CJparker
New Member
Let's be totally clear. I don't care about ACL - the council own them (co-own) so are entitled to subisize them, even though ACL has been in profit for most of its existence.
What I also do care about is the club becoming self-financing - that is a necessity, both for SISU and their shareholders and for CCFC (the club should not be reliant on ongoing 'good money after bad' funding).
Now that we are all agreed on the objective, you can take 3 approaches to achieve it:
One is that the club grows and increases revenue by doing well on the pitch - SISU's plan A which everyone should support. Shame they got it wrong - to be fair, they didn't have the best leader in Uncle Ray but it was their choice to get into bed with him.
Plan B is to retrench, cut back and hope for the best - they chose this in 2011 when plan A had failed. Shows how much they know about football, as we got relegated immediately and lost further revenue.
Plan C is to reduce ongoing costs to match lower revenue. This, again, is something that any sensible business will do. However, as other posters have pointed out, SISU are doing this by inappropriate tactics. Even if you do think the rent is too high, that is no justification for stopping paying. This approach has burned valuable bridges, and has involved a section of support trying to defend the club by blaming everyone else for our woes.
The solution is clear - a new Plan A which sees us going for growth again. SISU have tried this this season, but only to a point. Unless they leave, the council will not cooperate in full by selling the ground to the club - and rightly so. It is therefore clear that SISU need to leave the club.
So, if we agree that SISU need to leave, it is even more imperative that we become self-funding. You can see here the "chicken and egg" problem. However, it is more of a "cart and horse" problem - there is a right way round. If SISU leave, the council will be far more amenable to selling the club to a new owner, vastly improiving the attractiveness of the club as a proposition. Clearly therefore, getting SISU out is a priority. Here is how it should be achieved:
1) Football Assocation to refuse permission to allow the club to leave the immediate Coventry area. Council to refuse planning permission for the club to move to a new ground anywhere inside the immediate Coventry area. - SISU are therefore unable to leave the Ricoh.
2) Council to insist on current ACL negotiation position with SISU. Higgs to continue its role as a silent partner. - SISU therefore unable to buy Ricoh or to reduce rent to the level they want.
This will lead to SISU putting the club for sale discreetly, getting out of Coventry and allowing a new, more suitable investor, whoever that might be, to come in and buy the club from SISU for a song, and buy the ground from ACL at a reasonable price.
All City supporters to support the above, if possible through SOC-style direct action.
Who is with me?
What I also do care about is the club becoming self-financing - that is a necessity, both for SISU and their shareholders and for CCFC (the club should not be reliant on ongoing 'good money after bad' funding).
Now that we are all agreed on the objective, you can take 3 approaches to achieve it:
One is that the club grows and increases revenue by doing well on the pitch - SISU's plan A which everyone should support. Shame they got it wrong - to be fair, they didn't have the best leader in Uncle Ray but it was their choice to get into bed with him.
Plan B is to retrench, cut back and hope for the best - they chose this in 2011 when plan A had failed. Shows how much they know about football, as we got relegated immediately and lost further revenue.
Plan C is to reduce ongoing costs to match lower revenue. This, again, is something that any sensible business will do. However, as other posters have pointed out, SISU are doing this by inappropriate tactics. Even if you do think the rent is too high, that is no justification for stopping paying. This approach has burned valuable bridges, and has involved a section of support trying to defend the club by blaming everyone else for our woes.
The solution is clear - a new Plan A which sees us going for growth again. SISU have tried this this season, but only to a point. Unless they leave, the council will not cooperate in full by selling the ground to the club - and rightly so. It is therefore clear that SISU need to leave the club.
So, if we agree that SISU need to leave, it is even more imperative that we become self-funding. You can see here the "chicken and egg" problem. However, it is more of a "cart and horse" problem - there is a right way round. If SISU leave, the council will be far more amenable to selling the club to a new owner, vastly improiving the attractiveness of the club as a proposition. Clearly therefore, getting SISU out is a priority. Here is how it should be achieved:
1) Football Assocation to refuse permission to allow the club to leave the immediate Coventry area. Council to refuse planning permission for the club to move to a new ground anywhere inside the immediate Coventry area. - SISU are therefore unable to leave the Ricoh.
2) Council to insist on current ACL negotiation position with SISU. Higgs to continue its role as a silent partner. - SISU therefore unable to buy Ricoh or to reduce rent to the level they want.
This will lead to SISU putting the club for sale discreetly, getting out of Coventry and allowing a new, more suitable investor, whoever that might be, to come in and buy the club from SISU for a song, and buy the ground from ACL at a reasonable price.
All City supporters to support the above, if possible through SOC-style direct action.
Who is with me?