Wasps billing CCFC for pitch repairs after Wycombe game (1 Viewer)

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Nick said:
Do I believe you are trying your best to justify Wasps trying to charge the club for the pitch?

Did you miss my question. Why do Wasps not want CCFC as tenants?

Second question why do I need to justify anything to do with Wasps?

I think the fans damaging the pitch isnithing compared to the damage already there. I think all Wasps decisions like this one will be like this in order to increase the pressure on SISU over the legal action.
I do not think Wasps will back down and they will boot us out over it in the end.

I see no benefit of the legal action to CCFC. As with JR1 I see it as pointless. I know it will do us more damage than good.

JR1 did us a load of damage many cheered it in from the sidelines ironically and unfortunately thinking they were supporting CCFC by doing so. Yet as with JR2 it won't benefit us, it will agitate someone who we need a working relationship with and it will lead to us playing outside the city. Crying shame again. Unfortunately again a few can't see it.

The Reverend Skyblue · Mar 7, 2017

That televised game against Sheff Utd the pitch looked horrendous, I posted on here why are we even paying any rent at all to play on that debacle of a pitch. yes we have to pay for the stadium rent and associated costs but to pay for the pitch is a scandal. we should get a rebate in-fact
This wont do wasps any favours in my view, its a disgrace they even contemplated charging us, i've seen better council park pitches.
This is why we need a complete break from the Ricoh if wasps are staying there, the pitch will always be poor, and the obvious revenues we miss out on. all we need is to find owners to build us one, and a football caring council but that wont happen.

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

fernandopartridge said:
They'd have some difficulty wouldn't they? Have any papers even been filed on it?

What is JR2?

NortonSkyBlue · Mar 7, 2017

The Reverend Skyblue said:
That televised game against Sheff Utd the pitch looked horrendous, I posted on here why are we even payni rent to play on that debacle.
This wont do wasps any favours in my view, its a disgrace they even contemplated charging us, i've seen better council park pitches.
This is why we need a complete break from the Ricoh if wasps are staying there, the pitch will always be poor, and the obvious revenues we miss out on. all we need is to find owners to build us one, and a football caring council but that wont happen.

Yes let's take a break from the Ricoh! Are you seriously suggesting this is the best course of action for CCFC?
The pitch was poor before the rugby season started and it certainly doesn't help but it's Wasps pitch and their ground and they can and increasingly will do what they want with it.
There are many more important things to get angry about and this is just another deflection.
We have 99 problems but the pitch ain't one!!!

Deleted member 5849 · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Why do Wasps not want CCFC as tenants?

I wouldn't if I were Wasps.

Both approaches (in and out) probably have merit tbf, but if I were Wasps, I'd want CCFC gone.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Mar 7, 2017

Absolutely disgusting from these cretins

Anyone who supports this London club is gutter trash

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Nick said:
Only if there was wrong doing.

thanks for putting it in bold.
So i will take that as an acknowledgement that the legal action could adversely affect Wasps.
So they will be unlikely to not take advantage of us needing to rent the Ricoh off them in order to stop that risk to them from the legal action.
It really isn't a hard concept to fathom.
Not sure why you struggle with it so much.
Just repeating Wasps are hiding behind legal action as an excuse. Yet never real explaining what is their actual agenda then and why.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Mar 7, 2017

I hope the club told them to stick it up their arse

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Did you miss my question. Why do Wasps not want CCFC as tenants?

Second question why do I need to justify anything to do with Wasps?

I think the fans damaging the pitch isnithing compared to the damage already there. I think all Wasps decisions like this one will be like this in order to increase the pressure on SISU over the legal action.
I do not think Wasps will back down and they will boot us out over it in the end.

I see no benefit of the legal action to CCFC. As with JR1 I see it as pointless. I know it will do us more damage than good.

JR1 did us a load of damage many cheered it in from the sidelines ironically and unfortunately thinking they were supporting CCFC by doing so. Yet as with JR2 it won't benefit us, it will agitate someone who we need a working relationship with and it will lead to us playing outside the city. Crying shame again. Unfortunately again a few can't see it.

