@Coops250709 @TrampBeater @KeepCCFCinCov #pusb #skyblues Ok. This is my attempt to try to respond to your points.
It might not be completely correct, but it’s gathering together what I know and have learned about the case over time.
It’s worth pointing out again that Supporters Direct does not take a simplistic view that it’s one group or person’s complete fault: issues like this are rarely if ever that simple.
What is absolutely clear however in this case are two things:
1. The first is that whoever has been in charge of the Club during this period does bear some responsibility – however slight – for where things are today.
2. In our view however – and with the benefit of years of experience – is that SISU are engaged in a very deliberate attempt to try to get hold of the ground at the cheapest price possible. Hardly surprising given who they are, but ultimately very damaging to your Club.
In short everything they do appears part of a negotiating strategy, including sitting back whilst the fans are exploited cynically by this poorly performing hedge fund. Almost every article written on this issue backs that view apart from Joy Seppala, Tim Fisher (who are executing the strategy) and one or two others. So we’d all have to be wrong if that wasn’t the case, and I don’t believe that we are.
We’ve been consistent in that view and the facts as we have them do not change that. Whatever the City Council’s role in this, SISU bear the lion’s share of responsibility. It doesn’t solve it, but then whenever did knowledge of something alone cause something to change. That requires action, and it requires SISU to leave football and write it off as a bad investment, or back off and start taking this whole thing more seriously and stop acting like this is the City of London. It's immature and shows a lack of political nous on their part. Coventry City Council are a democratic body, responsible to their electorate (and government) for taxpayers money/funding. Whether they're good or bad at that is not at issue: that's their responsibility under the law.
It also shows how important changes to the regulation of football are - but that's not so much for now.
See our website for the stories we’ve published on it, and in fact, what is out there in papers/media like the Daily Mail/Guardian, etc.
1. The Council rescued the building of the stadium after CCFC sold Highfield Rd and had unsustainable business plan to build it
2. The rent was set when the club was in the PL. They were offered a sliding scale based on division & crowds, but refused it.
3. Why did SISU not do proper due diligence? They also had several years to put it right and didn’t. In the end they just stopped paying rent. Why? What would happen if anyone else did that?
4 They have been offered a rent lower than they’re paying at Sixfields and turned it down.
5 The share up for sale was the Higgs half of ACL. The Council had no part in the negotiations. Higgs would tell you that SISU reneged on an agreement to buy. i.e. it didn’t get past the negotiating stage. The only veto was Seppala’s.
6 The idea that the Council tried to force a new owner is untrue and not borne out by the facts: ACL (a separate entity remember) took the club to the High Court and got a judgement in its favour over the rent. SISU refused to abide by that judgement. The next logical step for any business creditor when a debtor won't pay was to go for administration.
7 But it was SISU who put the club into administration, so they could start a “pre-package” administration. This ensured they got the club back.
8 It was the club that left the Ricoh. ACL have always said the stadium is open to them to play at. They were even offered the chance to play for nothing (by Gary Hoffman) while in admin, but turned it down. Why?
9 The latest figures for ACL that we know of show a loss of £60,000 this year. That’s about one exhibition short of breaking - even without the football club. Not really a ‘white elephant’.
10 The reasons for the points deduction were: the administration (which SISU put them in) last season, and a condition of the sale to Otium (this year).
I hope that addresses your points, and I hope that you realise that we want this solved too - it's a terrible case. But it needs to be done with everyone being mature, grown up, and taking responsibility. SISU don't act like they want to do that, and that makes negotiation almost impossible.
If you want to talk further, I'd be very happy to, either via Twitlonger, or email.