Search results

I know. Anyone would think they've took our club away from us or something.

When over 3k are prepared to pay much more to travel over to Wolves then it should indicate that the cost of travel isn't the issue.

Is it really to their credit? They sort of remind me of WW1 generals. Sending the men over the top to be slaughtered each time, yet patting themselves on the back because they've stuck to their guns. Real bravery comes from knowing when your beat and admitting to yourself that your wrong.

CCFC, as you well know, isn't a public organisation.

Also by that time it will be generally accepted that we have the support levels of a Conference team.

Those that question NOPM need reminding of this: The directors had also made forecasts of revenue that may be jeopardised by the ground-share with Northampton Town FC. "Uncertainty exists regarding the level of support and attendance...which impacts on other commercial revenues and there is no...

If we get into the debate of what and who is supposed to do what, Should it be up to CCC to financially assist a private company?

It let me vote no.

There was still a rental agreement in place.

So they hand the golden share over to a company which then liquidates the club a few months later and they deny any responsibility you mean? Actually your right, I can see the league acting like that.

I think he means if Sisu liquidate then a Phoenix CCFC should be allowed straight back into the league as the FL would have contributed to the situation.

Or even the owners of the NEC buying it for some of their smaller exhibitions? Nothing that says a group of exhibition halls has to be on the same site.

RFC is more pro sisu that Seppalla. Theres your ACL plant!

I cant see any reason as to why ACL cant be set up as a division of CCFC. ACL as a ltd company would cease to exist, and all assets would belong to CCFC. ACL though would continue to operate separate from the football side of things.

As long as the stadium is going to the same company as the golden share, market value is paid, and safeguards are put in place then I don't have a problem with them buying the stadium. However I do have a problem with the stadium going off to separate companies. Sisu aren't to be trusted to do...

The progressive argument is for the the Ricoh lease (freehold is of no use to the club) to belong to the same company as where the golden share sits. Ccfc should be allowed to purchase acl for the market rate, with various safeguards put in place.

So we have to be open minded with sisu and accept that mistakes have happened but believe that they will be better in the future, but when it comes to the council we judge them on decisions made 10 years ago? That's a very open minded and progressive argument you've got there.

Yes I hope you have too. Let's explore all avenues. Why not get the council to build a ground and the club can rent it? I'm sure you will be in favour of at least considering this as we have to have an open mind and not let preconceived ideas affect our judgement.

Yes, I was happy when they took over. Are you suggesting I should have been hostile back then when I knew nothing about them?

Probably one of his companies, I was in agreement with you on that. However as osb58 points out its irrelevant on the face of it who owns the stadium. What is important is that the stadium is run in a professional way, ccfc gain the benefits, and Ccfc and acl be part of the same group. I...