Didn't know that any Cov fans had been threatened with litigation by SBT myself.
That's a new one, do you know who it was?
He never put forward a case, just vagueness as facts.
You should have either agreed or disagreed with the facts as I presented them; which I recall you didn't do - probably as it didn't suit your cause, or you were simply incapable. To not do so, and then come back sneering some months later seems a bit cheap if you don't mind me commenting so.
Cheap; but not surprising....
Didn't I read somewhere that in our relegation season the wage bill was £11 million?
Didn't I read somewhere that in our relegation season the wage bill was £11 million?
And even if it was true all our problems and reason for being so much in debt would have been the 1.2m rent.
Now poor Grenduffy is in a pickle. He either admits I'm right and our wages were amongst the lowest in the league, or they were high and the insignificance of the rent is highlighted.
I wonder which sword he'll fall on?
Now poor Grenduffy is in a pickle. He either admits I'm right and our wages were amongst the lowest in the league, or they were high and the insignificance of the rent is highlighted.
I wonder which sword he'll fall on?
I'm sure the prospect of getting to fall on anybody's sword is getting him all wound up as we speak
Indeed. Either ACL's rent was not as exorbitant as other costs and they're not the villains he suggests, or Thorn's managerial genius was curtailed by SISU leaving him hamstrung with cash. ACL or Thorn? Who will he support? I bet it's ruining his Subway...
That's bollocks. I posted a league table with wages - where available, next to each club, and links to sites such as this:
http://www.thescratchingshed.com/2012/04/championship-clubs-financial-results-2010-11/
My assertion at the time, and which I stick to now is that we were funded in the bottom three of the division. Agree, or disagree, and why?
What about the point you've made about SISU failing to control spending other than rent? So as to demonstrate that rent really wasn't that big a deal.
Not according to the interview with Deluded Ken. Again, as linked last time I presented the case for discussion
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sp...ews/ken-dulieu-coventry-citys-darkest-3034072
Why do you still insist on using CET articles as some sort of proof? With Orange Ken as the arbiter no less.
The figures are out there now for that season, was around £10.8million.
So how did 1.2m rent force us to go to Northampton then?
It didn't - its punitive restrictions on revenue means the club would never succeed so it had to go.
It didn't - its punitive restrictions on revenue means the club would never succeed so it had to go.
Are you telling us if they had the pie money we would succeed, how many pies do you eat?
SISU also told us in September they had agreed terms on land for a new stadium. Any updates or progress on this?
yes netherland...... he is good mates with a bloke called Peter....
It didn't - its punitive restrictions on revenue means the club would never succeed so it had to go.
It didn't - its punitive restrictions on revenue means the club would never succeed so it had to go.
We have had the opportunity in the past to be a part owner of our SMC (which is ACL) but we sold our share to the Higgs Charity. The club had the option to buy the share back at anytime from the charity, at a price based on an agreed formula. That would have given the club two seats on the board, 33 or 40% of the votes (depending on number of independent directors) and the chance to obtain the matchday pie money / see the ACL accounts etc. The club could have done this as I understand it at any point (before the boycott) and the charity were willing to sell to the club. SISU have been owners for 6 years and in over half of that time they never entered into negotiations with the charity. Instead of serious negotiations with anyone they went on the rent boycott then talked to the Higgs about the share.It didn't - its punitive restrictions on revenue means the club would never succeed so it had to go.
I'm hearing whispers about talks on Baginton being a serious contender for the site.
Apparently some talks have been held between relevant parties at a hotel just outside Leamington,at an early stage though.
Having the kibosh pretty much put on the Gateway Project does make it half-plausible, and of course(mostly) under WCC control rather than CCC.
Though think that CCC own the land that the airport is leased off, so unlikely from that aspect in my opinion.
Still unsure as to what benefit our club (not Sisu Capital Partners their funds or any associated businesses) would get from owning the stadium as well as the ACL lease and the associated revenues, as opposed to just owning the ACL lease and the associated revenues from that.
That's bollocks. I posted a league table with wages - where available, next to each club, and links to sites such as this:
http://www.thescratchingshed.com/2012/04/championship-clubs-financial-results-2010-11/
My assertion at the time, and which I stick to now is that we were funded in the bottom three of the division. Agree, or disagree, and why?
A property they would own so they could release equity from our club by remortgaging?
Travel wise only about 15mins by taxi so not too much extra but wouldn't go past HR or up Sky Blue Way so that would be a negative aspect. Not looked at buses yet.
We probably were, mainly because we had one of the bottom 3-4 turnovers in the league. The admin report said our turnover income/turnover in 2011/12 was £10.27m (15,116 fans), which puts us 4th worst on the championship for that season.
http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/championship-finances-201112-numbers.html?m=1
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Profit & Loss Account
- Turnover specific to CCFC down from 12.1m to 10.8m. Ticket sales was 3.5m (2011 3.9m) Commercial income 7.3m (2011 8.2m)
- staff costs were down from £11.2 to 9.9m in 2012
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?