letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
And Brum did it for the love of Coventry.
The love in on here for Brum was quite sickening.
And Brum did it for the love of Coventry.You're forgetting it was Wasps that refused to give us a deal. We didn't gamble on selling players to make a choice to go to St Andrews.
The accounts are dire though.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Historically, when having promotion winning seasons in the third and fourth divisions, we have averaged well over 20k. The first season back in the third division under Robins we averaged over 12k. We never even made the top 6 that season. It's hard to believe that in a season where we were rarely, if ever,out of the top 6, where we lost only once at home and three times in total, where we were playing some scintillating football, that crowds would not have have rapidly increased from the, say, 12k they could have expected first game of the season at home to Southend. They may not have averaged 20k by the season's end but they would have been significantly higher than the 12k of the previous season.No. On the odd one off game maybe but to average it over the season like some claim is ridiculous.
I think people forget that when we have averaged high(ish) attendances it's always been in the Premier League & Championship where the numbers are swelled by the away attendance too.
If you exclude ourselves, the average away attendance in League One is a pitiful 800 & that includes for Sunderland taking over 2,500 per game too.
And you are forgetting it was Sepalla’s decision to go to the EU courts that led to the decision by Wasps to not do a deal and she knew that would happen and what has that achieved, I think sisu’s boastful mantra “we batter people in court” bit her on the arse.You're forgetting it was Wasps that refused to give us a deal. We didn't gamble on selling players to make a choice to go to St Andrews.
The accounts are dire though.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
And Brum did it for the love of Coventry.
The love in on here for Brum was quite sickening.
Which in turn was about 45% of our gate reciepts.The love of £65 grand a game
Which in turn was about 45% of our gate reciepts.
Did us a favour my arse.
Well it was presumably that or be kicked out of the league
Or, you know, play at the Ricoh
Which is a bit tricky to do when the people who own it say 'no'
Ignore me Pete.
What a cretin I am , it doesn't even relate to to this year's activity.
Bit tricky when the owners of the club also said no
Without knowing all the ins and outs of the discussions can we even accurately apportion blame?
Well you did in your first statement
Well it's pretty clear we made efforts at negotiations which would be curious if the owner had no intention of staying there
Well given previous last minute withdrawals having agreed deals I’d say that’s very likely
If the club were asked to be liable for tens of millions of pounds would you not see that as just cause to call it off?
Which was hush hush and lambasted until Linnell denied it, then “according to his sources” wasn’t an issue 18 months down the line, suggesting it was originally onewhich again means you are taking word of mouth insinuation with no concrete evidence
which again means you are taking word of mouth insinuation with no concrete evidence
He’s right though - Seppalla knew what her actions would lead to, but it all resorts back to the council screwing us over by selling the Ricoh to the third party parasites in the first placeI'm not saying they were. But from your perspective the owners are guilty until proven innocent which clouds your judgement
Which was hush hush and lambasted until Linnell denied it, then “according to his sources” wasn’t an issue 18 months down the line, suggesting it was originally one
He’s right though - Seppalla knew what her actions would lead to, but it all resorts back to the council screwing us over by selling the Ricoh to the third party parasites in the first place
There is a difference between 'she did all the legals which made Wasps not want us to stay' (which is correct though was also her right to pursue) and 'she didn't want us to stay there'
So she wanted us to stay the last time we moved?
Northampton as I said at the time was a very deliberate ploy to get the stadium on the cheap. In the case of Birmingham even Eastwood said initially that he understood the legal action and didn't majorly object to it. Then the financial pressure and general failure of the Wasps project a few years down the line changed their perspective. All we have heard thus far on the breakdown of talks last year was that there was some sticking point originating from the Wasps side, not ours.
If concrete evidence comes out to the contrary I will gladly change my view
OSB what do you expect our administrative costs to be at a guess for this upcoming season and against that, how much do you expect the club's turnover to absorb such overheads given the increase in commercial revenue earned from the move back to the Ricoh/CBS?
I presume we'll still operate at a loss (unless we receive a significant surplus from a player sale), it'd just be interesting to see as a benchmark how much commercial revenue will need to be accrued each season (supplemented by broadcasting revenue/solidarity payments) to at the very least ensure we aren't making substantial losses whilst in the Championship and how realistic it would be to sustain that.
View attachment 20346
This is what Fisher said in the 2020 financials on the lease situation
Clearly the two sides were talking before the pandemic hit. We can see for ourselves that the club was suffering financially at St Andrews even if it wasnt suffering on the pitch. The missing 5 games would not have got rid of the losses, and those losses were greater than the SISU interest charges. For a club trying to be self sufficient, with already tight budgets not a good place to be. So I think we can be sure there were substantial losses at CCFC pre pandemic.
Wasps have in place a deal with Delaware North (replaced Compass - August 2018) that they claim gives them a better return. This in turn allows them to offer a better share to CCFC without it hurting their own financial position. It isnt rocket science.
What does a better share of non ticketing match day income actually mean. At one point we apparently had 15% of turnover because the net profit was split 50:50. So what is the split now? Is it a split of turnover or net profit? Is it before or after costs? Looks to me like it doesn't have to be much bigger split to CCFC to be substantially different. BUT what will it actually result in for CCFC in hard cash?
To think that this deal was not equally important for both clubs would be quite wrong. Wasps needed the income flows and CCFC simply could not support the losses/extra costs at St Andrews
There is a difference between 'she did all the legals which made Wasps not want us to stay' (which is correct though was also her right to pursue) and 'she didn't want us to stay there'
I was really hoping we'd get to spend the summer going over the same old 'how did we end up in Birmingham' and whose to blame. Who will be the first person to post up percentages of blame for all the parties involved?
Grendel and similar will certainly get ( perhaps ) slightly more than 0%?
Birmingham was the same. Believe what you like but if she had the interests of the club why would she have taken the Eu action at all.
If you need concrete evidence before you question Seppalla and her judgment this conversation is pointless
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?