Warwick Uni (land near) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter sw88
- Start date
James Smith
Well-Known Member
In a city of our size :facepalm:.
Sources also claim there have been hold-ups in any deal to buy the Brandon speedway stadium site - No shit!
But there is confusion over the precise location of the mooted stadium site - No shit!
He declined to comment if that meant at least £10m proof of funds had been shown to the League for a projected £25m stadium - No shit!
He refused to say who the investors were behind Arvo - No shit!
Mr Fisher accepted Sunday’s Sixfields attendance of 2,204 – half of which were Bristol City fans – was at the “lower end of our estimates.” - No shit!
Mr Fisher also claimed the club now expected the late accounts of Otium and other related companies would be filed within “a small number of weeks” - Now that does sound like bullshit!
But there is confusion over the precise location of the mooted stadium site - No shit!
He declined to comment if that meant at least £10m proof of funds had been shown to the League for a projected £25m stadium - No shit!
He refused to say who the investors were behind Arvo - No shit!
Mr Fisher accepted Sunday’s Sixfields attendance of 2,204 – half of which were Bristol City fans – was at the “lower end of our estimates.” - No shit!
Mr Fisher also claimed the club now expected the late accounts of Otium and other related companies would be filed within “a small number of weeks” - Now that does sound like bullshit!
deanocity3
New Member
Joe Elliot lives on the KEN.Road perhaps he might say 'not in my back yard you ain't putting it there'
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
It's quite comical really how often something comes out from the SISU side and is shortly followed by any other party involved going don't know anything about that!
So basically, we were going to tell you where the stadium was weeks ago but all the important people in a multi million pound deal have gone on holiday with no access to a phone or email. And we might think about filing accounts at some point in the future.
Have to be careful with exactly what he says, this doesn't really contradict what Clarke said about their being no plans. This is SISU saying we can afford to build a stadium, how confident is anyone that the level of evidence the FL asked for to back this up is adequate. He also someone contradicts himself, one minute they've provided evidence they can finance it, next minute they've shown 40% funding and might be able to borrow the rest from someone (not sure who would think them a good risk to loan money to).
And we've been recapitalised sounds a lot like the debt has gone up again.
Nick
Administrator
He will have his spade out...
Skybluepiglet
New Member
It was daft of me to think Warwick Uni was in Warwick.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
It is if you're anything close to being a local.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
How many people used to end up in Lancaster for what is now Cov Uni?
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
I was always told that it was because Warwick is a bit nicer sounding than Coventry. Meh, based on where the students all live, they should call it Leamington University.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Brunswick Street Uni has a nice ring to it!
Sisued
New Member
Fisher states that proof of funds to cover the operating costs while in Northampton were shown to the FL.
That could be as easy as showing you have 3 mil in the bank.
I don't believe they have the resources to fund a stadium and I'm not convinced that sisu want to be involved in property development.
It seems to be more posturing from Fisher with the real aim of getting the ricoh for a cut price.
That could be as easy as showing you have 3 mil in the bank.
I don't believe they have the resources to fund a stadium and I'm not convinced that sisu want to be involved in property development.
It seems to be more posturing from Fisher with the real aim of getting the ricoh for a cut price.
skybluericoh
Well-Known Member
On the radio this morning, when asked if he would talk to ACL about a return, he said. ' Not unless they get us our ten points back' . or words to that effect. The guy is still trying to heap all the blame on ACL. I know they have played a part but no doubt in my mind where most of the blame sits, right on your office chair Timmy boy.
TheParsonsHose
Member
As above....!! Give me strength.
Last edited:
hutch1972
Well-Known Member
There isn't anything more pointless than arguing about a fantasy and thats what it is.
Last week they had agreed to buy the Brandon stadium, this week its Warwick uni add to that an unknown 3rd site and you have a company that is totally out of touch with reality.
