So... This new stadium is taking a while... (14 Viewers)

Samo

Well-Known Member
No sarcasm intended, was attempting to pretend I was a sycophant.
.
Oh haha! Wooooosh! Sorry Trench
 

Last edited:

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Actually it could be very different.

We (the club) don't own ACL, but could own the equivalent stadium management company in a new stadium.
Sisu fought hard (and dirty) for that solution at the Ricoh, but lost.
If they believe in that construction surely they would implement it in a new stadium?

But if they are paid enough compensation that would allow them to build a stadium. Why would they not just walk away with that money and their reputation restored?
Why throwing that money into the stadium?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
But if they are paid enough compensation that would allow them to build a stadium. Why would they not just walk away with that money and their reputation restored?
Why throwing that money into the stadium?

If their purpose is to make money - as most seem to agree on here - then why not make more?
They wouldn't simply walk away, they would sell up, so they need to build value in order to have something to sell.
 

The Philosopher

Well-Known Member
Nowhere near big enough... if you were serious that is!

No just a shit joke by me.

This may seem mad, but Websters Sidings and Park in Foleshill / Radford is currently occupied by Scrap Firm EMR.

EMR have taken over the land just off the M6 at Exhall and that site is empty.

IF EMR move out if Foleshill, there is potential for a large site (contam land not suitable for housing) with (I'm guessing on the basis of "sidings") potential for a rail stop. The park may have to be absorbed but anyway

Just a thought.
 

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
I think you'll find you're not allowed to build on common land. Nobody is allowed to restrict the public from using "Common Land" either as grazing for sheep etc, or as walking across(Public Highway).
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
No just a shit joke by me.

This may seem mad, but Websters Sidings and Park in Foleshill / Radford is currently occupied by Scrap Firm EMR.

EMR have taken over the land just off the M6 at Exhall and that site is empty.

IF EMR move out if Foleshill, there is potential for a large site (contam land not suitable for housing) with (I'm guessing on the basis of "sidings") potential for a rail stop. The park may have to be absorbed but anyway

Just a thought.

Our favourite kind of land lets get Brian Richardson back to see how many times we can clear it:sarcasm:
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
If their purpose is to make money - as most seem to agree on here - then why not make more?
They wouldn't simply walk away, they would sell up, so they need to build value in order to have something to sell.

They are saying the compo would be 100's of millions.
If that's the case they would make money. Building a stadium would cost a small fortune. They would only see a return with significant investment in the playing squad.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
They are saying the compo would be 100's of millions.
If that's the case they would make money. Building a stadium would cost a small fortune. They would only see a return with significant investment in the playing squad.

Where have they actually said it will be hundreds of millions?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
They are saying the compo would be 100's of millions.
If that's the case they would make money. Building a stadium would cost a small fortune. They would only see a return with significant investment in the playing squad.

Wasn't it just 'talk on the street' outside the court - the 100's of millions. I haven't seen anything official from sisu, only that their reps in court said they would seek compensation if they were to win the revised JR.

And claiming they will only see a return with significant investment in the team ... I think others have tried and showed just how risky that kind of investment is. It's probably more safe to invest in property.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Wasn't it just 'talk on the street' outside the court - the 100's of millions. I haven't seen anything official from sisu, only that their reps in court said they would seek compensation if they were to win the revised JR.

And claiming they will only see a return with significant investment in the team ... I think others have tried and showed just how risky that kind of investment is. It's probably more safe to invest in property.

You think they would build a stadium and stay with a division three team?
For what purpose?

Just to be ckear I do not expect them to win the JR.
Also if they did I cannot see compensation to be given as a remedy
 

armybike

Well-Known Member
SISU sources have suggested the compensation claim could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.

Have you got a link to that info? Would like to take a look cheers.
 

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
What the hell is a sycophant? Is it some kind of elephant with mental health issues ?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
You think they would build a stadium and stay with a division three team?
For what purpose?

Just to be ckear I do not expect them to win the JR.
Also if they did I cannot see compensation to be given as a remedy

Throwing money at players isn't a certain way out of the division. I think TM is using the right approach. He just need to keep building without bankrupting the club. Belief, fans support and a positive hype is much more important.

