ohitsaidwalker king power
Well-Known Member
ok G... so do the maths based on 10k..or maybe 9k for margin of error reasons please.
There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.
I think its your calculator that needs changing.
You need to look at the bigger picture, the Sky Blues have no future whatsoever if either the club or the owners own our own stadium and have access to ALL revenue streams.
FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB
ok G... so do the maths based on 10k..or maybe 9k for margin of error reasons please.
You haven't read it properly (under the terms & conditions we were playing under at the Ricoh, no chance of making money either short or long-term!). TO BREAK EVEN AT THE RICOH WE'd Require gates in excess of 23,000!!!!!!!!!!
Not at all, Im just saying there is far less pressure on the players this season because we're not playing at the Ricoh.
Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability.
There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.
I think its your calculator that needs changing.
what's up grendull, has your calculator broke or have you just realised your argument doesn't stack up, even based on 9,000.
As usual you make no sense. What are you blathering on about?
As usual you make no sense. What are you blathering on about?
Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability.
i'll dumb it down for you, i just hope i can dumb it down enough for you.
you questioned the gate numbers that had been suggested so you were asked to do it base on a lower gate number of 9,000.
your reply was "Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability"
as usual when you cant back your self up, you've gone of at a tangent instead in an attempt to deflect that what you are blathering on about makes no sense.
so i'll put the question to you again. do the maths for 9,000. if your not sure how to do it go and ask a responsible adult.
Grendel, his quote was "FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB" so stuff equity, saleable value, improved borrowing - its punters cash he is talking about.
Again you make no sense.
The point made is if the club owned a stadium it's balance sheet and equity stake is enhanced. No "back up" is required.
Peter hill-wood I believe once famously said you don't need fans at football matches. In his case of course he referred to the huge revenue gained from TV.
However, if investors or one investor has agreed to support losses for a period and then promised a return if the equity conditions are met we also are in a position where attendances are not relevant.
Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.
No, the balance sheet is 'balanced out' with debt from the new stadium and many years of self inflicted reduced income. Your talking bollocks.
There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.
I think its your calculator that needs changing.
You haven't read it properly (under the terms & conditions we were playing under at the Ricoh, no chance of making money either short or long-term!). TO BREAK EVEN AT THE RICOH WE'd Require gates in excess of 23,000!!!!!!!!!!
Again you make no sense.
The point made is if the club owned a stadium it's balance sheet and equity stake is enhanced. No "back up" is required.
Peter hill-wood I believe once famously said you don't need fans at football matches. In his case of course he referred to the huge revenue gained from TV.
However, if investors or one investor has agreed to support losses for a period and then promised a return if the equity conditions are met we also are in a position where attendances are not relevant.
GRENDEL.
We're all still awaiting your calculations?
i have a feeling that we will see the plans for the HR2 before we see grendull's sums.
You need to look at the bigger picture, the Sky Blues have no future whatsoever if either the club or the owners own our own stadium and have access to ALL revenue streams.
FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB
is it just me or does that not read right? If CCFC or the owners (SISU) own the stadium and all income rights the Sky Blues have no future ?????
This is sensational. Italiahorse has inside knowledge as to sisu's future plans. He confirms tonight a new stadium will be built. He also knows that debt is to be piled against it.
Any chance you have a source?
tbf to RFC, whatever his/her errm, style of presentation, I'll forgive a typo
Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.
Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.
Well the 1500-2500 at sixfield is based on data I think-the Ricoh figure subject to conjecture I agree- but even if you reference last years home attendances as the comparator the maths to move to Norhtampton doesn't stack does it?- thus does VOR not post a reasonable hypothesis?
Sorry but there is no evidence to support your forecast.
I never said the move to Northampton stacked up either.
The original post makes the common error of judging solely on the immediate numbers however, which it's never been about!
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?