I don't think you are being fair to TF. Nowhere does he say he wants the rent down to Ipswich level. It may be a reasonable number, but so could £250t or £25t.
As I have said a few times now, I think the figure should be variable and reflected by the number of attendants, what league we're in and even if it's a cup match.
It also seems unfair to TF when you say that sisu want the income streams for nothing. I can't read that anywhere.
Quote TF: "There has to be detailed discussions about what access to revenues the club should have and whether it’s achievable without breaking the ACL model."
I read you as you think sisu want the whole stadium for free. Again, I haven't seen anything anywhere (except from the usual suspects on this board) that sisu is trying to get the stadium for free.
Is this a concerted media campaign as you claim? Well, I would like to think so - it's about time the board spoke up ... you know: Start to communicate. But sadly I don't think it was their intention. They didn't pay the rent in an effort to get some meaningful discussion started with those who control the rent. It was not the board or sisu who first told the rent wasn't paid, and they never confirmed it until everybody knew.
Finally, as the rent is now a huge percentage of the cost budget for next season it makes sense AT are not told what he can spend on wages until that issue is solved. And as sisu have already made it very clear that this club must be self sustainable, I see no surprise in the fact that if the rent is not lowered AT won't have much money left for wages.
I didnt say TF wanted a rent at £112K I said that the
CT thought that was an appropriate figure for a similar club that is Ipswich. I have said quite clearly in another post that the rent needs to be renegotiated - I have no problem with that anf when it comes to the crunch I doubt ACL or its shareholders will either.
so how are they going to get the income streams if they are saying they have no money and cant pay the bills? They cant pay for it can they and because of their own contractual arrangements I do not see how ACL can give it away
Do you not feel it unusual that we have had 3 statements from the club this week two of which went into great detail as to why it was because of everything else that it has failed?
The budget ...... you run a business ....... you tell me if people ever do what if budgets or flex them to take account of possible changes. AS it stands they have either told AT there is a budget to acquire players in current circumstances or there isnt one unless there is a rent reduction and additional income sources (not guaranteed)
We are making what 4m losses a year take out £1m in rent that is still £3m losses and bankruptcy - In previous estimates I thought it should have been nearer break even but taking what JS and TF said clearly not - it isnt the rent that is killing us first and foremost.
The media is important to us not to these discussions between SISU and ACL - so why place such emphasis on doing it now ?
I have never thought both sides as all good or all bad but people need to go into this eyes wide open not shut
SISU and the club have failed in so many ways and yet they expect others to bail them out. The circumstances havent changed in 5 years but the performance of the team and owners has been pretty poor in many areas.
Rent reduction is inevitable but does it not seem to anyone that this is rewarding the failure to deal with core issues for the last 5 years under SISU ?
