Search results

Yeah, I do. Board have backed their managers this season, he had good things to say about our players, we're a big club, who knows. I don't think he'll go to West Ham, Adkins would be the best shout for them IMO. Leeds could get him, again, Adkins and Coyle I'd imagine would be higher up...

Just wanna say this, 300k (in and around that area), is not peppercorn, Swansea, Ipswich and Hull pay peppercorn rent.

As much as I hate this Fascist pig... He's the only good manager unemployed, reluctantly... Sign him up.

I haven't got the exact figures on me, but they have consistently made 500k (give or take) profit a year, bar one year, they made 3.5m, an anomaly OSB explained, but can't remember what he said exactly. They aren't stable without CCFC, and would have to radically change if CCFC, for what ever...

The current arrangement is 1.28m with 0% of match day revenue. Why should we share revenue CCFC fans make!? No, for me, it's got to be 100% match day revenue, no less, like most teams. Ok, they are writing off 300k of our 1.3m debt, meaning we would've had to pay 1m for the last year to rent...

I've said on numerous occasions that the club could've handled it better, BUT, if the tactics work and we get a suitable settlement for CCFC, then it will be a vindication of their tactics, and will be well worth the hassle.

ACL only make around 500k profit, which includes a disgraceful 1.5-1.9m rent, 1.28m + revenue streams which varies season to season, take that away, and ACL are fucked, so no, they don't hold all of the cards, and they are in just as uncomfortable position as CCFC.

Without being too critical, it didn't really have much 'meat on the bones', otherwise a decent article.

Some poor managers in this League with some poor excuses! :thinking about: Offered nothing upfront.

You've misunderstood. What I'm saying is, ACL rely too heavily on CCFC to run as an efficient, competitive business, CCFC can't stand up on it's own 2 feet because we have to pay 1.28m in rent a year, AS WELL AS, getting nothing from the revenue streams, so we've lost out on about 1.5m a year...

No, I don't think so. He knew what he was getting into, he seen an opportunity, with more money on the table, championship status, and I feel he may have started to panic because we haven't had a great 2013 and have had to change his system to accommodate Clarke. Now it's your turn, you...

300k backdated, ACL should write the other 1m off, and CCFC get 100% of revenue streams. If that was put on the table, and it was rejected, my stance would become untenable. If they get cheaper than that, then fair fucking play! I think it's time for ACL to no longer rely on CCFC, and CCFC to...

It's ok to change your mind before you sign a contract, so if he did shake on it, it doesn't mean much really, as he wasn't 'contractually obliged', I've heard that phrase a lot from a few people. The deal, IMO, has to be backdated from when we stopped paying and we get 100% revenues on match...

No, it might be moveable, or changes time to time. I think ACL might be pulling a sly one with this 'rebate'.

Backdated to when we stopped paying and 100% of match day revenue, then that would be reasonable, but ACL remain rock solid on the former and I'm not to sure on the latter.

I'm sceptical of this 'rebate' because I don't see why they just wouldn't just knock it off the final price, again, I don't know the nitty gritty details, same with all of us really except the negotiating parties.

Without being disrespectful, I don't think any of this really matters tbh, especially if we get a favourable agreement. Isn't exactly going to live long in the memory when it's concluded.

If, by your standards, the deal is 150k because we get a cut in revenue streams, would that mean, whilst we haven't been getting this cut, we've actually been paying in excess of 1.5-1.75m a year? Especially bearing in mind, we had average crowds of 24k in our 1st season, 20k after that, late...

Why would we get a rebate? What would be the point of one, why haven't they just factored in the rebate in the final price?

You're missing the point, we're still paying 400k rent. Most clubs have 100% of this revenue streams, if we factored that into the 'average rents', the average rent would be below 100k! EDIT: if, by your standards, the deal is 150k because we get a cut in revenue streams, would that mean...