Transfer Embargo from midnight (11 Viewers)

[Diehard Si]

Although I'm not a gambling man, if SISU were to "Do one" and another investor stepped in, I bet ACL and the Council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:

If they were offered a fair package I bet they would, end the nightmare.

 

---

[torchomatic]

If. If. If. If.

although i'm not a gambling man, if sisu were to "do one" and another investor stepped in, i bet acl and the council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....acl are not anti ccfc......but they most definately are anti sisu.:blue:

 

[Steve.B50]

Sky Blue Kid-

I agree !!

 

[Grendel]

If. If. If. If.

It's an estimated fact - or pie in the sky.

 

[torchomatic]

MMM probably made it up. As soon as it's posted on here it becomes a fact.

It's an estimated fact - or pie in the sky.

 

[Grendel]

If they were offered a fair package I bet they would, end the nightmare.

Have I entered a time warp? Have we gone back 5 years?

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Is your sole purpose on here now just be the court jester? Are you ever going to post anything remotely sensible.QUOTE]


Something about glass houses springs to mind..

 

[Colonel Mustard]

One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:

Can they be separated though? We never really talked about the club in terms of ownership pre-SISU - it was just 'the club', even though the previous board was more inept and did greater damage.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

There is no pattern. You constantly berate and rubbish the football club sneer at people who try and defend it.

Not once have you ever suggested anything that would improve the situation or any potential alternatives. I can only therefore conclude you either lack intellect for a sensible debate or are only on here for provocation and have no real interest in the subject being discussed.

You mean SISU. Stop being such a WUM. You need telling this fairly regularly, but SISU does not = CCFC. By your logic, anyone who criticised Richardson when he was here was a traitor to the club, right?

 

[torchomatic]

It's weird. There have been a few posts today - and lots over the season where someone has written something along the lines of "bloody SISU not bringing in any players again" when since the beginning of the season we've had 16/17 come in by my reckoning.

Can they be separated though? We never really talked about the club in terms of ownership pre-SISU - it was just 'the club', even though the previous board was more inept and did greater damage.

 

[dadgad]

Although I'm not a gambling man, if SISU were to "Do one" and another investor stepped in, I bet ACL and the Council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:

I think that is becoming more likely by the minute.

Somebody may "encourage" sisu to leave the building.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

I don't understand how someone could side with, and praise the statement that hell will freeze over before the club get a share in the stadium.

It is essential that the club gain some sort of share/the generated revenue from food & beverage sales, as without this no one would ever be interested in buying the club off sisu. Without this, we are in serious trouble.

That statement was a product of and as a consequence of SISU's behaviour, it has not always been the case-yet you come to praise them? :facepalm:

 

[torchomatic]

But for the millionth time, WHO would take over? That's the question that no one has the answer to. What is so attractive about CCFC that would make someone invest in us?

I think that is becoming more likely by the minute.

Somebody may "encourage" sisu to leave the building.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

MMM probably made it up. As soon as it's posted on here it becomes a fact.

My use of the £10K offer for McGoldrick was to highlight the perversity of the position some were adopting on here.

On one hand quoting we had offered McGoldrick £10K a week. And at the same time stating that FFP was preventing us from offering class-leading wages to make us competitive

I highlighted the perversity of trying to preach both gospels. I'm sorry I bothered bringing the fragility of the perverse juxtaposition to everyone's attention.

You need to do better than that dear chap

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

But for the millionth time, WHO would take over? That's the question that no one has the answer to. What is so attractive about CCFC that would make someone invest in us?

That we don't know. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. No other club who has entered administration knew ahead of doing so who would prove to be the buyer afterwards. As if such was known, I guess administration wouldn't have happened?!

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Torchy....

I used only one "If"
Here's some more.
IF...SISU didn't renege on buying the share off ACL on tenure, we wouldn't be having this argument now.
IF...SISU invested properly in the playing staff, we could have been playing premier football now.
IF...SISU didn't once again renege on buying the share off ACL last year when saying they had the money to buy it, we wouldn't be having this argument now.
IF...SISU hadn't told so many lies, they could be owners by now.
IF...SISU hadn't tried to put a "Childrens Charity" out of business, they might have received more respect from businesses and fellow posters.
IF...YAAAWWWNNNNN, I'm getting tired now, plenty more "IF's" but cba.:facepalm:

 

[Colonel Mustard]

It's weird. There have been a few posts today - and lots over the season where someone has written something along the lines of "bloody SISU not bringing in any players again" when since the beginning of the season we've had 16/17 come in by my reckoning.