If TF comments about coming home are true it shows the cracks are opening within sisu, 3-5 years at NT is suicde.
georgehudson
Well-Known Member
i would not expect a word of truth from TF,
if, i had the time or inclination i would list his dubious statements,
though, i think, this should have been done by any decent investigative journo,
imho, it is absurd that OUR club should be manipulated in this way,
PUSB, & FOS
if, i had the time or inclination i would list his dubious statements,
though, i think, this should have been done by any decent investigative journo,
imho, it is absurd that OUR club should be manipulated in this way,
PUSB, & FOS
More Fisher quotes?
Moving on to funding,he said that the funding was in place but would not be drawn on where it was coming from.
Something else he was also involved with, was an organisation that would create 5,000 football related jobs in a manufacturing company, not all would be in Coventry but the company would be Coventry based. He refused to enlighten those assembled with this registration but said it would be in conjunction with the local council,the football club and another football club more than 100 miles away and was part of a ten year plan.
The question of investment was mentioned and he said that these were a family with two or three investors who did not want any publicity. He had worked with them for fourteen years,advised them on the potential of the club as well as the risks as part of a long term strategy.
Sounds like him doesn't it, but this was Jo Dhinsa a few years ago and is obviously a role model for Fisher.
Moving on to funding,he said that the funding was in place but would not be drawn on where it was coming from.
Something else he was also involved with, was an organisation that would create 5,000 football related jobs in a manufacturing company, not all would be in Coventry but the company would be Coventry based. He refused to enlighten those assembled with this registration but said it would be in conjunction with the local council,the football club and another football club more than 100 miles away and was part of a ten year plan.
The question of investment was mentioned and he said that these were a family with two or three investors who did not want any publicity. He had worked with them for fourteen years,advised them on the potential of the club as well as the risks as part of a long term strategy.
Sounds like him doesn't it, but this was Jo Dhinsa a few years ago and is obviously a role model for Fisher.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
To be fair you could bring up many more dubious statements than these from Uncle Joe over the years, yet some still worship him.
What's anyone else got to do with this?
I was pointing out the similarity between the toe curling fantasies of a deranged bullshit merchant and the joker that said he wanted to buy CCFC.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Thought you didn't want to talk about Joe?
No future with SISU
New Member
HS2 is the route through there,an act of parliament has been passed banning all developments on the route.Fisher is spreading a lot of rumours.
CCFC PimpRail
New Member
Isn't that because even when CCFC was a top flight club, people would rather support a better team.....?
There was also the argument that Cov was populated with people coming from other parts of the UK to work here and they chose to support their home team- well I didnt realise Old Trafford was in Ireland, and they must eat alot of curry on Merseyside....
Sisued
New Member
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
more questions/thoughts as usual
-If the aim is to build their own stadium and it makes so much sense why still interested in the Ricoh. (yes i know it makes sense to want the Ricoh but the point I am making is that the article is contradictory )"The club was expecting the council to consider whether it wished to renew discussions on the basis on a transaction, but no response has been received" “If we say we’re going to build a stadium, then we will". Well they have repeatedly said they will havent they ? - Also says they are not interested in any rental agreement at the Ricoh
-You dont need to own the stadium to have the income streams...... so is the need to own SISU's or CCFC's ?
- Land Warwick Uni ...... greenbelt, no talks with Warwick Uni, residents wont be happy (some expensive property up there), road net work not up to it, HS2 going through close by, all points to long delays and large cost. But right now the reality is probably that talk is cheap and it helps misdirect
- will university facilities be available when the university term starts? What happens to the Academy then
- "But there is confusion over the precise location of the mooted stadium site. The university said it was unaware of any approach for any of its land outside the Coventry border." Confusion seems to be order of the day with our owners whether deliberate or otherwise
- so its gone from about to sign heads of terms on 2 sites to being interested in 3 ?
- wouldnt heads of terms indicate the price to be paid ? so why would making it public put the price up? or is that an admission that TF realises heads of terms are not binding?
- “We’ve had no talks with Warwick University about a stadium nearby, but everybody can see the sense of linking sport and education" so Uni owns most of land up there and TF hasnt talked to them ? Yet this site is of great interest
- talking to other councils is a long long way from getting a site for a stadium....... plus other councils also talk to CCC. - Any development on the City boundary will mean that CCC are involved because of the impact on the infra structure of this City.
