bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Wow that building company was really generous letting us play in their ground for free don't you think?
We didn't pay rent at Highfield road.
How many times, no money has ever gone to the council. If you've got a point, don't ruin it with needless in accuracies.
And the fact remains, that as soon as the club entered serious negotiations the rent was cut by 67%, then again to 12.5% of the original deal. It was at this point Sisu took the club to Northampton.
Wow that building company was really generous letting us play in their ground for free don't you think?
We didn't pay rent at Highfield road.
Olympic football and England U21's are not international events, no?
Olympics will never happen again. When was the last U21 game? It's an empty FOOTBALL stadium so really they need to attract football (and rugby) events.
The new meadow must be a world class international venue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse and spelling or grammar errors
Olympics will never happen again. When was the last U21 game? It's an empty FOOTBALL stadium so really they need to attract football (and rugby) events.
New to this posting but have been reading for a bit but wanted to ask a serious question to the likes of Grendel, Fernando, Torch, Hill83, Edgy and Robon to name some. What is it that ACL/CCC have done that is so bad to cop what they get from you lot continually. Don't bother coming back with smart arse remarks because this is a genuine question.
Selling the ground and renting back is different to a normal arrangement.
Do you know details? I don't. Was it £1 million every year or just as quoted the final year. What did we receive for the sale?
The fact PWKH used this final year as an assessment of rental value is to me very telling.
The point is, it is a venue capable of staging international events, as it has previously demonstrated.Olympics will never happen again. When was the last U21 game? It's an empty FOOTBALL stadium so really they need to attract football (and rugby) events.
New to this posting but have been reading for a bit but wanted to ask a serious question to the likes of Grendel, Fernando, Torch, Hill83, Edgy and Robon to name some. What is it that ACL/CCC have done that is so bad to cop what they get from you lot continually. Don't bother coming back with smart arse remarks because this is a genuine question.
They charged a destitute club a completely unfair rent for 8 years. The end.
bang onI'm no fan of SISU or their methods but I think the simple answer to your question is that ACL/CCC have exploited the club when it was going through a difficult period with no more regard to its future or its fans than SISU have shown.
Just like we had single players getting paid half of what the rent was. Yet it always seems to come down to the rent to some.
The point is, it is a venue capable of staging international events, as it has previously demonstrated.
Just like we had single players getting paid half of what the rent was. Yet it always seems to come down to the rent to some.
Fair enough P. I have always highlighted the damage caused by the previous administration as well as the current.
Not clear why the request for a rent reduction circa 2006 was rejected by ACL though.
It seems that the greater distance from the original post the less accurate is the paraphrased quotation. So, some repetition to provide some clarification.
The sale of HR was c2000. The costs at HR that i quoted as being the same as the 2005 rent were for the last years, not the last year. The agreement to rent the Ricoh was signed in 2003. The rent negotiations between CCFC and ACL took place between 2003 and 2005. The Chairman of CCFC was a director of ACL. There was also another CCFC shareholder/director as director of ACL. It is difficult to understand the suggestion that CCFC were forced to do anything. For the CCFC directors paying the same for the Ricoh as they did for HR was getting more for their money than they had before. They felt that they had done well. The fact that their business was scarily close to catastrophic insolvency all the time was something they lived with. The rent and licence fee were far from the top of their list of attempted economies.
The rent and licence fee payable by CCFC in 2005 was not £1.2m. It was c£948,000.
We can all make brilliant and sensible judgements with the benefit of hindsight: for me, to have rejected the sliding scale rent and licence fee was bone-headed. I thought so, and said so at the time. I still think so.
Today for the first time since 30th April 2005 I went to where HR was and showed my son. Made me really sad.
The Ricoh should never have been built in the first place.
Why? Because you said so?
no, because we wouldn't be in this shite state of affairs.Why? Because you said so?
No. Because it's caused us nothing but grief. A soulless bowl. Still wish we were back there though.
no, because we wouldn't be in this shite state of affairs.
agreed, then spending 5m on lee Hughes wasn't the wisest moveWe were fucked the minute we were relegated out of the prem.
Hey don't forget the pound lol.
Agreed. The fee was just 5 million too much. The club is a basket case and has been for 15 years. Succession of idiotic decisions.
Agreed. The fee was just 5 million too much. The club is a basket case and has been for 15 years. Succession of idiotic decisions.
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?