Search results

I'm saying market rate should be paid.

I'm sorry but that is irrelevant for two reasons: A) Contracts don't cease to exist every time ownership of a business changes. B) Sisu did due diligence on the club when buying it. They accepted that they had no entitlement to revenue streams. And yes the same should apply to both. If a...

Yes he is, and on that I agree with him in principle. However ccfc did sell it's rights to income streams. That is clear to see.

Well yes. Grendel is right in that the default position of any stadium occupant should get to keep the revenues that they generate. However if anyone new coming in sold their rights then why should they then say oh actually we need those, but we don't want to pay for it.

But a rugby franchise for instance haven't already sold their income streams. In the real world if you sell ownership of something then you can't keep it.

It won't be on the city boundary though will it? The city is surrounded by greenbelt land, and there is more chance of a new stadium going on top of the cathedral than on greenbelt land. Once past the greenbelt you are almost certainly into the territory of other towns, places that ccfc have...

Why then did sisu threaten to sue The Guardian for printing a factually correct article??

So you want acl to give away something that they paid for? Why exactly should they do that?

It did benefit though. They sold their share of revenues for circa £6m.

Opinion once again presented as fact.

Yep, because if you agree/disagree with someone on one issue it means you have to agree/disagree with them on everything.

I'm not going to give someone credit for not being incompetent for once. This whole thread is like a criminal who goes straight and then expects praise for it. Once again Stockholm syndrome I suspect.

Aren't we all jumping the gun here slightly saying what we'd like to see at the Ricoh? I mean we have to get back there first!

But that history was never going to exist in any new ground. Even HR was new and lacking in character and history at one point remember.

I'm not sure what other personalising it needed though. It had the badge on it, sky blue seats, ccfc written into the seating. In terms of ccfc signage, what did HR have that the Ricoh didn't?

I thought you believed that it was an individuals right to choose which games they do or do not attend. Or does that only apply to Sixfields?

Do you think RFC is annoyed that his season ticket money has been spent on sisu's lawyers rather than Steven and the boys?

CCC are innocent as proven in a court of law. I think I will except the judges word over a ceo who has reduced his customer base by 86% Spin it what way you like, but sisu did conspire to damage acl.

Ccfc and sisu conspired against acl I suppose.

I remember them playing that at HR in the final premiership season and look how that turned out!