stupot07
Well-Known Member
You're in cloud cuckoo land if you think we'd be getting 32k at the top of the league in league one
now, as we should be top o the league in this division
So I guess it is a case if you think the Ricoh should command the same rent as the Bescot Stadium, Huish park, Weston Homes Community Stadium etc..
Or whether it should be higher as it is a far superior stadium. Which as MMM points out gets nearly double the attendance and if SISU had done their job. Would be getting nearly 5 times the average league one attendance.
Whether you think SISU should pay their debt.
Whether you think they should be held responsible for their own actions of accepting that contract when they took on the club or not.
Also whether you think they should be paying more for the ricoh possibly a championship average as Cov should not be in league one in the first place.
Why are Coventry fans not all wanting the rent to be as low as possible?
They don't. Also the club has been failing for years under several owners. This is a lame and pointless route to argue. It's also irrelevant to the debate on this thread. MMM has created a formula for calculating rent which shows the football club is being ripped off.
Simply rubbish. Yet again. I invented no formula. Fisher is comparing our rent to the divisional average. Not me. I simply observed that our match day renenue is in excess if this divisional average by £1m, and this proved Fisher's yardstick to be facetious
No it doesn't prove that at all.
Fisher has been given the chance to cut costs immediately by £800k at no extra expense to the footballing side of things, and even get a nice slice of the matchday revenue which contributes six figures in itself. He is still unwilling to budge even half the cost of David Bell's annual salary-how does the club emerge as the good guys in this?
What about the £1 million we have been overcharged already?
Well we've had no problems paying it since 2005 have we? Why has pursuing a cheaper rent not been on the agenda from the off, considering that it presumably is also higher than the Championship average as well?
What about the £1 million we have been overcharged already?
I don't get it Brighton, are you suggesting because we've never tried to change it before means that we shouldn't be trying to change it now?
Dont you think that before we start arguing about what our rent should be based on L1 average we ought actually prove the starting point rather than just accept TF's word for it.
To be more accurate perhaps we ought to include a notional rent for all the other clubs who own their ground but have mortgaged it to keep going. Perhaps as a starting point maybe the interest they would save by selling the ground ? (sale lease back arrangement so in same position as us). For those grounds totally free from charge (if any) maybe put in say one 12th of value. Actually see what the other rents are.
Not saying TF is wrong he might be too high even ...... to get to League 1 average that is ....... however I have a feeling the real notional average rent for L1 is probably higher. BUT if we are going to argue the figures lets get the starting point right first.
Just to be clear I want CCFC to get the rent as cheap as possible, to pay a fair rent. I have no interest in seeing CCFC go bust but I also have no interest in driving ACL into the ground either - it should be a profitable partnership looking to the future for each of them until the club (not SISU) are in a position to buy back the stadium. Behind that also is I have no desire to put a charity in crisis or to undervalue the citizens of Coventry investment either. A good deal is a win win for both parties.
Whilst we are talking costs - then personally I would take the CCFC case far more seriously if all costs were being addressed in the effort to "normalise" business arrangements and to create a "viable base" for the Club to go forward from. You cant claim the need for normal business practice and cost on one hand then claim football and CCFC in particular is a special case on the other - which is it? because that points to how we go forward and it is one or the other imo.
just my thoughts
Tbf OSB the next lot of accounts that relate to our relegation season will give us a decent indication of cost cutting and financial restructuring. It doesn't help that we get the accounts a year later.
Fact of the matter is OSB that ACL have offered big concessions at some cost to its business but the club has refused to budge so much as a penny-when all it would take is the sale of Bell to effectively emerge at the £200k point that Fisher is sticking to.
not arguing with you what you say BSB ......... think where I am coming from is lets see the facts............. a lot of people just take what TF has said as fact and from what I can see it aint necessarily so.
Have argued often that the club has to stand on its own two feet and that football cannot in general rely on ever increasing debt.
Each side puts their own spin on things though.
means getting info from companies house on all clubs going through the accounts and making some calculated assumptions to begin with BSB. Trawling around and getting info.
Not got time to do it right now but might at some point .
not arguing with you what you say BSB ......... think where I am coming from is lets see the facts............. a lot of people just take what TF has said as fact and from what I can see it aint necessarily so.
Have argued often that the club has to stand on its own two feet and that football cannot in general rely on ever increasing debt.
Each side puts their own spin on things though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?