torchomatic
Well-Known Member
People did scrutinize the owners at the time with the RR campaign. No one was interested.
Serious question about ACL, CCC (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter The Gentleman
- Start date
SydneySkyBlue
Member
The problem with this is that if they hadn't stepped in to give our club a home they would have been rightfully slaughtered.
To say that they took advantage of the club's vulnerability is a nonsense based on what?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Fan expectations (yes all clubs have the same problem). We were a PL club and demanded that we stayed one, and then happily turned a blind eye when Richardson took a punt. This along with financial pressure of relegation put pressure on the club to spend beyond its means. Even now when you mention the role of Richardsons punt era in our current plight , you get the response of "well at least we were in the PL watching decent players" as an excuse from some fans who believe we're still a PL sleeping giant.
Some of this has been mirrored in the championship.
I'm not apportioning a lot of blame on fans, just a bit. A bit like Portsmouth fans who were happy enough in the PL watching players they couldn't afford.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
SydneySkyBlue
Member
This was a world class internationally-used stadium with ambitions of Premier League football...
The cock-up was not employing lower rent clauses should we be relegated (as was offered at the end). In this sense, the Council / ACL are not blameless.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Here we go again. We do not know what those clauses looked like, and £1.2m was too much in the championship.
It has been used for 1 under 21 match and a dozen Olympic Games. It isn't a world class stadium, it's no better than Leicesters ground, or the riverside, for example.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
It is important to remember that the £1.3m rent equated to less than 4k people at a game.
Whilst i think we can all agree the £1.3m rent was high, the 22.5k figure was mostly due to the shoddy way in which the club was/is run.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The deal the club had was worse than any other council owned stadium. What it looked like is irrelevant. Financially the club were better off in Highfield road - even of they had to rent it.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Precisely.
Stupot07, our stadium is better than Fester's! Come on mate
I'm talking purely about the football bowl.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
You're on a forum don't forget, you're not writing a brochure for the Ricoh.
Anyway, ACL/CCCs rental model from flawed from the outset and it's no surprise we are where we are. And yes, the club were stupid to sign it. But like I said, what choice was there? Wimpey had already bought HR thanks to the incredible foresight of Mr Richardson.
Anyway, ACL/CCCs rental model from flawed from the outset and it's no surprise we are where we are. And yes, the club were stupid to sign it. But like I said, what choice was there? Wimpey had already bought HR thanks to the incredible foresight of Mr Richardson.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Fan expectations (yes all clubs have the same problem). We were a PL club and demanded that we stayed one, and then happily turned a blind eye when Richardson took a punt. This along with financial pressure of relegation put pressure on the club to spend beyond its means. Even now when you mention the role of Richardsons punt era in our current plight , you get the response of "well at least we were in the PL watching decent players" as an excuse from some fans who believe we're still a PL sleeping giant.
Some of this has been mirrored in the championship.
I'm not apportioning a lot of blame on fans, just a bit. A bit like Portsmouth fans who were happy enough in the PL watching players they couldn't afford.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Well for once I can't disagree with anything you've wrote!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So you want the club to sell all its best players and remain uncompetitive in this league.
I assume you wanted in 2005 the books balanced and players sold and even if relegated would not have complained as long as the council was receiving its regular payment?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Our highest income from ticket sales since moving to the Ricoh was £5.7m, so even then rent was c25% of our ticket sales, our last season at Ricoh it was £3.9m so rent was a third of our ticket income.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
SydneySkyBlue
Member
Like I said, the major flaw was the fixed rent fee. But then if our owners hadn't done such a shoddy job it might not have become the issue it did.
I'll ignore the 'smart arse' response at the beginning.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Depends which way you look at it.
In the first season the Ricoh generated an extra 5k fans per game. That equates to about £1.7m.
Rent at the Ricoh was only £300k higher than at HR, and let's say f&b's were about £0.5 million.
That means the club (even with a high rent) were nearly £1m better off in the first season of moving.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Like I said, the major flaw was the fixed rent fee. But then if our owners hadn't done such a shoddy job it might not have become the issue it did.
I'll ignore the 'smart arse' response at the beginning.
The major flaw was also agreeing to £1.2/1.3m rent in the championship.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Like I said, the major flaw was the fixed rent fee. But then if our owners hadn't done such a shoddy job it might not have become the issue it did.
I'll ignore the 'smart arse' response at the beginning.
It's valid - it's not an international stadium - its no better than other new builds constructed this century.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Our highest income from ticket sales since moving to the Ricoh was £5.7m, so even then rent was c25% of our ticket sales, our last season at Ricoh it was £3.9m so rent was a third of our ticket income.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
We didn't pay any in the last season
stupot07
Well-Known Member
We didn't pay any in the last season
Sorry meant the last season in the championship.. Pretty sure we did pay that season.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I think the Ricoh is better than most the new builds.
I hate the 4 identical stands look like at Leicester.
At least the Ricoh has 1 individual looking stand.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Your maths are all over the place. Many of the tickets were giveaways - our ticket revenue I believe has never reached £6 million and was always going to decline which means £1 in every £4 was going to the council - and that was when attendances were at their peak.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Probably true, even though the rent would have been at the same level as it was at the Ricoh.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
The major flaw was also agreeing to £1.2/1.3m rent in the championship.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
I'd attribute that to the fact it was a fixed rate and the club's ambition to be paying it as a PL club.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Surely the amount of giveaways was just as high at Highfield Road, and currently at sixfields?
Whatever way you look at it, attendance's went up by 5k, whilst rent only went up by 300k.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Have there been two sliding rent deals suggested? I know PWKH said there was one suggested by Sir Higgs when we moved to the Ricoh that was turned down and I seem to recall the one that has been mentioned by you and in the SISU era that had cost per fan included, or are they one and the same?The sliding scale that they turned down was still £1.2m in the championship, more expensive in the PL, but cheaper in league one and two. We don't know how cheap. It also included a cost per fan over a certain level, so not the great deal people like you think it is when you make the "rejecting the sliding scale" argument.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Plus you pay vat on tickets
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
How many times, no money has ever gone to the council. If you've got a point, don't ruin it with needless in accuracies.
And the fact remains, that as soon as the club entered serious negotiations the rent was cut by 67%, then again to 12.5% of the original deal. It was at this point Sisu took the club to Northampton.
Getting hung up on historic rent prices when talking about the current situation is either wilfully misleading or plain ignorant. Noone is saying the club was well run prior to Sisu, we paid far too much in wages too, which added far more to our debt, but I don't ever see you on here bemoaning that.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Think it was the same deal, but we have never seen the actually detail of it. The q and a suggested the Higgs one had escalators attached. Again we have no details of it. We have no idea if it was a better deal, or not. Someone did post some quotes from Paul fletcher but again that's not clear whether that was the deal or whether that was what ccfc were hoping for.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Longford
Member
I think this debate about ifs, buts and maybes is getting a little long in the tooth. The facts of this table bring into focus the real consequences of our owners actions..
http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/eng.3/english-league-one?cc=5739
http://espnfc.com/stats/attendance/_/league/eng.3/english-league-one?cc=5739
Grendel
Well-Known Member
That wasn't rent though was it - it was a rent back after purchase. What was the "rent" the year before?
The comment is very telling of the thought process of PWKH and the others towards the club.
Longford
Member
The clubs continued existence is entrusted to SISU no one else. They make decisions that ultimately effect that. Others are all bit part players who do NOT have that responsibility.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
That becomes even more dramatic when looked at in relation to the whole league and conference
Grendel
Well-Known Member
We didn't pay rent at Highfield road.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Wasn't aware we rented HR before the sale?
