Search results

ACL. They effectively sold the future profits from revenues generated by one if its tenants to a third party. Why the club allowed that to happen I've no idea. It isn't unusual for catering rights to be sold in this way, but clearly this should have involved the club as it was its customers...

If he going to come out with that sort of stuff then he is wasting his breath. The council didn't even own the land that was sold to Tesco. The purchase and sale was all wrapped up in the same deal effectively and the profits were used to help fiance the building of the stadium, so effectively...

That isn't what is being said, by 'doing well out it', this refers to the fact that have an asset they own which is worth a lot of money. We all know that no dividends have yet been paid. The entitlement comes from the fact that the stadium would not exist at all without the club and was...

I accept your last point, but the problem is people use that fact to defend and justify the stance that the council/ACL took during the rent dispute.

I believe I answered that point earlier. Plans were already in place to buy back HR in that eventuality. GR didn't want administration as he stood to lose too much, hence why years later when the club was in an even worse situation financially he was still trying to cling on and avoid that...

A good chunk of it came from Tesco, a deal that was brokered by the football club via BR. There were other funding sources too, like naming rights. Ricoh were paying to have their name stuck to the wall of a football stadium, unless you think they would have parted with millions to name a two...

No I'm not, on the contrary. I'm talking about the fact they managed to wrestle control of a £130 million project for next to nothing. Do you dispute that this commercial arrangement was not of benefit to them?

Built the stadium in the sense that they financed it. Which they didn't. So yes, they 'built' it using other people's money and then took ownership of it. What a result that was for them.

Give then credit for a commercial arrangement that was to their benefit, while at the same time detrimental to the football club? If you want.

Someone with no affiliation to or emotional investment in the football club might say exactly that. What we should not do is perpetuate these myths that they 'bailed us out', 'built the stadium' and more importantly they are somehow hard done by.

Indeed I think Higgs was instrumental in that. Actually, I feel a lot more gratitude and loyalty to them then I do the council. Ultimately, the council spent almost nothing and came out of it with total ownership of the freehold of a £130 million facility and a 50% stake in the management...

That's a perfectly reasonable position. We may disagree on the details and history of it, but clearly there needs to be a deal done. Both sides need to talk, and that was my original point. The suggestion ACL should 'not let this drop' and pursue the legal avenues open to them is possibly the...

What, even though it is all complete fantasy?

You're wasting your breath. No matter how matter times they are told they don't get it. All the council ever did was secure a bank loan to make up a funding shortfall for the building of a facility where the vast majority of funding was already in place. Not only that, GR has gone on record...

If you want to take personal offence to an insult aimed at a notional group of people who share a particular viewpoint then fine. I say grow a pair.

No I didn't, I said 'fuckwits' (note: plural) in response to a post by somebody else (note: not you) who had labelled somebody else an arsehole. So no personal insults were aimed at you at all before your little rant. Funny how the same people who have freely used the words 'areshole' and...

ACL didn't build anything, they are the management company that was set up to run it once it was built. The council didn't build it either. Their contribution (from their own coffers) to the construction costs amounted to about £2million, for a stadium that cost £130million to construct...

And where have I disagreed with that? That is a universally accepted fact. Those urging ACL to continue the legal fight and dressing it up as the 'common sense' position are pretty clueless though. Take that route and it pretty much GUARANTEES that the club leave the city, the very thing...

Just more name calling with no attempt to actually answer the points. Yes, because what we really need at this point is more legal action - those lawyers haven't earnt enough out of this have they? That's the common sense viewpoint - more conflict and confusion? An idea, we draw a line under...

Surely you mean our precious football club? Who cares about SISU, or ACL for that matter. What is weird is the sense of loyalty people feel toward a completely separate 3rd party corporate entity like ACL. It is very odd. Somebody on here once said they sided with ACL in the dispute because...