Bristol Rovers at Home (1 Viewer)

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
They are properly trying to put the squeeze on us now. Changing our games to suit theirs and closing off part of the ground to our fans. I think they're trying to disillusion us in the hope it will increase their attendances, they know they've hit peak and it's not going to work for them now so we're starting to see more of the underhand hedge fund tactics come to play.
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
Or it’s their ground And we have acted early to ensure as little disruption to fans schedules as possible.

Other games will be changed for tv, cup match classhes etc.

The days when any fan could buy a ticket for any club (let alone the top flight) and assume all sat 3pm kick offs are long gone
 

Magwitch

Well-Known Member
They are properly trying to put the squeeze on us now. Changing our games to suit theirs and closing off part of the ground to our fans. I think they're trying to disillusion us in the hope it will increase their attendances, they know they've hit peak and it's not going to work for them now so we're starting to see more of the underhand hedge fund tactics come to play.
It’s their ground ffs might not like it I certainly don’t but we are mear tennants paying quite low rent. If our landlord sticks to his word by April we will be looking for a new home
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
It’s their ground ffs might not like it I certainly don’t but we are mear tennants paying quite low rent. If our landlord sticks to his word by April we will be looking for a new home
They promised their move would not affect us in any way. they are trying to get our fans to be pissed off with our club. They may currently have the keys but it will never be their ground.
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
It’s a fixture clash, it doesn’t always have to be about Sisu or wasps and who is to blame.

We will move many more games this season due to fixture clashes.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
Not only do we need our own ground to generate additional revenue we now need it to stop our games being moved to whenever London Wasps fancy. If you're a franchise boot licker remember our fixtures were out a month before theirs, they could easily have avoided clashes and they promised none of our fixtures would be affected.
 

Nick

Administrator
It’s a fixture clash, it doesn’t always have to be about Sisu or wasps and who is to blame.

We will move many more games this season due to fixture clashes.

Is it still classed as a clash if our fixtures were out a month before?

Clashes are usually avoidable.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
Serious question...what is our rent now ? ...and how comparable is it to other clubs ?
This is Doncaster's

- 99 year lease agreement - all assets transferred for £1
- £100,000 per year rent
- Annual rent reduced to £10,000 per year for first 9 years to account for existing naming rights agreement
- A wide range of annual Community obligations included as consideration
- Responsibility for all running costs with exception of insurance contribution
- £75,000 per year contribution from Doncaster Council to insurances
- Full operational control
- A cheque to the Club from the Council for £400,000 for refurbishment of the Keepmoat stadium
- Stadium to maintained in a reasonable condition, fair wear and tear expected
- Permission required from Council for significant changes to structure
- Permission required from Council for changes of use
- A £7000 a year lease for the club training ground
- All food and beverage and stadium income for the club's revenues 365 days a year
 

SkyBlueZack

Well-Known Member
It's 100k per year for 23 days use. Not the full days use mind. Oh and match day costs are on top, which have increased. Comparable to other clubs? It's not really, most get 365 day sleep a year access and therefore can make money from it. Still, it won't stop people trying to make out we have a fantastic deal and wasps are angels.
 

Danceswithhorses

Well-Known Member
That looks a great deal...Doncaster council obviously get on very well with the football club's owners.
If only our two weren't at war !
Just for balance, are there clubs with expensive deals ?

This is Doncaster's

- 99 year lease agreement - all assets transferred for £1
- £100,000 per year rent
- Annual rent reduced to £10,000 per year for first 9 years to account for existing naming rights agreement
- A wide range of annual Community obligations included as consideration
- Responsibility for all running costs with exception of insurance contribution
- £75,000 per year contribution from Doncaster Council to insurances
- Full operational control
- A cheque to the Club from the Council for £400,000 for refurbishment of the Keepmoat stadium
- Stadium to maintained in a reasonable condition, fair wear and tear expected
- Permission required from Council for significant changes to structure
- Permission required from Council for changes of use
- A £7000 a year lease for the club training ground
- All food and beverage and stadium income for the club's revenues 365 days a year
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
They are properly trying to put the squeeze on us now. Changing our games to suit theirs and closing off part of the ground to our fans. I think they're trying to disillusion us in the hope it will increase their attendances, they know they've hit peak and it's not going to work for them now so we're starting to see more of the underhand hedge fund tactics come to play.

I don't think their reason is primarily about destabilising CCFC, it is more about them trying to sell more tickets themselves and increase the matchday revenue generated.

It just shows really though that realistically the two teams can't groundshare to gain mutual benefit to its fullest extent, contrary to what that prick from Beduff says.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
I don't think their reason is primarily about destabilising CCFC, it is more about them trying to sell more tickets themselves and increase the matchday revenue generated.

It just shows really though that realistically the two teams can't groundshare to gain mutual benefit to its fullest extent, contrary to what that prick from Beduff says.
I'd normally agree with you but this coupled with the closing of blocks looks suspiciously like destabilisation.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
So out of the 4 clashes, 3 have been moved so far...and are all our games.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Just a coincidence, stu.

