Paxman II
Well-Known Member
ACL should be disbanded.
ACL is a company formed by the Council to operate the lease.
Why wasn't the lease offered to the football club?
A separate company could have been formed like ACL to manage all other operations and sub leases at the Ricoh such as hotels, conference facilities, casino's etc.
The stadium part should belong to the football club and all activity within it. A fair price for that lease could have been offered back in the day.
The football club were instrumental in getting the project started that the whole City benefits from including recent Olympic events.
The fault here lies with the council and always has. Normally a city supports it's football club naturally within it's community. How have this council ever done that exactly?
More fault lies with past owners as much as the dreadful SISU in so much as failing to recognise what was needed in the beginning. Just how did the directors of the day such as Elliott and Richardson and co expect the football club to be sustainable without having income other than match day tickets of the stadium?
We do need a new era and a new approach. First we need SISU gone as clearly there is no good faith left here between the parties. A deal could still be done to effectively see SISU agree to leave and I don't think that is rocket science.
What's stopping the right approach and course of action is the greed of all sides.
If I was Haskell I would have approached the council and got a deal in principal on a new lease as explained above and then approached SISU and offered them a way out and cut them a cheque for what £30, £40m ? What do you think would get it done?
That way Haskell has the football club, a stadium ownership and all it's income streams as explained above in the new lease and who knows an opportunity to have further agreements to develop land too.
ACL is a company formed by the Council to operate the lease.
Why wasn't the lease offered to the football club?
A separate company could have been formed like ACL to manage all other operations and sub leases at the Ricoh such as hotels, conference facilities, casino's etc.
The stadium part should belong to the football club and all activity within it. A fair price for that lease could have been offered back in the day.
The football club were instrumental in getting the project started that the whole City benefits from including recent Olympic events.
The fault here lies with the council and always has. Normally a city supports it's football club naturally within it's community. How have this council ever done that exactly?
More fault lies with past owners as much as the dreadful SISU in so much as failing to recognise what was needed in the beginning. Just how did the directors of the day such as Elliott and Richardson and co expect the football club to be sustainable without having income other than match day tickets of the stadium?
We do need a new era and a new approach. First we need SISU gone as clearly there is no good faith left here between the parties. A deal could still be done to effectively see SISU agree to leave and I don't think that is rocket science.
What's stopping the right approach and course of action is the greed of all sides.
If I was Haskell I would have approached the council and got a deal in principal on a new lease as explained above and then approached SISU and offered them a way out and cut them a cheque for what £30, £40m ? What do you think would get it done?
That way Haskell has the football club, a stadium ownership and all it's income streams as explained above in the new lease and who knows an opportunity to have further agreements to develop land too.