We do pay a low rent that’s not in dispute.Ask the people trying to push that we just pay a low rent (yes, you included. Nice contradiction)
Have a day off again, you are embarrassing. Not clever enough to pull off what you try, just contradict yourself.
Still not bothering to talk about ccfc I take it?
Not going to happen on here where people keep quoting unreasonable matchday costs but can’t actually quote them. Tim Fisher excluded.You couldn’t see a reasoned judgement if it ran you over at high speed
We do pay a low rent that’s not in dispute.
But if we saw the figures on matchday costs we could give a reasoned opinion on whether the overall package is expensive or not.
You are not clever enough to show me the figures but keep quoting matchday costs as a problem. Bringing up CCFC posts is just deflection because you can’t supply the details.
Seems to be the favoured day, particularly with me and I have yet to see Wasps explanation why Saturday is best. It’s been mentioned that playing Sundays means that for most away games only gives them 6 days to recover but not by Wasps as far as I can remember.On their forum though they generally want Sunday fixtures
Point out where I have said anything about unreasonable matchday costs in this thread. I haven't, I have just said it isn't just the rent that people bang on as if wasps are doing us a favour.Not going to happen on here where people keep quoting unreasonable matchday costs but can’t actually quote them. Tim Fisher excluded.
It’s not necessary bad what you are saying as much as incorrect information or not actually quoting details that you are forcing your argument with. All I’m asking is that you show me the matchday costs figures or you will be seen as only preaching to the converted.I pointed out yet again that people try to make out we just give wasps a low rent. It isn't just that at all.
I'm pointing out that people like you try to spin it that wasps are doing us a massive favour for not much in return and go on about the low rent.
How is it deflection to point out you are a Tesco value version of a pr machine trying your best not to let anybody say anything bad about whoever it is blowing smoke up your arse at that time?
So the rent is reasonable then ?Point out where I have said anything about unreasonable matchday costs in this thread. I haven't, I have just said it isn't just the rent that people bang on as if wasps are doing us a favour.
Like I said, you aren't clever enough to try and catch people out.
It’s not necessary bad what you are saying as much as incorrect information or not actually quoting details that you are forcing your argument with. All I’m asking is that you show me the matchday costs figures or you will be seen as only preaching to the converted.
You bought up quoting low rent as a problem in this fixture thread.What incorrect information have I pushed?
I'm not the one on here with no interest in CCFC trying as hard as possible to push that Wasps are doing us a favour and won't have a bad word said.
Is it fact or not that it isn't just rent we give to Wasps, we also pay matchday costs to cover putting our games on.
You bought up quoting low rent as a problem in this fixture thread.
You keep quoting matchday costs as on costs to this and feeding them those that think its unreasonable without ever asking the question if the package if fair or not.
If you are going to mention them at least know what they are.
I’m a season ticket holder of many years and have no interest in CCFC. Really?
You need to question your reasoning in general.
You rate my CCFC loyalty on posts on here rather than attendance.Yes, I point out when people try to make out Wasps are doing us a favour because we pay a low rent that it isn't just rent as we also pay matchday costs to cover putting the games on. I'm factually correct.
I couldn't give a shit if you walk around the house singing the Michael Doyle song all day, I am on about your interest in terms of CCFC on here. You are far more interested in nobody badmouthing Wasps and don't bother discussing anything to do with CCFC.
I need to question my reasoning? Let's refer back to you demanding everybody supports SISU shall we and you piping up if anybody tried to slag them off? (Strangely like you do now with wasps but not as committed)
Like I said, you aren't clever enough to pull off what you try to.
His delusional what?Your delusional.
You rate my CCFC loyalty on posts on here rather than attendance.
Your delusional.
I’m not posting on CCFC because I can’t be bothered to research possible theoretical signings, I can’t be bothered to research new signings until I see them in a CCFC shirt. A lot of the threads on here are just discussions on nothing important but hats off to you guys who can discuss it all day. I’ll just read the interesting threads from guys that are watching the developing team until the thread deteriorates into the usual non entity and like the positive contributions.I rate your agenda on here based on posts on here, yes.
