Search results

I'm not defending it all. But it does illustrate the importance of revenue access. And your final sentence about FFP is inaccurate. You seem to think that because attendances are shit that means we will be FORCED to have no playing budget. I'm afraid that is simply not true.

Yes if it is piss poor then you are right. There are also conditions that effect what is classed as your 'wage bill'. For example home-grown players (English/British) that were registered for 3 years before their 21st birthday, (which would then imply all home grown players under 21.. of which...

Again.... our playing budget can be set at the level the owners wish it to be. They will have to supplement it with donations that will not be able to added as debt. See below: - SCMP in its most basic definition for League 1 for this season limits player wages to 60% of your forecast turnover...

Michael - you have ignored some of my questions earlier in the thread - I'm not demanding an answer am I? The solution lies in negotiation. Now you are right, there has been little if any movement from either side in this so far. However it is kind of to be expected given the impending JR...

Make your mind up Michael... you either want to pursue the SISU out line or you want to actively be involved in a negotiation strategy. Trouble is I can't tell from post to post which one it is.

How about finding a solution where CCFC return to the Ricoh and some kind of working relationship is established between the parties, so that CCFC is on a sound financial footing. Isn't that your mantra?

It's one thing wanting the current owners to leave... But you've hardly provided a compelling alternative which would see the club exist in any form in the future.

Firstly - no one has said SISU have been good for us so far. Really... because I am confused... Your comment from 1 week ago. Excerpts from your OP yesterday. Now forgive me if I feel you are a little contradictory.

I'm not surprised McDonald was picked for Wolves - he was the best player on the pitch yesterday.

KCIC's agenda is a little something like this: People that are entitled to a return on their investment: Higgs, ACL, CCC People that are NOT entitled to a return on their investment: SISU People that must give away their interest in CCFC/Ricoh for free: SISU People who must NOT give away...

If this is the stance from KCIC then I'm afraid they have lost all credibility as a supporters group aiming to find a solution to all this.

You are right - but have any of our owners since early 90's been any good? Their actions have exacerbated the shite that went before. And given the fact as fans we can't agree on anything - I don't think we would actually do a very good job running a football club.

Michael - you said this barely 7 days ago in criticism of some of my comments "I never bought into the whole pro/anti acl/sisu thing and I lost interest in people arguing over it a long time ago. kcic is pro team and pro fan hence coming to our 4 key questions which are about how we get back...

Nice one Michael... What happened to 'we're not anti SISU/ACL - we're pro team' ? Has someone been in your ear promising you the world if we can get the bad SISU people? 'Yes Michael you can be on the fans board...' I don't know what's more of a joke...

Marshall is the only player making any kind of impression going forward.

What? Has he even had a shot??

Wilson doesn't look remotely interested. Is he injured?

The CET article is party their opinion aswell remember before the direct quote from JS

Firstly there would be no other set of circumstances them at could have occurred. If Higgs directors accepted it, and overall ACL rejected it, then it can only have been that CCC rejected it. Secondly, the only transaction between CCFC and ACL was the rental deal. Admin was sought to recover...

Their only stakeholders were Higgs and CCC. Higgs agreed to it. So given they rejected it we can only assume CCC did not. Revisiting the process would not have benefited any stakeholder unless they were trying to purchase the business themselves, as the settlement amount was the same...