They only want us if we fill a gaping whole in their financial projections. They anticipated a large sponsorship deal which has not happened and will not happen.

A deal is there - £750k a year to bridge the hole.

Then they just sit back blame "legal noise" and let dribbling idiots like you and Italia do the work for them

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Mar 7, 2017

shmmeee said:
Problems with not having your own ground. I assume this was agreed when the rental deal was signed, same as the Higgs maintenance.

Of course as it's Sisu and not ex chairman the fault will be with the people who set the terms not those who signed them.

In reality the fault is with the people who thought breaking our rental deal was a smart move. Once you've done that you can't really bitch about the terms you have to accept, you've made your bed.

I doubt it was agreed tbh, wasps just trying to pull a fast one over CCFC and it's fans.

Sky Blue Kid · Mar 7, 2017

SISU not only offered, but actually paid £150k for a new pitch at Northampton.. Just saying.

King of the Lesbians · Mar 7, 2017

riyadhskyblue said:
We have 99 problems but the pitch ain't one!!!

That's worth a like...

oldskyblue58 · Mar 7, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
I wouldn't if I were Wasps.

Both approaches (in and out) probably have merit tbf, but if I were Wasps, I'd want CCFC gone.

I agree with you NW. The only thing keeping CCFC there is the rent agreement till August 2018 and an undertaking of sorts given about them being there. I think CCFC will be gone from the Ricoh one way or other soon and I get the sense that suits TF & SISU too

I reckon that will leave Wasps a 2.5% drop in turnover to cover and affect their bottom line by not a lot

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
They only want us if we fill a gaping whole in their financial projections. They anticipated a large sponsorship deal which has not happened and will not happen.

A deal is there - £750k a year to bridge the hole.

Then they just sit back blame "legal noise" and let dribbling idiots like you and Italia do the work for them

Do you support JR2 like you supported rent strikes. Threats to move out and shaking on deals then encouraging them to push for more.
All because you thought it is best for CCFC. Seems you haven't got a clue what actually is best for CCFC and keep somehow suporting what is best for SISU and very damaging for CCFC.
Well done

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
I wouldn't if I were Wasps.

Both approaches (in and out) probably have merit tbf, but if I were Wasps, I'd want CCFC gone.

If CCFC give Wasps more money than they cost them. If there is not another option that would give Wasps more money than CCFC theywill want them.
If CCFC are doing something that could damage Wasps business and Wasps have something we want.
They will use that to its maximum to stop SISU damaging their business.

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
thanks for putting it in bold.
So i will take that as an acknowledgement that the legal action could adversely affect Wasps.
So they will be unlikely to not take advantage of us needing to rent the Ricoh off them in order to stop that risk to them from the legal action.
It really isn't a hard concept to fathom.
Not sure why you struggle with it so much.
Just repeating Wasps are hiding behind legal action as an excuse. Yet never real explaining what is their actual agenda then and why.

If it really was because of legal action why did they start proceedings and talks in the first place?

skybluetony176 · Mar 7, 2017

oldskyblue58 said:
I agree with you NW. The only thing keeping CCFC there is the rent agreement till August 2018 and an undertaking of sorts given about them being there. I think CCFC will be gone from the Ricoh one way or other soon and I get the sense that suits TF & SISU too

I reckon that will leave Wasps a 2.5% drop in turnover to cover and affect their bottom line by not a lot

If CCFC leave the city again it might actually suit Wasps too. Whose to say that it wont have a positive effect on their attendances with the biggest competition from within the City itself out the way? Any lost rental income could easily be replaced with extra attendances, F & B sales and merchandise sales. We're hardly paying a kings ransom at the moment to play at the Ricoh.

TF & SISU may or may not think it suits them to leave but if they believe it does the possibilities are that yet again they are unwittingly playing into the hands of an out of town Rugby team same as they did last time the took the club out of the City. What's that saying about doing the same things expecting different results and stupidity?

Deleted member 5849 · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
If CCFC give Wasps more money than they cost them. If there is not another option that would give Wasps more money than CCFC theywill want them.

