L
limoncello
Guest
Maybe the Golden Bear?
That'd be on the " wagon",and would be a mistake IMO.
Please enlighten us then on what revenue ccfc are getting at Sixfields that they wasn't at the Ricoh?
At Ricoh they got ticket sales, pitch side sponsorship and 1 section of the car parking. That was it. Everything else went to ACL. It's not necessarily about what they get at Sixfields, but more about what they didn't get at Ricoh.
That's not to mention all the other non- matchday revenue that they wanted to get a part of.
This is what they want. I daresay that if ACL gave them it as part of a long term deal at the Ricoh - they would probably accept it.
The problem is ACL - not in terms of blame but their actual existence. It may be sensible of SISU to buy out ACL but I don't think that could ever happen.
Why? Is it because it's sensible?
At Ricoh they got ticket sales, pitch side sponsorship and 1 section of the car parking. That was it. Everything else went to ACL. It's not necessarily about what they get at Sixfields, but more about what they didn't get at Ricoh.
That's not to mention all the other non- matchday revenue that they wanted to get a part of.
This is what they want. I daresay that if ACL gave them it as part of a long term deal at the Ricoh - they would probably accept it.
The problem is ACL - not in terms of blame but their actual existence. It may be sensible of SISU to buy out ACL but I don't think that could ever happen.
Jack, are you the Jack that wrote On The Road?
The former England wicket keeper? Help me out here Jack, I'm floundering.
Again. If the JR is a done deal sisu will apparently be having all the revenue streams anyway.
So there is no harm in them signing any deal however ridiculous or reasonable the deal on offer may be as they'll be in control of everything anyway by next season seeing as they can't possibly loose the JR apparently.
This being the case they may as well sign a deal now and give the much beleaguered fans and playing staff something to look forward to.
A private company that's being manipulated by CCC who allegedly employed one of the worlds most expensive PR companies to represent ACL @ the recent high court heating in Birmingham.
No he's dead.
What of a condition of accepting the "deal" was dropping the JR?
No he's dead.
OK, back to the point, I was asking if the poster was someone who has access to the media through an occasional column in the Cov Telegraph, one that supports a line similar to Rob Stevens & Les Reid, and one which is better for SISU. Other people who seem to have access to the media like Stuart Linnell, Rob Stevens & Simon Gilbert are open about their identities in this forum as is PKWH and Micheal Orton.
And I'm staying anonymous ;-)
Question: Why can't Sisu accept a temp rent deal?
Answer: They don't want to rent a Stadium.
I can't see how that is so hard to understand frankly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Question: Why can't Sisu accept a temp rent deal?
Answer: They don't want to rent a Stadium.
I can't see how that is so hard to understand frankly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They're renting one now. And the net cost is far higher than the Ricoh. So again, why don't they want to move back, even temporarily?
Snap......They're renting one now. And the net cost is far higher than the Ricoh. So again, why don't they want to move back, even temporarily?
But that's exactly what they've done , at considerable indirect cost.
Question: Why can't Sisu accept a temp rent deal?
Answer: They don't want to rent a Stadium.
I can't see how that is so hard to understand frankly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That'll be why they won't accept. They want access to revenue streams.
And if you think it's just a bit of pie money, you haven't really grasped how this issue is so important in the dispute. If it's just pie money - why are ACL so intent on keeping hold of it?
So they're prepared to effectively turn away 80% - 90% of their "customer base" because "they don't want to rent a stadium".
Got to be honest - I find that impossible to understand.
They're willing to cover the costs, someone explain to me why we are going over this for the millionth time?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They have no alternative to renting at Sixfields, they obviously feel there is an alternative to the Ricoh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One can safely assume sisu believe they will win the JR and they will claim sufficient damaged to make their stance worthwhile.
One would also assume the cheap rent / increased match day costs deal either was offered on the basis the JR was dropped or their legal advisors said accepting the deal would compromise the case.
Its hardly difficult.
Indeed, the alternative is renting at Sixfields. C'mon Rob, out with it, why won't they rent the Ricoh?
I can't see how it's so easy to accept the frankly pathetic argument of 'they just don't want to, OK'.
7 years of Sisu and this is the first part of their business decisions and timing that you fail to understand?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure how you got that impression!
One can safely assume sisu believe they will win the JR and they will claim sufficient damaged to make their stance worthwhile.
One would also assume the cheap rent / increased match day costs deal either was offered on the basis the JR was dropped or their legal advisors said accepting the deal would compromise the case.
Its hardly difficult.
How can you assume that? Once they finally admitted that the offer was made ML was falling over himself to tell us how bad of a deal it was. If dropping the JR was in there it would have been the fist thing him and TF would have been spouting of about as they did with the offer made through the administrator. ML was eager enough to tell us the bad parts it's just a shame he didn't disclose the offer in full. Can't think why he wouldn't, after all he doesn't work for sisu he's only interested in what's best for the club.
If the offer was so good, why haven't ACL disclosed the terms?
I think TF came out and went through one of the offers but no reply to say "thats bullshit fella" in as many words.
As I recall ,the response was a bit of a conundrum in that What TF referred to as matchday costs when he was paying them in the previous season ,he now wished to imply they were in fact ," Rent".
How can you assume that? Once they finally admitted that the offer was made ML was falling over himself to tell us how bad of a deal it was. If dropping the JR was in there it would have been the fist thing him and TF would have been spouting of about as they did with the offer made through the administrator. ML was eager enough to tell us the bad parts it's just a shame he didn't disclose the offer in full. Can't think why he wouldn't, after all he doesn't work for sisu he's only interested in what's best for the club.
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?