Coventry United had agreed to play at the Ricoh... (3 Viewers)

Forums New posts
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
How strange.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
 
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
I wonder how they could afford to play there? For some bizarre reason the majority on here think it's fair that our rival's reserve team play there for a lot less than we were paying.

Imagine other clubs fans acceting that and their fans posting 'up the council'. It could only happen at CCFC. There are some many double standards on this forum and some of the excuses made for ACL are laughable.

There is no logical sense to any of it. Both SISU and ACL should hang their heads in shame but as usual most of our fans can only see in black and white.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
H

Huckerby

Guest
honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate
 
edgy

edgy

Well-Known Member
So you think the rent should collate with the attendance?

Shame that didn't happen with us, eh?
 
Sky Blue Pete

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
It did edgy it was all part of the original agreement that should have been renegotiated when they took over rather than just refusing to pay. Surely?
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sky Blue Pete said:
It did edgy it was all part of the original agreement that should have been renegotiated when they took over rather than just refusing to pay. Surely?
Click to expand...

Without refusing to pay there is no evidence they would negotiate.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Huckerby said:
honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate
Click to expand...

Ok what part of the costs are variable? Enlighten us.
 
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Huckerby said:
honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate
Click to expand...

Imagine fans of other clubs coming out with this apologist rubbish!!
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
Sick Boy said:
Imagine fans of other clubs coming out with this apologist rubbish!!
Click to expand...

Can you imagine fans at certain clubs going on about how badly their club is being run because they never won anything this year? Or how badly their club is being run because they never made it into the main European competition. Or lack of funds being put into the club because they only spent 20m on their squad this year.

I bet they would never imagine anyone sticking up for owners if they had their club taken 34 miles away from where it is supposed to be. Or being able to get used to admin/liquidation occurring at their club. Or having to rely on youth players coming through. Or relying on litigation to try and get what they want and not need, and not worry about their supporters or what is happening to the club. How about a relegation into Division 3? Or if a player embargo wouldn't surprise anyone? Waiting for their owners to make a payment that has been payable for about 9 months, and if not paid could send your club out of the FL. Only 12 days to go now. Going to games 34 miles away in a shed where there are no demonstrations from people inside?

I wonder who the apologists really are. Do we really have any? Are we doing what we think is best personally?

Whatever it is we could be doing more and not attacking each other all the time.
 
Sky Blue Pete

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
There was evidence Grendel. The sliding scale was rejected in the original negotiations. What do you think enabled the reduced offers? The remortgage!
I am happy that sometimes it's a tactic in negotiations and if it was then it worked so why did sisu move out of Coventry rather than accept it or stay without paying?
 
S

Spionkop

New Member
Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. It is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Spionkop said:
Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.
Click to expand...

They can't afford the 50% share anymore. That's all gone on legal fees and covering lost revenue. With another season at suxfields they probably could have bought ACL 100%, If we haven't already passed that mark. Still biting your nose of to spite your face is obviously better for the club in the long run. The majority are just too stupid to see the bigger picture, yeah right.
 
Last edited:
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
I have not seen anyone on here backing SISU or sticking up for them. If you dare to state that other parties are to blame as well then it automatically equates that you support SISU.
 
rondog1973

rondog1973

Well-Known Member
Sick Boy said:
I have not seen anyone on here backing SISU or sticking up for them. If you dare to state that other parties are to blame as well then it automatically equates that you support SISU.
Click to expand...
No, but some, yourself included, will far more readily criticize or blame CCC/ACL for the mess we are in, when those that chose to leave the Ricoh are seemingly exempt from blame.
 
A

AJB1983

Well-Known Member
Don't think Leicester reserves would have needed a club shop either, or office space, or IT infrastructure....and everything else that goes with having a football club sit as tenant in a stadium.
 
covcity4life

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
rondog1973 said:
No, but some, yourself included, will far more readily criticize or blame CCC/ACL for the mess we are in, when those that chose to leave the Ricoh are seemingly exempt from blame.
Click to expand...

he just said other parties to blame ASWELL

so he didnt exempt sisu at all, stop lying.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Spionkop said:
Playing in another town is wrong. Full stop. Backing that in any way, shape or form is wrong.
There is no rational reason for playing at Sixfields. It is utter madness.
It's just a ploy to try and force ACL out.
Sisu, why don't they just pay the going rate for a 50% share and we can move on?
Answer, they'd rather lose £5 million a season to get it for next to nothing.
Christians, my backside.
Click to expand...

What is the going rate?
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Huckerby said:
honestly some people! how many people would turn up for that game do you think at the ricoh? I don't know how many they get but it cant be more than an absolute maximum of a couple of thousand? if that?

HMMMMMMMMM!!!! Let me just think...god I wonder why they wouldn't have been charged the same amount? Gee.....i just can't put my finger on it.

Some right fucking idiots on here. On both sides of the pathetic little debate
Click to expand...

Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Did the rent at the Ricoh include the office space, shop ticket office etc? as well as the pitch and seating etc.
 
Last edited:
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?
Click to expand...

You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
Why didn't the rent drop in line with the average gate then? Or is that an idiotic question?
Click to expand...

Does that mean the rents about to drop big time at suxfields? Seems we're overpaying based on attendance.

Does this also mean grendull is going to get his list of people to blame for the clubs downfall upto three? Lucas, Thorn and Cardoza.
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?
Click to expand...

Problem is we weren't getting 20k+ crowds at HR in the championship whilst we were negotiating the deal....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
 
H

Huckerby

Guest
Grendel and FernandoPartridge.

I don't know the ins and outs of the deal so I won't pretend to by trying to argue with you about specifics.
That being said, you both seem like educated men/women - don't drag yourself down by pretending that you would expect a team playing a one of game with a crowd of 500 to pay the same matchday costs/rent as one with 20k+. I've heard some of your arguments and they are better than that. Ridiculous.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
You're right it is. The reason it is, is that we are talking about matchday costs in a new deal, not the agreed costs in a long defunct deal that some can't help bringing up.

You could ask: hey: why didn't the club agree a deal that changed with attendance? That wouldn't be a stupid question, just an irrelevant one. Problem is, no-one who knows the answer is talking, and it doesn't help us move forward. If you want an answer, my best guess is that the club believed they'd be back in the Prem in no time. Hence the rejection of the sliding scale based on league position, hence the deal being set up for a club with 20k+ crowds.

Oh wait, I mean, I'm sure the council stole it all while twiddling their moustache. That's the answer you want, right?
Click to expand...

I was responding back directly the point the poster made, that rent and attendances are linked.
 
Last edited:
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
I was responding back directly the point the poster made, that rent and attendances are linked.
Click to expand...

Not necessary really is It ,sure Shmmeee Is old enough and educated enough to think for himself ,I mean you don't know me and I don't know you ,how has his Identitiy or that of his dad become public on here by the way.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
wingy said:
Not necessary really is It ,sure Shmmeee Is old enough and educated enough to think for himself ,I mean you don't know me and I don't know you ,how has his Identitiy or that of his dad become public on here by the way.
Click to expand...

I've taken that bit out as it was a bit below the belt, god knows why it's public knowledge
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top