It's not just that. We're a rival for support, like it or not. It's more... does CCFC being there bring in more, then Wasps can increase their takings by us not being there (also frees up the arena every other weekend for other events not involving Wasps)

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
It's not just that. We're a rival for support, like it or not. It's more... does CCFC being there bring in more, then Wasps can increase their takings by us not being there (also frees up the arena every other weekend for other events not involving Wasps)

Exactly! If we aren't there then they have more people to try and get down there for their games.

We are a competitor. More kids not doing anything etc.

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Do you support JR2 like you supported rent strikes. Threats to move out and shaking on deals then encouraging them to push for more.
All because you suppirtvehat is best for CCFC. Seems you haven't got a clue what actually is best for CCFC and keep somehow suporting what is best for SISU and very damaging for CCFC.
Well done

The cold hard truth is that without the rent strike either the club would have folded, ACL would have folded or both as the whole arrangement was totally unsustainable.

You have not really addressed the issue though have you? Its odd is it not that you accept totally at face value Wasps rhetoric on legal noise given that past statements have been nothing but false promises and outright untruths

They will only want the club there if it generates profit to them. The present arrangement does not and never will. So they hike the price up to make it viable to them and in the hope one day the football club succeeds which yields commercial benefits that gain they will deny the club access to.

The Wasps business model presently is not sustainable. High revenues have not translated into profit and the owner is still subsidising them. We will only stay if we fill the void - if not that pesky legal noise will be the excuse - believe that if you will.

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Deleted member 5849 said:
It's not just that. We're a rival for support, like it or not. It's more... does CCFC being there bring in more, then Wasps can increase their takings by us not being there (also frees up the arena every other weekend for other events not involving Wasps)

The bit in brackets is what I mean when I say unless there is a different option to us that brings in more money.,
I have never seen us a competitive crowd wise. The way are ranoyr crowds are only going one way unfortunately

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
The cold hard truth is that without the rent strike either the club would have folded, ACL would have folded or both as the whole arrangement was totally unsustainable.

You have not really addressed the issue though have you? Its odd is it not that you accept totally at face value Wasps rhetoric on legal noise given that past statements have been nothing but false promises and outright untruths

They will only want the club there if it generates profit to them. The present arrangement does not and never will. So they hike the price up to make it viable to them and in the hope one day the football club succeeds which yields commercial benefits that gain they will deny the club access to.

The Wasps business model presently is not sustainable. High revenues have not translated into profit and the owner is still subsidising them. We will only stay if we fill the void - if not that pesky legal noise will be the excuse - believe that if you will.

I have always said if we bring more money to Wasps than we cost them. They are a business and we are there to make money.
Unfortunately the rent will have to go up. Tim Fishers arguement about average league one rents (some to become average league 2 rents ) doesn't cut it. You also have to look at the facility. Wasps will also look at do they have another option that brings them more money.
I couldn't give a rats ass about Wasps they mean nothing to me.
I am just looking at it logically.
JR2 causes them a threat. So on the one hand we are causing them risk. The other hand we are negotiating with them.
They will want that risk gone before they negotiate. When they negotiate they are not a charity and will want us toward them money.
JR2 is for SISU's benefit as was JR1 both will cause catastrophic damage to our club.
JR1 should have been offered up as part of a package to negotiate a deal for ACL.
JR2 should now be sacrificed in order to get a better rent deal.
Neither will have happened because SUSU's number priority is SISU not the long term good of CCFC.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
The cold hard truth is that without the rent strike either the club would have folded, ACL would have folded or both as the whole arrangement was totally unsustainable.

You have not really addressed the issue though have you? Its odd is it not that you accept totally at face value Wasps rhetoric on legal noise given that past statements have been nothing but false promises and outright untruths

They will only want the club there if it generates profit to them. The present arrangement does not and never will. So they hike the price up to make it viable to them and in the hope one day the football club succeeds which yields commercial benefits that gain they will deny the club access to.

The Wasps business model presently is not sustainable. High revenues have not translated into profit and the owner is still subsidising them. We will only stay if we fill the void - if not that pesky legal noise will be the excuse - believe that if you will.