I heard it was all just done on a coin toss and we kept calling heads and it was tails every time.

4th time lucky perhaps. Fingers crossed.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
That looks a great deal...Doncaster council obviously get on very well with the football club's owners.
If only our two weren't at war !
Just for balance, are there clubs with expensive deals ?
Our relationship with the council doesn't matter any more. We could have the best owners in the world, local cov fans who want to pump money into the club and run us properly but London Wasps have a 250 year lease on our stadium. There are no other examples of clubs only paying for 23 days a year access but there are many examples of teams paying less than us for complete 365 day use with all revenue.
 

Magwitch

Well-Known Member
But we aren’t the only football/rugby clubs that groundshare are there similar issues with others ? Like most I hate sharing but unless we can find a piece of land, get permission and build a new ground we are stuck.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
They are properly trying to put the squeeze on us now. Changing our games to suit theirs and closing off part of the ground to our fans. I think they're trying to disillusion us in the hope it will increase their attendances, they know they've hit peak and it's not going to work for them now so we're starting to see more of the underhand hedge fund tactics come to play.

Literally insane. How would any of that increase their attendance?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Not great for CCFC and a consequence of a whole lot of bad history. Sadly we can expect more of the same. For the foreseeable future this is how it will be. We will keep having this discussion but nothing will change. We are left with the realities

Why would Wasps put the interests of CCFC above their own....... if it were reversed CCFC wouldn't? It is not about keeping a tenant happy, when it comes down to hindering your own team or business, someone else's interest or business will come second at best.

I don't think there is much point referring to past assurances........... Eastwood had no choice in saying that because it was most probably in the four year contract already in place before Wasps came in. They were not doing us any favours. Of course now its a new contract ........... they wont do us any favours

CCFC cant get the same deal as Doncaster unless CCC build an entirely new stadium ........ just not going to happen

Wasps are going to put their interests first ........... if that doesn't help CCFC then they wont lose any sleep over it. There is an operational relationship but no goodwill

There is nothing really to stop CCFC putting events on at the stadium ............ but they would have to do it by using ACL, until recently that just was not allowed to happen. Boddy seems to have change that at least a little so well done him

Did Wasps close parts of the grounds or was it CCFC wanted to keep costs as low as possible?

And all teams pay match day costs (maybe not so high but we don't know what is included) and those other teams can be paying other stadium overheads. As I understand it they were in the region of £300k plus the rent. I would assume that most of the matchday expenses are paid to ACL but is it all of the matchday expenses? I would assume included in there is the supply of stadium staff, an element of insurance and utilities, security cost & licence fees etc and contribution wear and tear. Rent £4347 per match and other costs £13043 per match, against which income from match receipts averages out last season at round £90k per match

Its crap, and sadly I don't see it changing

btw Doncaster in their 2017 accounts showed a £2m+ loss despite the possibility of all those other income sources, which meant they needed the directors to put in £2m in loans. So owning the ground even on favourable terms doesn't mean financial success. They regularly show around £2m losses per year (ignoring £4.6m loans written off in 2015). Strangely the accounts say they have no employees but 236 in 2016?- think that's just a typo though

Just to show how incomes could be split I have attached details of Bristol City (who have a multi use stadium I believe) for 2017 & 2016 and are one of the few clubs to show any real detail. Their wage costs exceeded turnover though

upload_2018-7-17_14-57-21.png

Point I am making is where are these other incomes that will make such a big difference. CCFC already have the L1 or 2 equivalents to many of those sources. What you have above is the top line before deducting staff and stadium costs, so what is left for the team from other commercial will be significantly lower . (we get the retail share already)

Thing is unless in the Premier League very few clubs make a profit from their operations very often because of the wage costs involved, until that is addressed in football and rugby it is hard to see anyone making profits at the Ricoh or many other stadiums

The way to CCFC success is through people going with increased numbers, the rest is secondary
 
Last edited:

Nick

Administrator
I’ve seen no actual figures on this so I can make a reasoned judgement on whether we are paying an unreasonable amount or not.
What are the figures and the source or we will keep going round in circles?

Ask the people trying to push that we just pay a low rent (yes, you included. Nice contradiction)

Have a day off again, you are embarrassing. Not clever enough to pull off what you try, just contradict yourself.

Still not bothering to talk about ccfc I take it?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I don't think their reason is primarily about destabilising CCFC, it is more about them trying to sell more tickets themselves and increase the matchday revenue generated.

It just shows really though that realistically the two teams can't groundshare to gain mutual benefit to its fullest extent, contrary to what that prick from Beduff says.

On their forum though they generally want Sunday fixtures
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I’ve seen no actual figures on this so I can make a reasoned judgement on whether we are paying an unreasonable amount or not.
What are the figures and the source or we will keep going round in circles?

You couldn’t see a reasoned judgement if it ran you over at high speed
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top