It is not so weird. The rabid criticism of SISU has been here since day one: criticised for selling off players, then criticised for letting players walk for free; criticised for a lack of transparency, then criticised for anything they say; criticised for 'not putting any money into the club' whilst casually overlooking who has been picking up the losses. I think the one that really took the biscuit was the criticism of 'punishing walk-up fans' with higher ticket prices, rather than just seeing it as rewarding the cost certainty of early purchasers.

 

[TheParsonsHose]

ACL are "demanding" that the club accept a ridiculously generous two thirds cut in rent....stop pretending that it's not SISU who is being unreasonable.

I really don't see what else ACL can do.

Try and resolve the match day revenue issue with one of their suppliers perhaps?

 

[lordsummerisle]

My use of the £10K offer for McGoldrick was to highlight the perversity of the position some were adopting on here.

On one hand quoting we had offered McGoldrick £10K a week. And at the same time stating that FFP was preventing us from offering class-leading wages to make us competitive

I highlighted the perversity of trying to preach both gospels. I'm sorry I bothered bringing the fragility of the perverse juxtaposition to everyone's attention.

You need to do better than that dear chap

Ah, the old "Posting something stupid in order to expose stupidity" defence.

Not valid of course in this case, which was using a made-up fact to back up your argument as you had no actual facts to do so.

Over and over.

 

[Grendel]

You mean SISU. Stop being such a WUM. You need telling this fairly regularly, but SISU does not = CCFC. By your logic, anyone who criticised Richardson when he was here was a traitor to the club, right?

Wrong. Prior to relegation and ground sale the club was a viable entity and could realistically attract a buyer.

Since relegation we have been on a significant downward spiral.
No one will buy the club off sisu. It has a xommercily uncompetitive arrangement with the council even if the new arrangement is offered

So we went for administration or worse. This would involve a drop in status by 1 or 2 divisions so even worse revenue and the prospect of a 32,000 stadium with no fans in it.

This isn't a case of better the devil you know as there is no one else to consider and extinction is very close.

 

[Noggin]

I almost never bother to listen to these things, none of the interviewers ever actually manage to ask the questions properly or encourage another answer after a spin responce. How about when he blames ACL they ask was it their fault for the last 2 years as well? how about asking why they cant budget useing the best offer they have been given and release the accounts based on that? if they manage a better deal they will simply have more to spend.

I've got to take this back at least for this occasion, other than not calling Fisher out on the £800k "rent" they have paid. Shane did a really good job. Fisher came across very poorly

 

[Grendel]

I've got to take this back at least for this occasion, other than not calling Fisher out on the £800k "rent" they have paid. Shane did a really good job. Fisher came across very poorly

Fisher came across very dejected. I think he will soon be gone. Fans may then regret what they wish for when it actually happens.

 

[Moff]

Only respond to attacks not initiate them Moff. From the first time I made a post I've been attacked by Torchy,Grenduffy, Then Summerisle stuck his oar in, passing comment on my education. I don't talk like I've got a plum stuck up my arse like those 3 do.Try talking in words that EVERYONE can understand. The 3 of them come over(Not only to me) thinking they and their posts are superior to all others....Why don't you join in with posts on subjects, rather than pick holes in posters comments. Come up with something to let others make comments on?:facepalm:

I join in with posts on many subjects, have a look at how many times i have posted. So to say otherwise is way off the mark.

I posted my comment as it was correct. If you dont like my observation, hey ho.

I havent posted anymore on this as it would be difficult to get a point of view accross with so many 'experts' already on the post.

 

[torchomatic]

Sorry, I'm as thick as shit. Juxtawhat? Ah, yeah got it now. You made it up.

My use of the £10K offer for McGoldrick was to highlight the perversity of the position some were adopting on here.

On one hand quoting we had offered McGoldrick £10K a week. And at the same time stating that FFP was preventing us from offering class-leading wages to make us competitive

I highlighted the perversity of trying to preach both gospels. I'm sorry I bothered bringing the fragility of the perverse juxtaposition to everyone's attention.

You need to do better than that dear chap

 

[Ashdown1]

I wonder how many minutes/hours we've all put in combined in debating this merry go round..................enough labour to run a small nations economy over the last month or so !! No-one is exactly right or wrong but rather depressingly the legacy left to the club from past administrations and the current stand off is meaning the club is gradually sinking into the quicksand that its current financial foundations were built on. Every week this debacle carries on, more fans will abandon the club, SISU and ACL will lose more revenue, players and managers will look elsewhere for employment other than CCFC and potential investors will evaporate !

 

[Moff]

I wonder how many minutes/hours we've all put in combined in debating this merry go round..................enough labour to run a small nations economy over the last month or so !! No-one is exactly right or wrong but rather depressingly the legacy left to the club from past administrations and the current stand off is meaning the club is gradually sinking into the quicksand that its current financial foundations were built on. Every week this debacle carries on, more fans will abandon the club, SISU and ACL will lose more revenue, players and managers will look elsewhere for employment other than CCFC and potential investors will evaporate !

