)

its imperative we are back at ricoh next season, lots of die hard fans just losing the faith

i am ashamed to say that i forgot cov were playing till 9.10pm last night when i checked the score.

Click to expand...

bad time to check the score mate. just going 2-1 down then lol

Lorksalordy said:

The only definite in all of this is that none of us plebs really know what either side are after or would accept in any deal as we are being told nothing. I see nothing other than next season kicking off at Sixfields and a much tougher season than this due to further squad weakening. Also wonder whether that being the case would be the point at which Pressley decides he can do way better (club, division and no doubt salary) and doesn't need the hassle any more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Nail on the head

theferret said:

Why? SISU have hinted a number of times recently that a long leasehold is not out of the question and that they would be happy to get independent valuations.

The truth is, ACL do not want to sell, freehold or leasehold - they only want a new rent deal. In which case, come out publicly and admit that instead of hiding behind the 'SISU only want freehold and we don't sell freeholds' bollocks.

Click to expand...

The council Can't give sisu a long lease, it's another spin from sisu to make it look like they are asking for something more reasonable than the freehold even though it's not possible to do. ACL have a lease for 40 years more ish, untill that lease ends the council can't give out another lease.

theferret said:

That was the statement, yes. But there have been a couple of times recently where SISU have hinted at leasehold, something was said at the SCG meeting along the lines of 'a long enough leasehold is as good as freehold'. Is that out of the question too? Because EVERYTHING she has said in recent statements (Lucas) has been about the reluctance to sell the bricks and mortar (i.e. freehold).

The only way we will see city return to the Ricoh is if they have at least partial ownership. That is the reality, but yet we still have the council cheerleaders who'd rather the club stayed where it is and the Ricoh lay empty.

Click to expand...

I question the logic of making suggestions of what you might want instead of making an offer, and changing that suggestion in such an inconsistent manner that it is unclear that you know what you want.

I question the logic of trying to pressure ACL and CCC to each provide what they can't legally offer, and then suggesting that failure to deal is because it is Sisu asking for a deal, and not because they can't sell what they don't have.

I question the logic of why wanting Sisu, to actually make an offer for what they actually want, to the people that can actually provide it, is seen as being a Council cheerleader that wants the team to continue playing at Sixfields.

Sisu are responsible for this stewardship and well-being of this club. The buck stops with them as with any business owner.
If they want the Ricoh make a clear offer.

theferret said:

Why? SISU have hinted a number of times recently that a long leasehold is not out of the question and that they would be happy to get independent valuations.

The truth is, ACL do not want to sell, freehold or leasehold - they only want a new rent deal. In which case, come out publicly and admit that instead of hiding behind the 'SISU only want freehold and we don't sell freeholds' bollocks.

Click to expand...

Haven't they said this? many times now.

GaryPendrysEyes said:

Sisu are responsible for this stewardship and well-being of this club. The buck stops with them as with any business owner.
If they want the Ricoh make a clear offer.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more but they will never make an offer. Its not for sale.

Kingokings204 said:

Couldn't agree more but they will never make an offer. Its not for sale.

Click to expand...

Most things are for sale if you make a fair offer, and the incentive is there for the owners to sell.

You just have to make sure that what you are asking for is legally in the control of the person you are asking to sell it.

stupot07 said:

We will be back at the Ricoh next season IMO after the outcome go the JR regardless of whether any of them appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Click to expand...

If the council win
And SISU appeal. How do you see us coming back?
I hope u are right....

Kingokings204 said:

Make no mistake, Sisu are losing and will have lost circa 3 million this year alone due to massively wrongly predicted attendances as we know and surely lower commercially sales due to supporter and club loss of interest and trust. Are they really going to do this for 5 years? NO CHANCE. I don't care how much they hate the fans they wont cost themselves another 15mil and for what? End of 5 years something must happen. They are not going to wait 5 years and then come back to ricoh after losing approx 15mil and we all new stadium is a load of crap so has to be a return to the ricoh imminently.

I cant help feel if sixfields only had attendances of 100 or 150 then we would be back already and I do remember ML saying numerous times "a long leasehold is as good as freehold" also TF says on every occasion "Ricoh is plan A" put two and two together I think.

Click to expand...

100-150 fans is impossible now as I think 500 season tickets were sold.

Maybe a symbolic one off game of no attendance if the season ticket holders were prepared to sacrifice.

However I do think season ticket attendees only would put extra pressure on SISU when they make a big decision in the summer.

They intended to fund the losses however I think they believed they would get 5000-7000 fans.

If it dropped to 500 it would have to come into their thought processes in the summer.

theferret said:

That was the statement, yes. But there have been a couple of times recently where SISU have hinted at leasehold, something was said at the SCG meeting along the lines of 'a long enough leasehold is as good as freehold'. Is that out of the question too? Because EVERYTHING she has said in recent statements (Lucas) has been about the reluctance to sell the bricks and mortar (i.e. freehold).

The only way we will see city return to the Ricoh is if they have at least partial ownership. That is the reality, but yet we still have the council cheerleaders who'd rather the club stayed where it is and the Ricoh lay empty.

Click to expand...

I thought the Lucas statement was about the inability to sell the unencumbered freehold, which it seems SISU had shifted their demand to.

If the demand has moved again, to something different like long leasehold, why don't they discuss that with the Council instead of the SCG?

And the 'council cheerleaders' thing is fatuous - it adds as much to the debate as calling you a SISU sock-puppet. Let's play the ball and not the man, eh.

The simple fact is that SISU could move CCFC back to the Ricoh tomorrow, make more money than they are at Northampton, and still negotiate over all of these things. But they won't. Why?

theferret said:

Why? SISU have hinted a number of times recently that a long leasehold is not out of the question and that they would be happy to get independent valuations.

The truth is, ACL do not want to sell, freehold or leasehold - they only want a new rent deal. In which case, come out publicly and admit that instead of hiding behind the 'SISU only want freehold and we don't sell freeholds' bollocks.

Click to expand...

Either you are confused or I am !
ACL lease the Ricoh complex off CCC who own the freehold (the stadium and land).
ACL is a management company who are made up 50% by CCC and 50% by Higgs charity.
If you want to buy the stadium you need to make an offer to CCC not ACL.

ACL have a 40 year lease from the owners CCC.
If you want access to all the incomes from the Ricoh you need to take control of ACL.
This is (was?) available for less than £10M for each of the 50% shares.
CCFC owners have had the option to take over ACL. Old owners couldn't afford it and Sisu have not taken up the offer??

Unsure but I think Sisu want ACL to finish all the leases for hotel, casino, etc before they even consider taking over ACL. (Unencumbered?)

CCC do not want to sell the complex as is there right.
Sisu will not take over Freehold/ACL lease because it is too expensive for it to be released unencumbered.
Sisu only options are to lease the stadium (available) or take ACL/Freehold encumbered (If available)

jackmartin said:

i remember the fans who go to sixfields (fair play its a free country)saying the team play better there because of less presure and no boo boys,so why are they now losing?

Click to expand...

Because even if that theory was true in any way, it still wouldn't have meant that the magical secret to guaranteed football success had been discovered?

duffer said:

I thought the Lucas statement was about the inability to sell the unencumbered freehold, which it seems SISU had shifted their demand to.

If the demand has moved again, to something different like long leasehold, why don't they discuss that with the Council instead of the SCG?

And the 'council cheerleaders' thing is fatuous - it adds as much to the debate as calling you a SISU sock-puppet. Let's play the ball and not the man, eh.

The simple fact is that SISU could move CCFC back to the Ricoh tomorrow, make more money than they are at Northampton, and still negotiate over all of these things. But they won't. Why?

Click to expand...

They can't do that either, the council can't sell the unencumbered freehold, nore can they sell a long lease, the only thing the council can sell is the encumbered freehold which is of absolutely no use to the football club over the next 40 years.

Noggin said:

They can't do that either, the council can't sell the unencumbered freehold, nore can they sell a long lease, the only thing the council can sell is the encumbered freehold which is of absolutely no use to the football club over the next 40 years.

Click to expand...

Under these Owners.

Noggin said:

They can't do that either, the council can't sell the unencumbered freehold, nore can they sell a long lease, the only thing the council can sell is the encumbered freehold which is of absolutely no use to the football club over the next 40 years.

Click to expand...

Why is it no use ?

italiahorse said:

Either you are confused or I am !
ACL lease the Ricoh complex off CCC who own the freehold (the stadium and land).
ACL is a management company who are made up 50% by CCC and 50% by Higgs charity.
If you want to buy the stadium you need to make an offer to CCC not ACL.