You used to get the benefit of the doubt because you at least posted about CCFC as well. Nowadays you are an illiterate version of Peeler and any others who signed up just to post about Wasps.
But nobody is saying Wasps shouldn't put their interests ahead of ours. Quite simply this is a situation that need never arise. Premiership Rugby no longer requires its clubs to have primacy of tenure, and even when they did Wasps were one of the clubs who were exempt from that requirement.Why would Wasps put the interests of CCFC above their own....... if it were reversed CCFC wouldn't? It is not about keeping a tenant happy, when it comes down to hindering your own team or business, someone else's interest or business will come second at best.
There might not be much point but the likes of the local media and the Sky Blue Trust shouldn't give Wasps and the council a free ride. Promises were made, both to us and CRFC, when the Ricoh was sold and they have been broken. You can be certain questions would be asked if the roles were reversed.I don't think there is much point referring to past assurances
Wouldn't agree with that. If I hired a venue for a football match I'd expect the basics to be included. Imagine hiring a pitch at the Higgs and you then get presented with another bill for multiple times hire charge for 'extras' such as the staff turning up to sell you drinks or there being electricity. I wouldn't be expecting to cover additional wear and tear or utilities charges over and above the hire charge either. If that kind of thing has been shifted from the rent column to the matchday costs column then we're getting treated even worse than I think anyone imagined.I would assume included in there is the supply of stadium staff, an element of insurance and utilities, security cost & licence fees etc and contribution wear and tear.
His delusional what?
Both of us can be delusional it’s not an either orWorld class that. One of my favourites.
I’m not posting on CCFC because I can’t be bothered to research possible theoretical signings, I can’t be bothered to research new signings until I see them in a CCFC shirt. A lot of the threads on here are just discussions on nothing important but hats off to you guys who can discuss it all day. I’ll just read the interesting threads from guys that are watching the developing team until the thread deteriorates into the usual non entity and like the positive contributions.
But actual news that effects me,in the closed season, like fixture changes, ticketing and standing I’ll make a contribution. I can also offer explanation from a Wasps point of view on their reasoning and how I see it from being a season ticket holder there.
Its not the forum admins agenda but I prefer to voice my point of view.
Sometimes it’s not always CCC/Wasps are wrong and CCFC/Sisu are right.
I believe the Higgs did charge the club for wear and tear that is one of the reasons that the academy were going to move out.But nobody is saying Wasps shouldn't put their interests ahead of ours. Quite simply this is a situation that need never arise. Premiership Rugby no longer requires its clubs to have primacy of tenure, and even when they did Wasps were one of the clubs who were exempt from that requirement.
It is very easy (its taken me about 5 minutes to work out looking at the fixtures) to avoid clashes without moving our games.
Our fixtures were released a long time before Wasps, and I have no doubt if required the FL would have indicated which weekends we would be playing to Wasps earlier or even, as they did when we were at Sixfields, arrange the fixtures so as not to clash with any weekends Wasps require.
Both teams can play Saturday or Sunday as suits. Both teams can move games for TV if required. The pitch is not used on back to back days. Surely that is the better option all round.
There might not be much point but the likes of the local media and the Sky Blue Trust shouldn't give Wasps and the council a free ride. Promises were made, both to us and CRFC, when the Ricoh was sold and they have been broken. You can be certain questions would be asked if the roles were reversed.
Wouldn't agree with that. If I hired a venue for a football match I'd expect the basics to be included. Imagine hiring a pitch at the Higgs and you then get presented with another bill for multiple times hire charge for 'extras' such as the staff turning up to sell you drinks or there being electricity. I wouldn't be expecting to cover additional wear and tear or utilities charges over and above the hire charge either. If that kind of thing has been shifted from the rent column to the matchday costs column then we're getting treated even worse than I think anyone imagined.
You have more... interesting birthday parties than me, if you need bouncers!When I hired a room for my birthday I paid for just that if you wanted doormen or any other extra I had to pay for it.
