Coventry United had agreed to play at the Ricoh... (1 Viewer)

[Pusb1]

"As it turns out a deal to play at the ricoh had been negotiated but for Burntwood not being able to make the planned 7.00pm kick off time."

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/coven...ination-league-division-2-626285.html#p626285

Doubt they'd have been charged, the however many of thousands for that game :thinking about:

 

[stupot07]

How strange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Sick Boy]

I wonder how they could afford to play there? For some bizarre reason the majority on here think it's fair that our rival's reserve team play there for a lot less than we were paying.

Imagine other clubs fans acceting that and their fans posting 'up the council'. It could only happen at CCFC. There are some many double standards on this forum and some of the excuses made for ACL are laughable.

There is no logical sense to any of it. Both SISU and ACL should hang their heads in shame but as usual most of our fans can only see in black and white.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Offer made through fl you may have forgotten mate

 

[Grendel]

Offer made through fl you may have forgotten mate

What the one with matchday fees that made to no different to any other "offers"?

 

[Huckerby]

honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate

 

[edgy]

So you think the rent should collate with the attendance?

Shame that didn't happen with us, eh?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It did edgy it was all part of the original agreement that should have been renegotiated when they took over rather than just refusing to pay. Surely?

 

[Grendel]

It did edgy it was all part of the original agreement that should have been renegotiated when they took over rather than just refusing to pay. Surely?

Without refusing to pay there is no evidence they would negotiate.

 

[Grendel]

honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate

Ok what part of the costs are variable? Enlighten us.

 

[Sick Boy]

honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate

Imagine fans of other clubs coming out with this apologist rubbish!!

 

[Astute]

Imagine fans of other clubs coming out with this apologist rubbish!!

Can you imagine fans at certain clubs going on about how badly their club is being run because they never won anything this year? Or how badly their club is being run because they never made it into the main European competition. Or lack of funds being put into the club because they only spent 20m on their squad this year.

I bet they would never imagine anyone sticking up for owners if they had their club taken 34 miles away from where it is supposed to be. Or being able to get used to admin/liquidation occurring at their club. Or having to rely on youth players coming through. Or relying on litigation to try and get what they want and not need, and not worry about their supporters or what is happening to the club. How about a relegation into Division 3? Or if a player embargo wouldn't surprise anyone? Waiting for their owners to make a payment that has been payable for about 9 months, and if not paid could send your club out of the FL. Only 12 days to go now. Going to games 34 miles away in a shed where there are no demonstrations from people inside?

I wonder who the apologists really are. Do we really have any? Are we doing what we think is best personally?

Whatever it is we could be doing more and not attacking each other all the time.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

There was evidence Grendel. The sliding scale was rejected in the original negotiations. What do you think enabled the reduced offers? The remortgage!
I am happy that sometimes it's a tactic in negotiations and if it was then it worked so why did sisu move out of Coventry rather than accept it or stay without paying?

 

[Spionkop]

Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. It is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.

 

[skybluetony176]

Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.

They can't afford the 50% share anymore. That's all gone on legal fees and covering lost revenue. With another season at suxfields they probably could have bought ACL 100%, If we haven't already passed that mark. Still biting your nose of to spite your face is obviously better for the club in the long run. The majority are just too stupid to see the bigger picture, yeah right.

 

[Sick Boy]

I have not seen anyone on here backing SISU or sticking up for them. If you dare to state that other parties are to blame as well then it automatically equates that you support SISU.

 

[rondog1973]

I have not seen anyone on here backing SISU or sticking up for them. If you dare to state that other parties are to blame as well then it automatically equates that you support SISU.

No, but some, yourself included, will far more readily criticize or blame CCC/ACL for the mess we are in, when those that chose to leave the Ricoh are seemingly exempt from blame.

 

[AJB1983]

Don't think Leicester reserves would have needed a club shop either, or office space, or IT infrastructure....and everything else that goes with having a football club sit as tenant in a stadium.

 

[covcity4life]

No, but some, yourself included, will far more readily criticize or blame CCC/ACL for the mess we are in, when those that chose to leave the Ricoh are seemingly exempt from blame.

he just said other parties to blame ASWELL

so he didnt exempt sisu at all, stop lying.

 

[Nick]

Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. It is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.

What is the going rate?

 

[dongonzalos]

What is the going rate?

Was 4 million agreed by both sides?

 

[fernandopartridge]

honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate

Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?

 

[James Smith]

Did the rent at the Ricoh include the office space, shop ticket office etc? as well as the pitch and seating etc.

 

[sky blue zam]

Did the rent at the Ricoh include the office space, shop ticket office etc? as well as the pitch and seating etc.

I'm sure I read somewhere that the club owned the shop and that's why Jimmy hill is where he is. Might be wrong though.

 

[stupot07]

Was 4 million agreed by both sides?

Wasn't that with the loan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[italiahorse]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the club owned the shop and that's why Jimmy hill is where he is. Might be wrong though.

Wrong, they rented it. Hence the Friday night scarper in a couple of trucks !!!

 

[shmmeee]

Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?

You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?

 

[skybluetony176]

Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?

Does that mean the rents about to drop big time at suxfields? Seems we're overpaying based on attendance.

Does this also mean grendull is going to get his list of people to blame for the clubs downfall upto three? Lucas, Thorn and Cardoza.

 

[stupot07]

You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?

Problem is we weren't getting 20k+ crowds at HR in the championship whilst we were negotiating the deal....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Huckerby]

Grendel and FernandoPartridge.

I don't know the ins and outs of the deal so I won't pretend to by trying to argue with you about specifics.
That being said, you both seem like educated men/women - don't drag yourself down by pretending that you would expect a team playing a one of game with a crowd of 500 to pay the same matchday costs/rent as one with 20k+. I've heard some of your arguments and they are better than that. Ridiculous.

 

[fernandopartridge]

You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?

I was responding back directly the point the poster made, that rent and attendances are linked.

 

[wingy]

I was responding back directly the point the poster made, that rent and attendances are linked.

Not necessary really is It ,sure Shmmeee Is old enough and educated enough to think for himself ,I mean you don't know me and I don't know you ,how has his Identitiy or that of his dad become public on here by the way.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Not necessary really is It ,sure Shmmeee Is old enough and educated enough to think for himself ,I mean you don't know me and I don't know you ,how has his Identitiy or that of his dad become public on here by the way.

I've taken that bit out as it was a bit below the belt, god knows why it's public knowledge

 

[covcity4life]

it should be public knowledge, its clearly skewered his opinions on the whole matter.