As I plainly said I will say again I do believe not all the posters on here have the good of the club in their hearts. people like yourself and I may disagree on what or how is best for the club but that is because we do care about what happens to it. It was in no way a dig at people who have supported the club since being kids or later. it is the ones on here who are on here trying to back up what their bosses want said or planted on this site. can you really tell me people like True Sky Blue are real CCFC fans.
Are you the love child of CJ Parker by any chance?
How can people suddenly change allegiance and start arguing that the council/ACL are not doing enough to get CCFC back at the Ricoh. Have people really forgotten the whole story who the real enemy is here?? Im not going to claim ACL/council are angels because of course they are not. But offering them to play for free at the Ricoh - Why on earth would anyone do that?! They offered them the Ricoh for £150,000 a year ........ how is that not acceptable??
I also cannot see how the Ricoh is not profitable :S a basic look at things show that they made £1mill profit when Coventry paid "nearly" the full amount of £1.3mill rent. Now obviously they are not getting the rent, however there are now no costs for matchdays (there are none!) and the council has bought the mortgage and reduced the payments. So how can it not be profitable?
I'd forgotten all about CJ. Wonder what happened to him?
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
It just beggars belief that after all these Hedge Fund BASTARDS have done to our club, people STILL feel we should just rollover and give these so called people the very thing they have been after all along. I am sorry I love my club as much as any genuine Sky Blues on this board (I do believe there on owner plants on here) but I would rather see the so called owners loss every penny they can in NT. That is the only way we are going to get rid of them and get OUR club back
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
He changed his name by deed poll to Hugh.
I really can't believe I just read this!Stay in Northampton then. Sorry but if thats the choice.
If the Ricoh is very profitable, why don't the council offer the stadium free for a year? To help the club out and see football back in the city.
I'd forgotten all about CJ. Wonder what happened to him?
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Interesting the sisu evening telegraph ask for accounts to be publicised - why aren't they asking the same openness and honesty from sisu? Could it be that sisu are financially involved with trinity mirror group (owners of telegraph)? I was led to believe their is a link, but of course the telegraph could open its books and prove me wrong!
It wasn't really a bailout, they still owe the exact same amount of money just to someone else and on better terms. That said I don't believe the Ricoh is "Very Profitable" either and whilst I support the Telegraph calling her out I really don't feel they have demanded the same for the CCFC books.
Ask Hoffman, he's on the Mirror group board.Interesting the sisu evening telegraph ask for accounts to be publicised - why aren't they asking the same openness and honesty from sisu? Could it be that sisu are financially involved with trinity mirror group (owners of telegraph)? I was led to believe their is a link, but of course the telegraph could open its books and prove me wrong!
It is a bail out. They were heading for insolvency due to being owed rent. If it wasn't a bail out the court case that has just been thrown out may have been successful.
Ask Hoffman, he's on the Mirror group board.
It'll be interesting to see the ACL accounts to May 2013.
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
how does that work with FFP?
Because the headline "150k" rent was not the deal in reality. They had conditions unacceptable to the football clubs owners within that offer. the free rental offer was merely a control point while in admin (very short term only)
Also please folks remember the stadium is the freehold property of the council not ACL/Higgs. They have a lease. The premium for that lease (40 years?) was achieved by a loan which the council have now taken over with lower terms for ACL (pretty convenient) Without that SISU had them on the ropes you might say.
The offer of half the stadium is no such thing. It's merely 50% of the shares that Higgs have. No access to income streams comes with that. If you don't understand the basics then you can't argue the facts.
If they fund the losses through equity increase it will count as revenue in the FFP calculation.
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
If they fund the losses through equity increase it will count as revenue in the FFP calculation.
So it will not increase the debt then ?
Debt and equity are different, equity means giving away ownership. In this case it would need to be for money.
If the Ricoh is very profitable, why don't the council offer the stadium free for a year? To help the club out and see football back in the city.
Interesting that the telegraph has asked acl to open their books as proof, yet i cant remember them taking this stance with sisu
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?