There’s discussion and interesting discussion.There's plenty of discussion about CCFC.
Tbf going back a few years and yes I did need themYou have more... interesting birthday parties than me, if you need bouncers!
Maybe Higgs was a bad example as I meant more if me or you hired a pitch for a couple of hours. Not the academy being there 6 days a week.I believe the Higgs did charge the club for wear and tear that is one of the reasons that the academy were going to move out.
Yes every club has matchday costs but its not a set definition with every club paying the same thing. That's exactly the problem.As for matchday costs wouldn't we have had them anyway if we owned the stadium, I'm sure every club in the country has them?
That's exactly the point, we had bigger crowds then yet we paid less in matchday costs.Also wasn't that how it worked when we rented from council?
But the rent was 10 fold when we rented off the council, The stewarding situation is shit,Maybe Higgs was a bad example as I meant more if me or you hired a pitch for a couple of hours. Not the academy being there 6 days a week.
Yes every club has matchday costs but its not a set definition with every club paying the same thing. That's exactly the problem.
People throw around the phrase matchday costs and the everyone pays them line like we're all paying the same thing. Things that were part of the rent are now classed as matchday costs so the likes of Italia can shout about how low the rent is.
How many clubs are buying in F&B for hospitality at full retail price with no room for margin? How many clubs have to pay retail price for parking spaces for media etc they are obligated to provide under FL regulations? How many clubs have to pay a premium every time they want to open an extra block?
Look at what's happening with the stewarding. Thats a prime example.
That's exactly the point, we had bigger crowds then yet we paid less in matchday costs.
Which is fine. They can play Saturdays, but they should certainly be questioned about broken promises to both ourselves and CRFC. But that doesn't mean they have to play the Saturdays we have games. Clubs up and down the country avoid clashes. There are more than enough Saturdays in the season for there to only be one game per weekend scheduled at the Ricoh. To not do that is just making things deliberately difficult.Wasps said last year that they were considering what was better financially for them... It looks like they believe it is a Saturday... Once that decision was made it is completely down to the RFU to plan fixtures.
Nowhere has anyone suggested that should be the case.you couldn't expect a landlord to make a loss from its Tennant
Why not? There will be more people at the Ricoh this year to see us than to see Wasps yet if you question their ability to run the Ricoh you get shot down. And who says the club would run it directly anyway. I would like to see anyone put up a decent argument that someone like AEG couldn't run the stadium.Ultimately as a L1 or L2 club we couldn't afford to run ACL and the Ricoh, it doesn't make enough money as it is. Therefore to play in cov, rental is the only option other than build new and own the ground without the shackles of ACL.
They aren't hurting SISU, they are hurting the club. Do you think Joy is sat in her office upset that games are being moved or someone can't sit in block 14? The damage is being done to the club while our fans defend the people doing it!I think they (Wasps) are trying to hurt SISU and unfortunately stepping on us fans to do so.
That's the whole point! It was higher but it was still rent and there was still matchday costs on top. The rent going down is no reason for the matchday costs to go up. We rent the ground then, we rent the ground now. Nothing about that has changed. Its the same ground with the same stands and the same facilities.But the rent was 10 fold when we rented off the council
And they watch the reaction to things like this and know they can chuck us out and still our fans wouldn't place the blame on them.Problem is we rent so the landlord charges what he wants or you just don't pay it and move on.
Just out of interest how many rugby teams rent their stadium to a PL or EFL team? I cant think of any. It has always been the other way round hasn't it? It would seem, given the FA/EFL rules on primacy, that rugby teams where tenants have always played second fiddle because the football team own or control the stadium. Not sure there is any evidence of any EFL fixtures being moved to accommodate a rugby team tenant.
