Search results

I would be happy for someone senior from SISU to speak to them. However when your previous offer was described as derisory you really need to come back with something significantly improved, not just a promise of a few quid if Wilson leaves Bournemouth.

And remember Johnson slipped out about being able to play at the Ricoh if it wasn't SISU, trust meetings with the council that they weren't allowed to report on and notes in the trust board meeting minutes to get updates from Hoffman. They're all in it together and it will play out just as it...

Exactly, how blatant does it need to be. We've even had Nick Eastwood saying the fans should be more upset and protest more.

Couldn't have planned it any better :emoji_thinking:

Where would that money be coming from? The hallmarks of a Hoffman offer is promising SISU payment of future income, add in accepting any old offer to stay at the Ricoh and funds will be a lot tighter than they are now. Maybe we can get a Wonga loan off his mate Ranson.

Reckon there will be a few people lying low now having made complete idiots of themselves.

Given that Hoffman and Elliott were thick as thieves with Ranson and he was seen at the Ricoh recently would you bet against the funding coming in the form of one of Ranson's Wonga style loans. Add that into the mix with promising future income to SISU and accepting any offer Wasps will give...

So predictable yet there were those who claimed yet again that it was tinfoil hat territory. So we've got Hoffman and Elliott, recently seen at the Ricoh with Ranson, putting in a bid to 'save' the club. Sure I've seen that before somewhere. In my opinion, and not really based on anything...

Think the council were awarded £330K costs for JR1 and the council & Wasps have already been awarded some costs for JR2. I suppose there's always the prospect of them not being paid but I suspect the FL would treat it in the same manner as the debt to ACL if SISU went down the administration route.

As I've already posted even if you want to completely discount that, although I'm not sure those who have signed contracts with Wasps would agree that the loss of over quarter of a million customers over 23 event days should be discounted, you're still have a much higher total figure than people...

Amazing people still believe that. Or that the rent now can be compared to the rent previously. Even if you assume Fishers figures include every penny spent by supporters you're still comparing somewhere in the region of £.75m against £1.6m. Given the loss of primacy, stands closed, loss of...

It was when CCC had agreed to sell to Wasps. At the time it appeared to be a case of them covering themselves from a legal POV as they weren't certain if the clubs option to buy the Higgs share still existed. Was rejected by Higgs and I think it later came out that Wasps had a veto so it was...

Its the figure from last season given by the club and confirmed by my contact at ACL. If you're trying to argue its inflated by matchday F&B then you're arguing against your own previously made point when you've said the revenues from that for football matches is insignificant. Still I think...

Why haven't they asked him why the council has continually insisted there has been no conversations with the club regarding a new stadium for him to now say there has been 'in recent years'?

Why? We are told we are insignificant to Wasps finances and they don't need us there. Why then would they need to jack the rent up?

But again reasonable person is expecting to go in to negotiations with everything already agreed. If they will start talking to each other then there is a chance of working out what commercially acceptable terms are. A continual refusal to speak gets us nowhere. When did this become widely...

I've yet to hear the council make any reference to the damage the loss of the football club will do to the local economy. For that reason alone they should be doing everything they can. It's so easy, rolling one year deal on the current terms plus annual inflation increase until the legals are...

But it isn't really is it? Not in the grand scheme of things. They waste so much time and money on all sorts of rubbish quite happily but we're supposed to believe they're desperately concerned about that when it comes to this. If, as is constantly claimed, there is no chance of them losing...

Council didn't seem so concerned with taxpayers money when it was bailing out failed events at the Ricoh or paying out hush money. No way the cost is the true reason they so desperately want it called off.

And of course as has been said many times before if they are so confident of victory why the desperation to get legal action dropped.