I have no idea if they will win the revised JR or not.
But someone on here used to love asking: So, the judge got it wrong?
Seems two other judges think so. At least as far as the premise for his judgement.

And even if they win - how on earth will the court calculate a compensation? That's way above my pay grade. In any case I think that a compensation would be settled out of court.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Throwing money at players isn't a certain way out of the division. I think TM is using the right approach. He just need to keep building without bankrupting the club. Belief, fans support and a positive hype is much more important.

I have no idea if they will win the revised JR or not.
But someone on here used to love asking: So, the judge got it wrong?
Seems two other judges think so. At least as far as the premise for his judgement.

And even if they win - how on earth will the court calculate a compensation? That's way above my pay grade. In any case I think that a compensation would be settled out of court.

Are you referring to me regarding the judge comment?

I am not sure the judge was wrong. The appeal will decide that.

Personally I fully expected the appeal to be allowed appeal to be successful. However the appeal itself I expect to be the same result.

Regarding compensation if SISU actually won. I can't see that been a remedy unless SISU's iwn behaviour has in no way contributed to the situation.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Never thought a stadium thread would be the fun thread.

Go Stadium threads!
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
No the article doesn't say the owners think it's worth millions at all.

Why are you lying all the time?

Grendel please stop its too easy taken directly from the article:-

Sisu sources have suggested the compensation claim could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.

Which is exactly what I posted.

So we have ascertained I am not a liar but you certainly are silly
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Grendel please stop its too easy taken directly from the article:-

Sisu sources have suggested the compensation claim could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.

Which is exactly what I posted.

So we have ascertained I am not a liar but you certainly are silly

Please show where it says "sisu sources" and provides any real quote the actual quote says no comment.

The CET remember quoted that wasps deal was £30 million - not £5million.

The CET proves nothing.
 
Last edited:

Grendel

Well-Known Member

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
If you can prove sisu sources said it and you can reveal the source yes of course.

You called me a liar on the basis that the article does not say SISU sources.

I just copied and pasted direct from the article.

To be honest I knew you are not capable of an apology when so clearly proven to be in the wrong I am used to it with you.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
No the article doesn't say the owners think it's worth millions at all.

Why are you lying all the time?

The article actually does. You better quickly change tact and say the CET are not a worthy source and demand the name of the SISU source ( that will work)

This is beyond funny

Squirm squirm
Back track back track

You didn't think it mentioned SISU in the article which it does. So you called me a liar. Have the balls to admit you screwed up and apologise
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
You called me a liar on the basis that the article does not say SISU sources.

I just copied and pasted direct from the article.

x honest I knew you are not capable of an apology when so clearly proven to be in the wrong I am used to it with you.

What does the Sisu spokesman say that?
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
So when I posted this taken word for word from the article

Quote Originally Posted by dongonzalos View Post
SISU sources have suggested the compensation claim could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.

And Army Bike asked this.....

Have you got a link to that info? Would like to take a look cheers.

And you stick your oar in and said this........

Clearly not - he just made it up

Followed by this........

No the article doesn't say the owners think it's worth millions at all.

Why are you lying all the time?

What you actually meant was

The article doesn't nane who the source is and even though I never said it did. I am lying about the fact that it doesn't. Even though I never said that. Also that the article does mention SISU and even though I just copied and pasted directly from the article I personally have still made it up and am lying because I don't know who the CET spoke to.

Sounds reasonable to be fair.

In no way does it sound like you jumped in on the back of what Mr Trench said. Called me a liar thinking there is no mention of SISU in the article. Then realised you have screwed up and rather than taking one on the chin. You tried to get out of it with this terrible line about naming the source

It just gets better and better
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
The article actually does. You better quickly change tact and say the CET are not a worthy source and demand the name of the SISU source ( that will work)

This is beyond funny

Squirm squirm
Back track back track

You didn't think it mentioned SISU in the article which it does. So you called me a liar. Have the balls to admit you screwed up and apologise

Sisu are not quoted as saying it - you do realise this whole article was rubbished on CWR the following day I assume? A business expert said it was inconceivable and the whole article had zero factual merit.

Still I guess it suits you and your employers motives.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top