- Changes to roads & infra structure = added cost to the plan - and large costs at that
- "Overall, our primary objective was to fulfil our fixtures with a ground-share. People questioned whether we would proceed. We’ve done that".“Our second objective is to develop a site to capture all the revenues from stadium" shouldnt the first objective have been to get a deal at the Ricoh? (yes I know perhaps it wasnt doable)
- “There was a requirement to show an amount of cash up to 40 per cent of the stadium’s full development costs.
“The rest, as is typical, will likely come from real estate borrowing.” - so that means more debt loaded on the club surely? Also more annual costs in terms of interest payments and the only source of income is CCFC? Wont that affect profitability and what can be spent on players? Plus if you havent got the site how do you know the cost and how can you show "up to 40%" of what you dont know?
- "
Fisher insists Sky Blues owners Otium have shown the League proof of funds from bank accounts to fund losses for three years while playing at Northampton Town.
And he says additional evidence was provided that Otium had been “recapitalised” – with cash from another Sisu-related hedge fund, Cayman Islands based Arvo Master Fund." So Otium up until now has not traded, so has no income and therefore nothing in the bank. But it can show it can cover losses based on estimated crowds of between 3 and 6K (how good will that estimate be so how accurate is the ability to cover losses?) So recapitalised would appear to be further loans from ARVO = even more debt loaded on the club
- "Mr Fisher said the transfer of Holdings’ assets to Otium, which now has the League’s crucial “golden share” right to operate Coventry City, had now been completed" So no use for CCFC H Ltd ....... liquidate that next ? That would be the company that was formed in 1907 to include the original CCFC, nice admission on the 130th birthday of the club. Another piece of our history gone?
I cant help thinking about just how many links with the city and the history of our club are being broken....... but its ok because the Football League have received a couple of promises from TF & co that it will be alright in the end ........
Interesting this article came out a few days after it was reported Haskell was here, after 2204 at Sixfields, after 8000 at the Ricoh.......
In reality there is very little that is new in it
-If the aim is to build their own stadium and it makes so much sense why still interested in the Ricoh. (yes i know it makes sense to want the Ricoh but the point I am making is that the article is contradictory )"The club was expecting the council to consider whether it wished to renew discussions on the basis on a transaction, but no response has been received" “If we say we’re going to build a stadium, then we will". Well they have repeatedly said they will havent they ? - Also says they are not interested in any rental agreement at the Ricoh
-You dont need to own the stadium to have the income streams...... so is the need to own SISU's or CCFC's ?
- Land Warwick Uni ...... greenbelt, no talks with Warwick Uni, residents wont be happy (some expensive property up there), road net work not up to it, HS2 going through close by, all points to long delays and large cost. But right now the reality is probably that talk is cheap and it helps misdirect
- will university facilities be available when the university term starts? What happens to the Academy then
- "But there is confusion over the precise location of the mooted stadium site. The university said it was unaware of any approach for any of its land outside the Coventry border." Confusion seems to be order of the day with our owners whether deliberate or otherwise
- so its gone from about to sign heads of terms on 2 sites to being interested in 3 ?
- wouldnt heads of terms indicate the price to be paid ? so why would making it public put the price up? or is that an admission that TF realises heads of terms are not binding?
- “We’ve had no talks with Warwick University about a stadium nearby, but everybody can see the sense of linking sport and education" so Uni owns most of land up there and TF hasnt talked to them ? Yet this site is of great interest
- talking to other councils is a long long way from getting a site for a stadium....... plus other councils also talk to CCC. - Any development on the City boundary will mean that CCC are involved because of the impact on the infra structure of this City.
- Changes to roads & infra structure = added cost to the plan - and large costs at that
- "Overall, our primary objective was to fulfil our fixtures with a ground-share. People questioned whether we would proceed. We’ve done that".“Our second objective is to develop a site to capture all the revenues from stadium" shouldnt the first objective have been to get a deal at the Ricoh? (yes I know perhaps it wasnt doable)
- “There was a requirement to show an amount of cash up to 40 per cent of the stadium’s full development costs.
