D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Two people ahead of me mentioned 'owning' the stadium.
Twat
And 'ownership' does not have to equal freehold.
Smug tool.
Two people ahead of me mentioned 'owning' the stadium.
Twat
And 'ownership' does not have to equal freehold.
Smug tool.
If you paid £140k for this place would you consider that your own it or not?
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-47035244.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
If you paid £140k for this place would you consider that your own it or not?
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-47035244.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I don't understand the point you're making. Wasps have a lease and are seemingly happy with that. Swansea Football Club have a lease or tenancy agreement; and are seemingly making it work.
Neither 'own' the stadium. Yet people make a big thing about 'owing' the bricks and mortar; still following Labovich's mantra (CET) 'We have made it clear that no club can have a viable financial future unless it owns its own stadium. There is no prospect of us returning to the former landlord/tenant relationship'
With Football you need to think you are going somewhere, some aspire that their team could win the Premier League one day.
With these clowns we have no hope, no future and no aspirations.
And 'ownership' does not have to equal freehold.
Smug tool.
Do Swansea fc get money from all stadium activities? Not a trick question, I genuinely don't know.
And 'ownership' does not have to equal freehold.
Smug tool.
The point is that Joy did start of on the "freehold or nowt" track and the subsequent new stadium bollocks.
The problem is the people sisu have running the football team, it is they who apply their policy on behalf of the owner, she doesn't know a football from a pumpkin
...and the subsequent clarification that a long lease would do, is always brushed under the carpet.
Whilst I agree they should go. Who's going to "buy" us? There's nothing to "buy" is there? Thanks to the Council the chance of owning our own stadium is at least 250 years hence.
It's a fuck up from everyone.
...and the subsequent clarification that a long lease would do, is always brushed under the carpet.
It's disappointing then that they didn't put an offer in to buy a long lease, and decided instead that a 4 year rental was enough.
It's disappointing then that they didn't put an offer in to buy a long lease, and decided instead that a 4 year rental was enough.
The obvious fit here would be Wasps owners, surely. Now that they own ACL they'd get a substantial benefit by picking up and improving the club. Not that I'd trust them with the stewardship of the club either, but from a financial angle it would make sense, imho.
Maybe. The deal was already being made with Wasps though presumably at that point so SISU wouldn't have got one even if they had asked.
This won't be a popular comment. But FFP means clubs that don't own their stadium are vulnerable to being franchised. You had a taster of that with the bizarre move to Sixfields. Next time SISU might get it right and franchise you permanently to Brum or London in a tax efficient Enterprise Zone area.
With RFC Franchise owning the Ricoh and its 365 trade, SISU will be envious. Without a new stadium soon CCFC are at real risk of being franchised unfortunately. Where SISU will find the cash for a stadium I have no idea.
Can you explain why it would be better for SISU, from a financial viewpoint, to move to an Enterprise Zone and build a stadium compared to renting at the Ricoh?
From a financial angle it might make sense. I just couldn't support that in the slightest, though.
Replace owners who move sports teams temporarily for financial reasons, with an owner who moves sports teams permanently for financial reasons? Think I'd give up there and then, tbh.
It'd hardly be a Brave New World in anything other than the dystopia to follow!
Can you explain why it would be better for SISU, from a financial viewpoint, to move to an Enterprise Zone and build a stadium compared to renting at the Ricoh?
This won't be a popular comment. But FFP means clubs that don't own their stadium are vulnerable to being franchised. You had a taster of that with the bizarre move to Sixfields. Next time SISU might get it right and franchise you permanently to Brum or London in a tax efficient Enterprise Zone area.
With RFC Franchise owning the Ricoh and its 365 trade, SISU will be envious. Without a new stadium soon CCFC are at real risk of being franchised unfortunately. Where SISU will find the cash for a stadium I have no idea.
This won't be a popular comment. But FFP means clubs that don't own their stadium are vulnerable to being franchised. You had a taster of that with the bizarre move to Sixfields. Next time SISU might get it right and franchise you permanently to Brum or London in a tax efficient Enterprise Zone area.
With RFC Franchise owning the Ricoh and its 365 trade, SISU will be envious. Without a new stadium soon CCFC are at real risk of being franchised unfortunately. Where SISU will find the cash for a stadium I have no idea.
And you think that'll solve any of our problems that exsisted long, long before SISU arrived??????????????????????I'm still laughing.
I could be wrong but I think the point it that with dodgy owners a club who don't own their own stadium are more likely to be transient. Wasps is a fine example.
SISU is another. See Northampton for starters and P.i.T.S: Stadium for afters... maybe
Well if they could get some help building it, they could end up with an asset on their books for a start, possibly of (at least initially) more than the cost of building it.
Wouldn't the dreaded management fees crop up as well, in terms of they could charge for managing said asset?
(you did ask for the SISU POV!)
...and the subsequent clarification that a long lease would do, is always brushed under the carpet. And I don't know why, as it then ends up polarising into black and white, thumbing the nose at SISU and saying their mothers smell of elderberries.
It doesn't, however, allow us to move forward to reconcile a deal. the justification for the lack of a long lease at peppercorn rent not being offered, has always been the freehold or nowt quote. However, if that is then clarified to show there is flexibility, that (rather base) justification goes away, and is irrelevant...
Sorry Northern but that is not what she said on the occasions we met her!!!
Easy for people to change what other people have said after the effect. She said all or nothing more then once.
Don't forget we have moved forward we have a new ground to build but first we have to purchase one of the plots of land we have highlighted over a year ago !!!!! Oh I forgot these things take time. Bollox Bollox and even more Bollox one for each site they are looking at..
Not forgetting that Timmy's new roll is to oversee the new stadium. This happening not so many weeks ago.
They have said so much about building their own stadium that there's no point moaning now the horse has bolted that they would have considered a long lease. What did they actually do to achieve this? Did they ever make an offer to the council like Wasps did? Did they ever make a counter offer once the Wasps bid was public or even before it was public (I can't believe that they didn't know about it before).
Wasps have been allowed to take control of the Ricoh mainly because of SISU's failings.