Isn't this chap just confirming what Fisher has stated many times in the past? That in L1 / L2 our attendances allow us to be competitive but move to the championship and that isn't the case. We know thats true as the figures have been shown many times on here - we don't need to get the bar graph out again do we?
Of course if the revenues we don't get are so insignificant I'm sure ACL won't hesitate to pass them on to the club as if they are insignificant to CCFC then surely they are even more insignificant to ACL. Even if you agree with his valuation on stadium naming rights would £200K a year really be an insignificant amount?
Do people really want Fisher to come out with a massive list of what we do and don't get every time he talks about the Ricoh or do most people have a grasp on the basic facts?
That's what I mean, it would be interesting to compare.
Only comparison I know of is Portsmouth. They had to pay out £400K one season in ground maintenance. But then you have to factor in that zero maintenance had been done for around 10 years and the ground is 120 years old. The Ricoh should be nowhere near that as it is newer and you would assume maintenance has been done since day one.
but do all matchday costs have clubs?
They do but matchday costs is used as a cover all term so even if you knew other clubs matchday costs you wouldn't be comparing like with like. Just look at the last couple of seasons, matchday costs have increased rapidly as our crowds have decreased. Does that really stack up or are ACL using it as a way to keep the headline rent figure down whilst still taking a significant amount from the club?