“The rest, as is typical, will likely come from real estate borrowing.” - so that means more debt loaded on the club surely? Also more annual costs in terms of interest payments and the only source of income is CCFC? Wont that affect profitability and what can be spent on players? Plus if you havent got the site how do you know the cost and how can you show "up to 40%" of what you dont know?
- "
Fisher insists Sky Blues owners Otium have shown the League proof of funds from bank accounts to fund losses for three years while playing at Northampton Town.
And he says additional evidence was provided that Otium had been “recapitalised” – with cash from another Sisu-related hedge fund, Cayman Islands based Arvo Master Fund." So Otium up until now has not traded, so has no income and therefore nothing in the bank. But it can show it can cover losses based on estimated crowds of between 3 and 6K (how good will that estimate be so how accurate is the ability to cover losses?) So recapitalised would appear to be further loans from ARVO = even more debt loaded on the club
- "Mr Fisher said the transfer of Holdings’ assets to Otium, which now has the League’s crucial “golden share” right to operate Coventry City, had now been completed" So no use for CCFC H Ltd ....... liquidate that next ? That would be the company that was formed in 1907 to include the original CCFC, nice admission on the 130th birthday of the club. Another piece of our history gone?
I cant help thinking about just how many links with the city and the history of our club are being broken....... but its ok because the Football League have received a couple of promises from TF & co that it will be alright in the end ........
Interesting this article came out a few days after it was reported Haskell was here, after 2204 at Sixfields, after 8000 at the Ricoh.......
In reality there is very little that is new in it
Last edited:
Covkid1968#
Well-Known Member
No its in Coventry as well they know...they must have felt that it sounded better!
But heh...Cov Uni is now 33rd in the Guardian league table and Climbing the league table far faster than a League 1 club based in Northampton without a ground of its own to play at. Its also the top of the league of former poly Uni's in the Midlands
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Well they walked away from the Higgs after agreeing Heads of Terms so I suspect that they know they're not binding.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I heard somewhere that those wise folk at Coventry City Council turned down the opportunity to use Coventry in the name for the University of Warwick. I'm not sure whether it's true or not.
Sisued
New Member
OSB58 - well written, thanks.
I had similar thoughts regarding the reasoning of fishers article. Nothing is really said there is no substance just a lot of ifs and maybes.
All I can think it's that it's been done as some kind of publicity stunt regarding haskells visit.
I thought maybe he had made a low bid and sisu are trying to demonstrate that they are willing to press on with a new stadium.
The silence surrounding the reason of Haskells visit seems to hint at a move to buy the club but that might just be me enjoying some straw clutching
I had similar thoughts regarding the reasoning of fishers article. Nothing is really said there is no substance just a lot of ifs and maybes.
All I can think it's that it's been done as some kind of publicity stunt regarding haskells visit.
I thought maybe he had made a low bid and sisu are trying to demonstrate that they are willing to press on with a new stadium.
The silence surrounding the reason of Haskells visit seems to hint at a move to buy the club but that might just be me enjoying some straw clutching
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Just a thought ............. but a lot of what is being put out by the SISU side actually increases the public clamour for ACL/CCC to sell the site to to the club.
I think there is more to the PR being put out than realised.
Leave you to make own minds up
Just bear in mind the following
- The freehold is SISU's only positive way out of this
- CCFC do not need to own the freehold to access all income streams at the Ricoh
- there has never been a change in SISU's objectives
- Legals and skewed PR areknown tools of SISU's trade (yes I know the PR on the otherside is open to question too)
- CCFC is not the reason it is the means to the objectives in this and always has been
I think there is more to the PR being put out than realised.
Leave you to make own minds up
Just bear in mind the following
- The freehold is SISU's only positive way out of this
- CCFC do not need to own the freehold to access all income streams at the Ricoh
- there has never been a change in SISU's objectives
- Legals and skewed PR areknown tools of SISU's trade (yes I know the PR on the otherside is open to question too)
- CCFC is not the reason it is the means to the objectives in this and always has been
Last edited:
ajsccfc
Well-Known Member
As they're both large-scale employers, if anything the city would want to keep them sweet.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I fail to see why SISU should be given or sold the freehold to a City asset.