Search results

I suppose the sticking point is the logistics - stewarding, can tickets be sold on site or even collected, car parking spaces etc. All will be resolved, but it should have been done earlier in the week. 48 hours until kick-off and they're still 'in discussions' :facepalm:

Not least the council who forced the club to only deal with SISU when there were other interested parties.

Whatever happened to the real Japandy? He was crazier than the fake one.

Don't be late. It's 3pm kick off.

Quite possibly, but the fact remains having requested the adjournment they have now informed the court they are happy to proceed with the appointed administrator suggesting there are no major concerns. He is an officer of the court when all said and done. Suggestions by some that he is in bed...

What this: http://www.ccfcshop.co.uk/ Not on the version of the internet I'm using!

Suspect something in the region of 8k so far. Imagine it will be an average turn out of 10-11K in the end, plus what you bring. It is a bank holiday and kids for a quid so that will compensate for those that stay away because of all this shit.

You'll have a job. Site has been down for 5 days.

Makes no difference in the scheme of things. He is legally obliged to act independently and in the interests of all creditors. He is an officer of the court If he's an idiot, then he's an impartial idiot. Don't go in for all the paranoia myself. What next, Fisher is an alien and Waggot a...

Agree. He's an independent administrator, it isn't for him to have an agenda. Unless you think the conspiracy runs so deep that he is a plant doing SISU's bidding.

If they have an agreement with the club, and the answers were only provided on the basis that the agreement should be honoured, well then it should be honoured. SISU renege on agreements and they are rightfully criticised for it. The Trust are right not to publish those answers.

...not only that, but you talk about pot holes being filled in, but we all know that even when the club was paying the full rent, ACL still didn't pay any dividends. There is no 'profit' for the taxpayer to be made from Ricoh, not in the short term anyway. And as for "265,000 not giving a...

Read the statement from the Swansea council leader posted in another thread. The difference between the political leaders in that city and ours is striking. The economic benefits to the city and all its residents from having a top flight football team eclipse the modest returns from rental...

Yes I know, and it was a good thing they got involved and their trust is an excellent example of what can be achieved by fan involvement. My post above was more a response to the comments about how profitable they are.

Swansea are a PL club when all said and done and have much more favourable rent terms with the council. This is what their council leader said when it was suggested the rent be increased: "We should be helping them to achieve more not taxing them on their success. As far as I am concerned...

It was all over their forums last week. They were creaming themselves at the thought we'd go bust.

That isn't 'exactly' what he said; that was more of a report of what he said. I don't doubt that he said it, but it would be nice to see it again. That fans forum on September 13th was filmed, and part of it is available on you tube, but not all of it. I am sure the whole thing would have...

That report and the funding forecasts were put together after the sale of costs from CCFC to the Higgs charity. I'm just curious as to what the £2 million payment 'direct from CCFC to ACL' was. Nowhere in the document does it explain it. A rent advance? Not all that important in the scheme...

But doesn't that report you refer to (in the construction funding forecasts) a payment from CCFC to ACL of £2 million? Not a huge amount in the context of this project, but equally not "nothing". Also, nobody is able to say with any certainty who purchased the land from BG and sold it on to...

Wasn't decontamination covered by an EU grant?