Astute
Well-Known Member
As in does Grendel add any value to this forum?
As in does Grendel add any value to this forum?I used the word arsetute once to highlight the juvenality of name calling and childlike terms like Grendull. Perhaps you'd like to do another poll?
Lol - I was going to reply to each point but given you've admitted you are proud of acl and proud of the council I guess why waste my time.
To compound your problem you've had a like from a fellow CCFC hating council sponsored troll.
Here's the problem.
Go to the Butts or stay at the Ricoh. Either way we don't own our stadium. All the Butts is doing is giving better revenue streams possibly.
I still feel this is a negotiation tactic to get revenue streams from the Ricoh.
Ultimately nothing will happen till Sisu drop legal proceedings.
Once? You are full of shit.
Yep anyone who stops a business half owned by a children's charity charity getting screwed over makes me proud. No issues with saying that. Quite happy to repeat every time you and Nick bring it up.
Yep anyone who stops a business half owned by a children's charity charity getting screwed over makes me proud. No issues with saying that. Quite happy to repeat every time you and Nick bring it up.
Shouldn't you then be angry at the council?Yep anyone who stops a business half owned by a children's charity charity getting screwed over makes me proud.
So your search only brought it up once? So now you are innocent?:smug:Yep once - other than when I refer to saying it once
If you do not believe me use the search facility - comes up with once. Shall I use it for Grendull?
Trust, Young Fans Good idea
SISU have screwed us. Couldn't bring yourself to admit it could you?The council screwed the charity by offering to only extend the lease when they sold their share. There really is no hope is there?
Why just CCC though? It has been all of them that has played a part.Shouldn't you then be angry at the council?
Shouldn't you then be angry at the council?
Why just CCC though? It has been all of them that has played a part.
So your search only brought it up once? So now you are innocent?:smug:
I don't care how many people have called you Grendull how many times. You are dull and you deserve everything you get with the insults you throw around. I bet you are twice your real height when hiding behind a keyboard.
Would they have been allowed to increase the length of lease when they still owned 50%?The council screwed the charity by offering to only extend the lease when they sold their share. There really is no hope is there?
Stop being a prick. Had enough of you today. So how is it nothing to do with CCC when it is all sides?Never CCC for you is it?
Didn't you mean that your IQ is 11.6?That would make me 11'6 - I'm happy with my intellectual height thanks.
Why would they have wanted to? They didn't want the Ricoh. They ended up with it only as security to what CCFC owed them.Would they have been allowed to increase the length of lease when they still owned 50%?
Would they have been allowed to increase the length of lease when they still owned 50%?
I knew it small man syndromeThat would make me 11'6 - I'm happy with my intellectual height thanks.
If I wanted to buy ACL and then the Council increased the lease so that the value and presumably the price increased, I'd question the fairness of that. If I had a reputation for battering people in court, I may test this perceived unfairness.Yes they could. Why couldn't they? More to the point why didn't they start with that lease period to begin with?
Why would they have wanted to? They didn't want the Ricoh. They ended up with it only as security to what CCFC owed them.
Who has paid virtually everything back?So now your saying they never wanted it in the first placed and had to just have it to make sure the club paid everything back.
They must have paid virtually all of it back didn't they? Why isn't it ours then?
Who has paid virtually everything back?
How many years did we pay 1.2m?Well the club has paid how many years - 9? So pretty much most of the apparant £10 million shortfall.
Now I know exactly what your going to say but of course two alternate plans were drawn up the funding of ACL - one the dreaded albatross of a loan- and the other less talked about alternative.
Remind me what was that alternative?
Who has paid virtually everything back?
How many years did we pay 1.2m?
How was the shortfall only 10m?
The other alternative was Richardson not selling HR. But we were 60m in debt and he needed the money to keep us going. We couldn't afford to build a new stadium. But you always defend Richardson.
Grendel have you ever thought how much pain SISU inflicted on Higgs / CCC prior to WASPS, Lucas Mutton & Co are politicians not business people, they have reputations that were going to be sorely tarnished if they gave into SISU. SISU weren't being reasonable and IMO were beyond negotiating with, Northampton proved the extent to which they were prepared to go to get their way. The morality of it etc.. the impact on CCFC of selling to WASPS but when it gets nasty and personal things like this happen and unfortunately it has. Who knows whether a more conciliatory approach would have worked but SISU's tactics are worse than a Slade Boothroyd double act
So it wasn't Richardsons fault that we were 60m in debt when they kicked him off the board?God now it's Richardsons fault.
We weren't £60 million in debt when we actually got to the Ricoh so what on earth has that to do with anything? When we arrived at the Ricoh debts were nowhere near £60 million.
Mcginnity sold the rights to Highfield road by the way.
So answer the questions to the statement you made.What about pre sisu? There was an existence at the Ricoh before. the leader of the council at the time, Ken Taylor, decided that sisu were the only offer that the club could consider. So they were an approved chkuce.
Anyway move back and when the club requested a rent reduction they were denied that by the same council.
True isn't it?
So it wasn't Richardsons fault that we were 60m in debt when they kicked him off the board?
We were only about 30m in debt after McGinnity sold players among things. But it was Richardson who put us in debt. It was Richardson who sold HR. But you love to defend him and say he did nothing wrong.
So answer the questions to the statement you made.
How many years of rent at 1.2m did we pay?
Why did you say that the shortfall was only 10m?
In think we paid 10 years. The contribution was £10 million. The £21 million loan was entirely down to the council as was the choice to put the lease at a very restrictive 50 years. That suppressed value as did the choice to have a £21 million loan.
Now you are astute. So what was the other option instead of the loan the council could have done according to the original council documentation?
Go on what was it?
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?