This sounds like a Sisu death roll.
You ignore the facts in your gibbering rhetoric.
Sisu, Les Reid (Sisu PR) and you are in good company.

Personally I'll wait and go with the facts.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

SkyBlue_Bear83 said:
Absolutely disgusting from these cretins

Anyone who supports this London club is gutter trash

What's the facts on this before you label 30,000 innocent Wasps fans ?

skybluebeduff · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
They only want us if we fill a gaping whole in their financial projections. They anticipated a large sponsorship deal which has not happened and will not happen.

A deal is there - £750k a year to bridge the hole.

Then they just sit back blame "legal noise" and let dribbling idiots like you and Italia do the work for them

Wasps want £750k per year in rent off us? Someone down the pub told you that?

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
I have always said if we bring more money to Wasps than we cost them. They are a business and we are there to make money.
Unfortunately the rent will have to go up. Tim Fishers arguement about average league one rents (some to become average league 2 rents ) doesn't cut it. You also have to look at the facility. Wasps will also look at do they have another option that brings them more money.
I couldn't give a rats ass about Wasps they mean nothing to me.
I am just looking at it logically.
JR2 causes them a threat. So on the one hand we are causing them risk. The other hand we are negotiating with them.
They will want that risk gone before they negotiate. When they negotiate they are not a charity and will want us toward them money.
JR2 is for SISU's benefit as was JR1 both will cause catastrophic damage to our club.
JR1 should have been offered up as part of a package to negotiate a deal for ACL.
JR2 should now be sacrificed in order to get a better rent deal.
Neither will have happened because SUSU's number priority is SISU not the long term good of CCFC.

They have offered a deal - its there to sign JR or no JR

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

skybluebeduff said:
Wasps want £750k per year in rent off us? Someone down the pub told you that?

Oh you weren't on the last thread when I said that and then another poster confirmed he had also heard the same?

skybluebeduff · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
Oh you weren't on the last thread when I said that and then another poster confirmed he had also heard the same?

No hence the question mark. If true then I hope it becomes public knowledge.

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

skybluebeduff said:
No hence the question mark. If true then I hope it becomes public knowledge.

How can it? No one is going to admit it from Wasps end. CCFC wanted a short term deal Wasps said no. That is the impasse in the end.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
How can it? No one is going to admit it from Wasps end. CCFC wanted a short term deal Wasps said no. That is the impasse in the end.

Love it how you put opinion over as fact.

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
Love it how you put opinion over as fact.

Like your sponsorship tripe? Which as a fact I can assure you is utter bollocks. Go an ask your source what they wanted and even your jaw will drop.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
Like your sponsorship tripe? Which as a fact I can assure you is utter bollocks. Go an ask your source what they wanted and even your jaw will drop.

Not involved in that level of detail.
Mind you I could pick up on an internal Jaguar Chinese whisper about the figure and run with it.

Same as this thread where there are no facts on it other than the Sisu Free mouthpiece where the usual just run with it.

You will need to wait a little longer to prove me wrong.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

fernandopartridge · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
Like your sponsorship tripe? Which as a fact I can assure you is utter bollocks. Go an ask your source what they wanted and even your jaw will drop.

What's this Grendel? Wasps sponsorship demands putting off sponsors?

stupot07 · Mar 7, 2017

skybluetony176 said:
If CCFC leave the city again it might actually suit Wasps too. Whose to say that it wont have a positive effect on their attendances with the biggest competition from within the City itself out the way? Any lost rental income could easily be replaced with extra attendances, F & B sales and merchandise sales.

Been sayng this for ages, but the point gets largely ignored.

But I'd also add, sponsorship, corporate, etc, etc.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Moff · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
What's the facts on this before you label 30,000 innocent Wasps fans ?

30,000? You are the Les Reid and Simon Gilbert of SBT. What is it they say about lies, damned lies and statistics.

As you said to Grendel, 'I love how you put your opinion over as fact'

Wasps billing CCFC for pitch repairs after Wycombe game (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency