D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It has been demonstrated that the 50% on offer then was unsellable.
Then buy the 50% share in the first 2 /3 years
This is a brilliant post.
Although I wouldn't go around telling people you used to think SISU were doing a good job. They don't understand shades of grey on here or that opinions change in accordance facts on the ground.
Not worth debating if you don't trouble yourself with a few inconvenient facts that don't suit your "Victory!" argument, I'd agree.
Can you show me where it has been proven that there are parties who would like to buy the club? Furthermore can you explain how they will be keen for buying a club that has no chance of owning its own ground and has a poor League 1 squad to its name?
It won't be long until some are calling us to drop sky blue and have a kit based on Wasps'.
You don't know who's interested until the club is up for sale. I think that point was well and truly proven when the club went into administration - the "SISU are the only show in town" brigade had egg on their faces and yet here we are again for some reason.
You believe that our Council should have struck a deal with the very people who have undermined them and taken them to court at every opportunity (and still continue to do so) not to mention trying to distress ACL and 'steal' the stadium at a knock down price?
...and yet I'm the one ignoring inconvenient facts.
While there will always be people interested, I'd rather we aimed higher than previous dismal failures backed by a US property developer, and a bloke who can't use email, but managed to get disqualified from the regulatory body of his profession.
We have no evidence that Haskell would have done a bad job.
What i think many people quite reasonably expected was a period of calm, allowing everyone to draw breath after sixfields and then start a rebuilding process. It was constantly stated that acl was doing fine financially so there seemed no need for an immediate sale to anyone at all - certainly not a secret deal rushed through with no consultation allowing the worst kind of sports club turned into a financial franchise to uproot from its loyal supporter base in the hope of attracting new transient customers.
From a business and commercial point of view, it was too good a deal for the Council to turn down IMO.
Can you show me where it has been proven that there are parties who would like to buy the club? Furthermore can you explain how they will be keen for buying a club that has no chance of owning its own ground and has a poor League 1 squad to its name?
From a business and commercial point of view, it was too good a deal for the Council to turn down IMO.
Apart from the fact ACL's preferred administrator cast doubt over his ability to buy the club, his failed pursuit of other clubs, his property development background suggesting he was interested in property deals rather than football club... and him being backed by two dismal failures from the past, you mean?
how on earth can you say that when the details are secret?
Doubt over his ability to buy the club based on what?
His failed pursuit of other clubs - Meaning he should never be able to own one?
If you ask me a property tycoon is exactly what we need - development around the stadium and build from there.
We have a Premiership rugby club coming to the city. How can that be a bad thing?
:facepalm:
We have a Premiership rugby club coming to the city. How can that be a bad thing?
How does your logic work here RT?
It's given, by most, that the club needs some kind of access to revenues from the stadium and surrounds. It's accepted by you above, that it makes little financial sense to build a new stadium. The council talked about building trust when the club returned from the Ricoh, which suggested scope at some point for a negotiation. Despite this, the council, by selling to Wasps who also need access to revenues from the Ricoh to survive, have locked CCFC out of them.
And yet you don't think that it's more probable that the club moves now. To me that's irrational. Whether it's gone from 'possible' to 'probable', or 'extremely unlikely' to just 'unlikely', clearly it's more in the club's interests to move now than it was before. On that basis it simply has to be more likely.
As for the door (to the Ricoh management company) being open and offers invited, let's look at that claim...
At the point when the club came back, did the council suggest that SISU made an offer for ACL, or did they actually say that it was time to rebuild trust?
I'll help here - this is the article, August 21st 2014, headline...
Council chief: We need time to rebuild trust before we discuss Ricoh Arena ownership
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/council-chief-need-time-rebuild-7651892
And did they ever make the same offer available to SISU as they made to Wasps - 100% of ACL for £5.5m, plus a 250-year lease? It would seem not. And in fact even when there was the opportunity after the fact, Higgs chose to take Wasps offer over CCFC's - the only reason for inviting an offer from CCFC Ltd being that they were legally required to, of course.
From where I'm sitting, the door wasn't open to the club buying ACL at the point we returned from Sixfields, the council (and Higgs) were actually in the process of closing it, bolting it, and bricking it up forever. Bitterly ironic, given that the Council's deputy leader actually said...
"All parties concerned need to learn to open doors the door for one another as opposed to allowing it to slam in other people’s faces."
Doubt over his ability to buy the club based on what?His lack of cash.
Meaning his lack of cash, and desire to use them as money making ventures rather than a love of the club.
What we need for sure is someone who could split the stadium and land from club to make money...
You never learn...
Who said the stadium and land revenue wouldn't be used to benefit the club? Not all owners try to leech from their club you know.
This comment just shows what a massive bellend you are.We have a Premiership rugby club coming to the city. How can that be a bad thing?
We have a Premiership rugby club coming to the city. How can that be a bad thing?
You're doing a grendel, avoiding the question and asking a different question to divert attention. You said "From a business and commercial point of view, it was too good a deal for the Council to turn down IMO." I asked how on earth you can say that when the details are secret - your lack of an answer suggests you have no idea and are just making things up
Most clubs don't own their own grounds. It would come down to the price wanted. When we went into administration there was interest until it came out that only debt was for sale.
What home did Wasps have when they got took over? What they did get was owners with a plan. The opposite to what we have.
Right, I am indeed checking out. Enjoy. X
You don't know who's interested until the club is up for sale. I think that point was well and truly proven when the club went into administration - the "SISU are the only show in town" brigade had egg on their faces and yet here we are again for some reason.
There's no need for those kind of accusations - way below the belt!
Of course I don't know the commercial details - none of us do. If you want to play it that way, who are you to say that it's a bad thing?
All we can do is look at it from an outside perspective. Only a mad man would say that a world class rugby team playing out its games in Coventry is a bad thing for the city.
I do apologise for the short answers, it's getting late!
So you're referring to a point in the past when we had only one offer that could be described as credible.
Drugs worn off at last?
Not only that, one that now has the second highest turnover in Europe and therefore great great potential.
T
All we can do is look at it from an outside perspective. Only a mad man would say that a world class rugby team playing out its games in Coventry is a bad thing for the city.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?