Search results

Just wondering. Would Boundary Blindness be what afflicts England batsmen when on tour?

Thank God you reposted, from your initial answer i was worried that Jimmy Saville was back from the grave!

Just can't think of many politicians around that I could say that i respect anymore. Dennis Skinner? Always had a soft spot for Ken clarke despite him being a Tory. Really don't think that any of the new breed of politicians has any sort of principle that guides them, could all easily...

I'm not sure.

Do you have something to do with Compass?

The first one.

I just don't think that there is any evidence as yet that ACL aren't being distressed,nor that they are either of course. That will be in the next couple of years. Unfortunately, Sisu for a Hedge Fund seem more willing to play a long game than I'd have given them credence for when they first...

Not at all confused, the £21million(not £25million, my mistake) is for the ACL lease as stated(Though of course that money went back to the council immediately). The £40million is the figure that ACL valued the agreement between themselves and the club.

One more before I leave it! Of course that £4million would have helped the figures somewhat, but only get that once.

I'm still upset about Tony Benn to be honest, so going to leave it for a bit. Saw him giving a speech in hyde Park at the end of a CND march and rally back in 1980 when i was 12, hugely influenced me at the time. Not too many of his ilk left sadly.

That £40million is the value that ACL put on the contract between themselves and the club at the time of administration. They have never paid "£40million as a right to trade", they paid £25million for the 50 year lease. You are getting the two confused.

Think that was the value given at the time of administration.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Respect enough for you to say that you're not stupid. The value of ACL as a business, separate from the leasehold they have on the Ricoh, would be contigent on contracts that they hold, and current or future income. The loss of a 40 years to run contract...

I think it was the value that ACL gave themselves for the remainder of the lease.

i am not. The value of ACL as a trading business included the 40 years remaining lease between them and the club, valued at around £40million. That has nothing to do with the duration of ACL's lease on the Ricoh, it is pertinent to their business value. That value was wiped off with the...

Is it not working though? Surely the value of ACL has been distressed by around the £40million that was remaining on the clubs lease? Do you think that the value of ACL has gone up or not since the club left?

Not really, merely preventing them from making losses.

Some think that are definitely distressing ACL, whilst also saying that ACL are doing not being distressed. That is the very definition of inconsistent, rather like the arguments on player transfers that "they are being sold for peanuts" whilst at the same time "trousering the profits on player...

No, you're deliberately misunderstanding the point as realisation has finally hit you. I'm talking about the value to ACL of the lease agreement that they had with the club, that still had 40 years to run. Think was valued at around £40million. That hasn't been replaced.