ACL have a 40 year lease from the owners CCC.
If you want access to all the incomes from the Ricoh you need to take control of ACL.
This is (was?) available for less than £10M for each of the 50% shares.
CCFC owners have had the option to take over ACL. Old owners couldn't afford it and Sisu have not taken up the offer??

Unsure but I think Sisu want ACL to finish all the leases for hotel, casino, etc before they even consider taking over ACL. (Unencumbered?)

CCC do not want to sell the complex as is there right.
Sisu will not take over Freehold/ACL lease because it is too expensive for it to be released unencumbered.
Sisu only options are to lease the stadium (available) or take ACL/Freehold encumbered (If available)

Click to expand...

What do we know? CCC wont sell the unencumbered freehold to ccfc and ccfc don't want to rent so this is where we are where we are today because they both want different things. I agree ccfc could move back tomorrow to make a lot more money and build bridges again but they don't. I for one am really confused by this..... surely you would want to make money i.e 90% drop in rent and cut the wage bill from 4m last year to around 2m this year so if they had stayed at the ricoh they would of saved 3mil on these two alone let alone no points deduction and playoff chances with great football and possibly leon staying so gates would of been up on last year around another 5k to around 15k a match so compared to last year ccfc would be a hell of a lot more viable and I just don't get it,

The figures don't add up in any form. Now they are at sixfields with 1500 a match and low commercially sales due to loss of fans. We all worked it out to costing them around 3mil per year and this is for a 5 year stint apparently so losing 15mil in 5 years and for what? either its a new ground, return to the ricoh or go bust and I cant see any of these 3 option happening after 5 years so something has to happen before this. Either a new ground will be built or a return to the ricoh will happen for next year or two. Why would you cost yourselves as a business to investors etc want to lose 3 mil a year and it achieves nothing from what I can see.

People keep saying on here about the JR on 10th june it has been announced. SO WHAT!!! CCC win and we are back to where we started and then what? or CCFC win and then what they sue for damages so may makes a few million off the council but CCC will never give them the ricoh so the JR is effectively pointless.

I personally think ccc will win the JR and sisu will have to take the rent 150k offer, Yes they will appeal so what? this is what they would do anyway but these things are rarely appealed successfully. It just delays the inevitable and sisu will know this so why stay in sixfields for another year? To lose another 3 million, I highly doubt that. "No business can run like that" to quote mr Smurthwaite. (port vale chairman) he also agree with me and thinks we will be back next year incidentally but this is just an opinion folks and not fact and I am quite easily wrong im sure but I just cant phathom the figures as im a business man and a figures man as this is what business is and it is just all folly and stupid.

To sum up stay in Northampton for next 5 years and lose 15mil and then be homeless and bust or do something this summer about it.

italiahorse said:

Why is it no use ?

Click to expand...

I think because the encumbered freehold is of very limited value with sitting tenants and long leases in place. In and of itself, the encumbered freehold doesn't really provide any access to income streams that I can see.

Noggin's point about the long leasehold is true too, Cov CC can't offer this whilst ACL hold the lease for another forty-odd years.

From where I'm sitting it seems that SISU have made demands that are all but impossible for the council to meet.

Yes, she spelt it out very clearly. In the chamber it was a definite "no", on the steps to journalists outside it was "maybe".

Spionkop said:

You've not been listening Ferret, Ann Lucas has spelt it out. Not for sale. Rent only.
You want that the council part bailed the club out nearly ten years ago and then hand it over to this bunch of sharks for a pittance?
Sisu change their minds everyday, it all depends where they can make the most money.
Rent or nothing.

Click to expand...

So the council can offer something to the football club that has no value really as we (the club) can't access any revenues.

duffer said:

I think because the encumbered freehold is of very limited value with sitting tenants and long leases in place. In and of itself, the encumbered freehold doesn't really provide any access to income streams that I can see.

Noggin's point about the long leasehold is true too, Cov CC can't offer this whilst ACL hold the lease for another forty-odd years.

From where I'm sitting it seems that SISU have made demands that are all but impossible for the council to meet.

Click to expand...

italiahorse said:

Why is it no use ?

Click to expand...

because the freehold doesn't give you the right to play football there, you need the lease which is owned by acl.