Good post Ashdown...the first line really sums it all up.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Ah, the old "Posting something stupid in order to expose stupidity" defence.

Not valid of course in this case, which was using a made-up fact to back up your argument as you had no actual facts to do so.

Over and over.

Not at all. I posted two diametrically op posing statements made by the same poster to highlight they couldn't coexist and invited explanation as to how they could do so.

As for the financing issue,it's not made up. I again provided some data. Agree with it or offer something better. Simply discounting it because you don't like it isn't the hardest job in the world to pull off

 

[lordsummerisle]

Not at all. I posted two diametrically op posing statements made by the same poster to highlight they couldn't coexist and invited explanation as to how they could do so.

As for the financing issue,it's not made up. I again provided some data. Agree with it or offer something better. Simply discounting it because you don't like it isn't the hardest job in the world to pull off

It is made up, you have shown no data for last season which is the season you were talking about, and it was very incomplete data at that.

You said last season that we had the lowest wage bill in the Championship, when asked for evidence for this your initial response was, "you heard Hoffman say something on the radio".

Do you have any proof whatsoever, apart from Radio Gaga that plays in your head, that supports your original statement that we had the lowest wage bill last year?

No, you don't.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Not at all. I posted two diametrically op posing statements made by the same poster to highlight they couldn't coexist and invited explanation as to how they could do so.

Really? Only gone back a week, and a weeks worth of your posts in one session is punishment enough for any man, but you just make yourself look ever more foolish the more that you squirm.

Looks rather more that you're repeating something spurious enough times that hopefully it will be accepted as fact.

A common tactic of yours.

Two days ago:

"Absolutely. Every time I hear this line tripped by someone supporting their stance; I ask them how - with current FFP rules in place and existing incomes streams - we offered McGoldrick more money plan any other player in this division only last month."

I haven't received an answer yet..... "

One week ago:

"We've discussed this before on other threads. Good idea to head a thread with it though.

I think the figure for this season would be south of a £4m cap. Makes the offer to McGodrick of the rumoured £10K-per-week quite incredible; as that would be a huge percentage on one player; bearing in mind a 25-man squad would average closer to £3K per player, per week.

And even more amazing when - according to some - we need increased revenue to 'compete', yet this offer was made within the auspices of this year's FFP, and would have made him the best-paid player in this division by some distance "


"This wasn't on the table when they bought into the club. Never part of their business plan since 2007. Why is it needed now?

And don't tell me FFP, as we've just offered McGoldrick £10K per week, which would make him the highest paid player in the division, and all this on existing turnover"

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Robins has far from a secure contract.. He's been given a rolling agreement by Huddersfield.. Things go wrong for him and they can bin him with no pay off

If that is true, it speaks volumes as to how much Robins knows about how much crap SISU must be in!

 

[lordsummerisle]

If that is true, it speaks volumes as to how much Robins knows about how much crap SISU must be in!

Not really, didn't the Telegraph say earlier in the week that Robins was on four times his wage at Huddersfield than he was on here?

One year already worth more than his full contract here by quite a sum.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Not really, didn't the Telegraph say earlier in the week that Robins was on four times his wage at Huddersfield than he was on here?

One year already worth more than his full contract here by quite a sum.

Just a couple of points...
a) So what you are saying is that CET are privvy to what wage Robins not only was on, but is on now?
b)Luwalla states...rolling contract, not what period it is. That could be game to game, could it not?
c) So this means he could be sacked after Huddersfields next game....Maybe even before that.
d) Doesn't that put a different light on the subject?
e) Finally, doesn't that make you as guilty of what you accuse MMM of?:wave:

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Grenduffy, Torchy....
Where are you????? Someone spouting figures without proof.....Oh!...wait a minute...it's your m8 isn't it.......Won't hold my breath on you having a go at him then!:facepalm:

 

[lordsummerisle]

Just a couple of points...
a) So what you are saying is that CET are privvy to what wage Robins not only was on, but is on now?
b)Luwalla states...rolling contract, not what period it is. That could be game to game, could it not?
c) So this means he could be sacked after Huddersfields next game....Maybe even before that.
d) Doesn't that put a different light on the subject?
e) Finally, doesn't that make you as guilty of what you accuse MMM of?:wave:

Think a rolling contract of a year means that there is always a year left on the contract, if he was sacked tomorrow he would have a years compensation.

That's why it's called a year rolling contract, not a day, or a week or a month>

The link is here: Could be true, could be not, but would explain why a year contract is more lucrative than a 3 and a half year one.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...r-mark-robins-couldn-t-refuse-92746-32868786/

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

I think all threads aside from match-day one's should henceforth be restricted to no more than 15 pages.