Unfortunately Wasps own or control the stadium, it isn't about what's fair to the tenant, or who got the fixtures out first, or how fixtures could be changed to suit CCFC or what was said 4 years ago Things have moved on, circumstances have changed, and yes they may be a certain amount of bloody mindedness involved but it doesn't change what is now. Clearly the one year contract that CCFC have at the stadium gives them very few rights. They do not get primacy of fixtures, and there is little goodwill between the two sides for accommodation of arrangements. The reality is under the present set up CCFC have no alternative and because of it little say. Yes rugby fixtures could be moved and it would work, the point is Wasps do not have to...... they are the owner of the site not the tenant. What is their encouragement to do so? Wasps can do what they like, and no amount of gnashing of teeth or history is going to change that
As for this the rent is the rent...... well yes but it depends what has been agreed by the parties in the rent contract. It could very well be that the rent agreement gives access to the site for a certain amount of time and that the contract is specific on the other charges that will become payable for that access. That still leaves the rent as the rent. It depends how it has been defined doesn't it. We also now have a situation that a new arrangement with new terms must be agreed annually, a complete nonsense when trying to build a stable club (CCFC or for that matter Wasps)
When comparing other clubs rent is there much or any information available that details the other stadium costs they pay? It would seem there are other costs associated at the Ricoh which have been paid and always have been. If, and none of us know the breakdown but for example, energy costs are included then over the last 4 or 5 years everyone knows they have increased. Crowd numbers may well have dropped but you don't just light the part of the stadium where the crowd are (just a for instance). Power usage for a match would be significant, a night game even more so. A 5% increase per annum from suppliers (some price rises have been higher) would put the current price up by 21% compared to 2014. Say energy costs in 2014 were £1000 per game that figure now be £1210 per game (an additional annual cost of £4830+) Wasps are supposed to just swallow that are they as part of the rent? Not going to happen. Matchday costs will go up.
I don't like it, Wasps control the stadium, Wasps will put what they perceive as their best interests first, as they are entitled to do, and will be awkward if they choose to - not sure why anyone should be surprised by that. Will that damage CCFC or CRFC who knows but both seem on the up at the moment despite Wasps
It is all still a mess and it is the fans that get inconvenienced as usual no matter whose fault it is. We are stuck with it
You don't think decreasing attendances at their major sporting competitor has any possibility of getting more customers at their games?
No not really. They don't happen at the same time and people are either interested in rugby or not. I stopped attending most of last season and didn't watch a single Wasps game. That's just not how it works.
I have seen people who shout they won't go because of SISU but go to watch Wasps. See that Peeler account on here and they are mostly on social media.
Make people pissed off with the club enough and it will happen. Look at how many had no interest in Rugby before but are now as well.
There are other people I know who go to Wasps over CCFC because they get free tickets to Wasps so spend their money on beer there because they can drink it outside. That's why they stopped going to CCFC as they say they can only afford to do one and they were pissed off with the club.
To think they wouldn't want to try and steal and influence our fans is a bit naive.
Newport Country rent from the rugby lot. They had a fixture clash and the rugby team moved their game to a different ground to allow County to play.Just out of interest how many rugby teams rent their stadium to a PL or EFL team? I cant think of any. It has always been the other way round hasn't it? It would seem, given the FA/EFL rules on primacy, that rugby teams where tenants have always played second fiddle because the football team own or control the stadium. Not sure there is any evidence of any EFL fixtures being moved to accommodate a rugby team tenant.
100% disagree with this. Assurances were made when the ground was sold that it would not impact on CCFC or CRFC. Nobody said anything about it lasting 4 years and then being a free for all. Those that made the promises shouldn't be able to ignore them without the press even questioning them.Unfortunately Wasps own or control the stadium, it isn't about what's fair to the tenant, or who got the fixtures out first, or how fixtures could be changed to suit CCFC or what was said 4 years ago
But the point is the fixtures wouldn't need to be moved if they weren't scheduled to clash in the first place which was very easy to do.Yes rugby fixtures could be moved and it would work, the point is Wasps do not have to...... they are the owner of the site not the tenant. What is their encouragement to do so? Wasps can do what they like, and no amount of gnashing of teeth or history is going to change that
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?