Search results

But how are SISU different to any other similar investors? Secondly, how is that necessarily bad, they want RICOH, but to get to there, they need a successful CCFC. As I said in the previous post, ACL would surely safeguard the club. Realistically, we can only get 50% share now anyway, the...

Thank you, for the facts. I understand the situation is slightly different, but my point here is that CCFC are paying 1.1/1.2m more than a premiership club. Their council wants them to pay more rent. If we put it into context, we pay nearly half what Man City do for a 48,000 seater stadium...

Wouldn't anyone who would take over CCFC want to own the RICOH? So what's the big deal with SISU being able to get a share? I'm pretty sure ACL would safeguard the club. Honest question(s).

Idea is, IMO, is to get ACL to the negotiation table (now we have to negotiate) and come to agreement, we want 200k, ACL want 400k, I reckon they'd (SISU/TF etc.) settle for 300k as that is realistic. We have to remember there are little details have to be agreed as well, if SISU just...

I suppose, but if you factor the money from getting promoted, it would counter the loss, I imagine, TV money, £ from winning title/POs etc. if we assume that's what TF budgeted for. Perhaps? :thinking about:

Is this to me? Swansea? My thread dedicated to it, has the web page with all facts on it. Ipswich, there was another thread and I comment was posted comparing us to Ipswich (who refused to pay rent) have a lot less contracted rent, and Hull didn't have to pay no rent, as a firm basically paid...

It's a scare tactic, quite a good one, but realistically, if worst come to worst, we won't go some shitty stadium 45 miles away! How many fans will turn up? I couldn't, I don't drive (getting lessons for Christmas etc) I can't get there, it is financially unviable, and our fan base couldn't...

If we get promoted, would we in fact make a small bit of profit? (If rent is considerably reduced) May also be why we want new rate of rent backdated from 10months?

They wouldn't move away from the RICOH, it's a scare tactic, to give us the upper hand in negotiations.

This stance? The stance that has forced ACL to make many concessions? Their 1st offer was 400k with other concessions, we on track for further concessions... Glad you aren't part of the negotiating! :thinking about: :whistle: :facepalm:

We didn't want McG then, nor could we have afforded him at the time! Ben Turner, none of us wanted him to lave and 1.8m was a bit low, but that's football, last in contract, so we couldn't command a better fee. :facepalm:

You're saying it's laughable to think it's to go renegade on ACL, but I'll be laughing when we get our own way - which we will. If you compare to the newer grounds that have been built: Hull, Swansea, then we should have an agreement that is similar to those 2 teams, who are in leagues above...

That's why I brought in the championship angle, we're above average in L1, however, below average in the championship, therefore, logic would say rent should be between 170k-240k?

I ent going to happen.

AT would've kicked the process off by saying, I want x, y, z on new contracts? Of course.

SISU didn't agree the rent in the first place. Serious question, do you think ACL would want to renegotiate if we paid rent? I'm unsure, I think ACL have been pushed to the negotiating table because of radical measures - if it works great. If the council want Swansea to pay more rent -...

I haven't started a thread on my socialist principles, I merely stated I was a socialist, if your referring to the thread about the monarchy, I don't think we sould have ruled by a blood line, that's not necessarily socialist (all socialists agree with that stance) but being a republican in this...

The main point I'm getting a there in this thread is, the council want more rent, Swansea nor Ospreys pay rent or their ground (similar to the RICOH), we're contracted to 1.1m rent, Swansea are in the prem, we are in L1, there's the facts. We deserve lower rent. 240k is fair.

The analogy of rent of 1 person of a house is completely different to the situation of ACL v SISU, SISU are a big corporation - they get away with shit, ordinary people don't. Councils whore themselves out to corporations.