The CableGuy
Well-Known Member
Quiet you! Don't let mere facts get in the way of a good rant.
Council tossers (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter rob9872
- Start date
Quiet you! Don't let mere facts get in the way of a good rant.
And I can't beleive people like you support SISU in any of this. I'm not an ACL sympathiser, they DID charge too much rent for a championship/league one club but SISU were aware of this and agreed to pay it. I don't like the amount of interest charged on my credit card but I agreed to pay it and if I stopped paying it I'd get taken to court. It's the same principle
Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
It is a good line though isn't it?
coundonskyblue
New Member
Answer 1 question then please:
Over the last year, what concessions have Sisu made over the rent negotiations?
Just what do you expect ACL to do then?
Oh and the Olympics are here every year
rob9872
Well-Known Member
So if it was your business you would continued paying the pre agreed rent even if it meant your business ultimately fails? But yes I am an idiot so thanks for the insult, it means so much and adds weight to your argument. Why does it need to come to a head we should be paying market rates that allow us to compete. Surely the only sensible outcome and if that means acl conceding more ground for the long term benefit if my club, then sorry if I don't give a flying fk.
coundonskyblue
New Member
Just to correct the ill informed on here, latest ACL accounts are up to May 2012. Two months before the olympics started.
Err, agree to the terms?
At 400K per year offered (not disputed by ACL BTW) in return for income amounting to 250K, we'd still be paying 150K per year which is still above market rates for a 3rd division club. It utterly amazes me how some people don't think that was a reasonable and fair offer.
WestEndAgro
Well-Known Member
Can you put this in bold or CAPITALS then the penny may drop !
rob9872
Well-Known Member
I'm on my tablet and can't view them at mo, so please deduct £1.3m from the bottom line and a conservative estimate of 200k for parkingband catering andtell me how much they made in that financial year. Thx in advance.
No, it is spin of the worst kind.
1. Sisu agreed the pre-purchase arrangements re:- rent, and made no attempt to change/amend them.
2. ACL have made huge concessions on this arrangement but Sisu have rejected them.
3. As I understand it ACL have also made offers as to match-day revenue streams.
In these circumstances please explain how you can possibly justify their actions on withholding rent.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Lets face it, there all wankers on both sides only looking out for themselves
Politicians love people like you. You'll buy any old line.
ACL who for months have been jumping up and down like children saying "we want our money" over and over, have suddenly now made a move to protect the club from going bust? All out of the goodness of their little hearts. Absolute shit.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Because the terms are still not market rate and by contributing anything they are inferring agreement to terms. I believe if we were offered market rates comparable withour competition then it would not be withheld. Just an opinion of couse but as acl would prefer admin to market rates I guess we will never know.
thorn in my side
New Member
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
Hook, line and sinker.
Can't be arsed explaining just how ridiculous your statement is
And whose fault is it that we are now a third division club?
He just explained it. The line that said "so if it was your business you would continued paying the pre agreed rent even if it meant your business ultimately fails?" said it all.
The club couldn't afford it. The deal wasn't right. The club's 'demands' would have ultimately meant a net contribution of 150K per year, these are figures that are not disputed. A fair offer in my opinion.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Greedy bryan richardson and a successiin of poor managers, worse boards and culminating in a bunch of council ballbags.
WestEndAgro
Well-Known Member
So explain "The SISU master plan" and then tell me why the council should let SISU take their pants down and FCUK them.
Lets look at CCC's astute record of keeping businesses in this city problem is there is none anymore. Because they left or went bust council response zilch. They wont to develop the land around the stadium and have done nothing yet. Look at the city centre an example of inward investment its dead when the last invester wanted to build anything there CCC's restrictions and stupidity made the investment company walk away. Currently the arena is down the road from the bigeest exhibition and concert arena in the UK oh and it has a railway station. If you think the NEC is going to keep losing business to the Ricoh Arean dream on. ACL are a council business central government are not going to just sit back and let CCC claim rebates for council tax etc when they have this investment in land and property on their protfolio. One reason why doncaster gave there away. PEOPLE I AM NOT SAYING SISU ARE THE ANSWER BUT WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ON ALL THIS BECAUSE WE WILL END UP WITH ANOTHER COMPANY IN CHARGE WHO ARE NO BETTER.
coundonskyblue
New Member
Market rates are determined by supply and demand.
Supply:
The fact that other club pay less is irrelevant, as none of those venues are an option to CCFC. Like it or lump it but the Ricoh is the only venue that CCFC (in its current form) can play in.
Demand:
Equally so, CCFC are the only sports team that the Ricoh is realistically able to host regularly.
So supply and demand rules state that the Supplier (The Ricoh) must reduce the cost of its product. (Which they have). They also state that the consumer (CCFC) must be willing to accept that they have to pay more than what they would like (which they haven't).
Only one side being unreasonable there.
Supply:
The fact that other club pay less is irrelevant, as none of those venues are an option to CCFC. Like it or lump it but the Ricoh is the only venue that CCFC (in its current form) can play in.
Demand:
Equally so, CCFC are the only sports team that the Ricoh is realistically able to host regularly.
So supply and demand rules state that the Supplier (The Ricoh) must reduce the cost of its product. (Which they have). They also state that the consumer (CCFC) must be willing to accept that they have to pay more than what they would like (which they haven't).
Only one side being unreasonable there.
coundonskyblue
New Member
So we have nothing to lose then.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You really are wasting your time you know.
It is summed up by the idiot who mocked the guy who posted about Doncaster. I was in Doncaster yesterday. They told the council they would not pay rent unless the council hand the ground over - which they did. Hull were supposed to pay £500,000 a year - they said no and have paid an average of £57,000 a year. Ipswich were sued for non payment but the Council gave up and handed over Portman Road for £30,000 a year. Brighton seemingly pay nothing.
It's pointless. We are going to get a 10 point reduction next season and there is no one interested in buying the club. Best we can hope for is relegation to League Two and then we will be paying £400,000 a year in League Two as surely the council wouldn't dare compromise on the rent then would they? Well they probably will and the farcical thing is that the majority on here will not care.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Just our club and status, but at least you can feel safe in the knowledge that you told us so. :-(
SkyBlueSwiss
New Member
Ditto!
That you can believe any of the SISU bullshit is totally beyond belief, that your morals would allow you to continue to support the illegal activities of a Mayfair hedgefund, that you continue to berate those institutions without which our club would have ceased to exist years ago already.
To quote you - Can't be arsed explaining just how ridiculous your statement is.
coundonskyblue
New Member
Well the threat of Liquidation has now passed so surely your pleased?
Take their pants down how? By paying them above market rates? At 150K per year net that still represented a good deal to ACL.
Like I said in another thread, Doncaster council gave their local football club their stadium. Ours get insulted by a rent offer of 400K and try to then force the club out of business. And people think this is good?
coundonskyblue
New Member
Please stop posting your opinions as fact.
I respect your right to an opinion, but you are posting things that you can't possibly know as fact.
Nearly 7 Billion people in this world, you can't possibly know all their intentions!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You are aware SISU can quite easily buy the club back arent you?
coundonskyblue
New Member
Yes but why would they? What would they have to gain from it? Also why would they by the club back just to liquidate it?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Aye, it's like saying "He was going to hang himself so I shot him dead"
Illegal? For someone who bleated on earlier about 'absolute proof' that is quite a bold statement.
Institutions that without which our club would have ceased to exist? What are you on? The only reason the club are here is because this hedge fund you so despise saw fit to protect their investment by continuing to pump money into the club to keep it afloat.
