So as usual Grendel is proven to be wrong so he makes a sharp exit from a thread.
Oh dear......
Back to Grendel facts...... Where are the posts which I supposedly made? Where is the letter where Joy drops unencumbered? Which is the question that you answered?
You saw the thread. Go back to it again. Took me long enough to get to the end of this one. On my phone and supposed to be getting ready for work
Wrong about what? Frankly it's just getting boring watching you and the other two council loving trolls getting together and back slapping each other.
As FP observed you can't even get the basics right.
But Tony and Martcov like your posts - so I guess that's all that matters.
Sorry mate I did see the thread but not what you were actually referring to. Hence I hoped you had it. As I never saw that in the thread, thought to myself where the heck had that comment come from??
Wrong about what? Frankly it's just getting boring watching you and the other two council loving trolls getting together and back slapping each other.
As FP observed you can't even get the basics right.
But Tony and Martcov like your posts - so I guess that's all that matters.
Ha, you wouldn't believe some of the people who post on here are grown men. If Grendel gave up posting I think some of them wouldn't know what to do with themselves. Oh sorry, 'Grendull' not Grendel. Hilarious.Nick must be pretty patient, Tony openly admits to being a troll and having no interest in ccfc and it appears that dongo is locked up in Ann Lucas' dungeon.
Considering his hero-worship of the worst manager in our history, I can only assume that this equates to openly admitting being one of Tony's pals.
Nick must be pretty patient, Tony openly admits to being a troll and having no interest in ccfc and it appears that dongo is locked up in Ann Lucas' dungeon.
Considering his hero-worship of the worst manager in our history, I can only assume that this equates to openly admitting being one of Tony's pals.
You can't take it seriously but put some serious time in on here. Makes sense.I've never said I have no interest in CCFC. Just that I have no interest in talking about on field stuff on here as I can no longer take the sight seriously. But you keep fabricating the facts. It's what you're best at.
What has taking the site seriously got to do with commenting on football. Surely if you think that badly of this forum you just wouldn't post at all.I've never said I have no interest in CCFC. Just that I have no interest in talking about on field stuff on here as I can no longer take the sight seriously. But you keep fabricating the facts. It's what you're best at.
Do you now accept that SISU said that they wanted the unencumbered freehold? Or is that still fabricated nonsense?
I think they said that in public, more importantly, in private they wrote directly to the council to state they'd consider a 125 year lease.
Have you ever considered that most public statements used by either side were just negotiating tools? Would you give more credence to a snippet of a public statement or a direct letter?
It's funny that when Grendull trips himself up he can always rely upon Bob, Dave and Stuart to come running to catch him with a bit of deflection.
I think they said that in public, more importantly, in private they wrote directly to the council to state they'd consider a 125 year lease.
Have you ever considered that most public statements used by either side were just negotiating tools? Would you give more credence to a snippet of a public statement or a direct letter?
Have trouble following the English there. So, she has said she doesn't want unencumbered freehold and would be happy with a lease that could contain restrictions- e.g. in the Butts lease the Rugby Club can only use the stadium for Rugby and cannot knock it down for some other purpose. Have you got a link to her letter? That would clear everything up. What restrictions would she have accepted if she could not get the equivalent of "unencumbered"?
I accept perfectly that they were probably just negotiation tools. Unfortunately the fact that they were overstated and then under used (I.e. No serious bid was placed) seems to have some posters in denial that they were ever said at all. I think if you look at all the times they've stated unencumbered freehold they've also gone on to state or a long lease although they've always (IIRC) stated that the lease should be wiped clean. Which I've always took to mean that CCC/Higgs basically have to wind up ACL and cover the costs of doing that (happy to be told otherwise if that assumption is wrong) Clearly neither of which was ever going to happen and as the sale of ACL proves, didn't need too.
Now I've had to negotiated a few times and they've always started at opposite ends of the spectrum and met somewhere in the middle.
So after using the "negotiation tools" of unencumbered freehold and clean lease, you'd expect SISU then to come out with another option of buying ACL with a long lease. There is absolutely zero evidence that this ever happened. All we had was AL changed her mind on the train down, which of course she didn't. She clearly stated what wasn't available before she got on the train and I copied and pasted a transcript of the BBC's website (because I know the CT only tells lies on here) earlier in this thread. It's pretty clear that SISU have only ever asked for what they know not to be available.
You yourself pointed out why they wouldn't have done the deal Wasps done for the Ricoh as there was no value in the debt so don't you think it's about time that this myth about SISU being serious about buying ACL was put to bed?
It's funny that when Grendull trips himself up he can always rely upon Bob, Dave and Stuart to come running to catch him with a bit of deflection.
So what do you three think? Do you accept that SISU stated that they want the unencumbered freehold? There's enough links to prove without doubt that they did and repeated it. Can any of you bring yourselves to admit Grendull got it wrong and it isn't fabricated nonsense as he's repeatedly claimed?
Grendel is contradicting Les Reid whenever he can - without knowing it.
Grendel got it wrong.
But I also find it strange that someone on a football site has nothing to do with football. For all Grendels faults he does go to home games and must have CCFC as his best interest.
It seems that when Sisu make a statement it is put over by the few as a negotiating tactic.
Why can't these people see that these statements are the reason that Wasps are here and why Wasps will just configure the stadium based on us not being here?
They seem oblivious to the facts already out there and there apparent support of this Sisu tactic just deflects from Sisu putting out any information.
Didn't SISU say about a 125 year lease also?
Also, do we know 100% Wasps wasn't unencumbered? (As to whether it was available or not).
Wasn't AL also playing PR games at this time of her meeting / getting on a train which could have stopped the meetings all together?
Surely the private letters / conversations are more meaningful than what is in the paper?
Do you work for Sisu ?
Three statements that could have come from the mouth of Tim Fisher.
So stuff we will never see is more important than a quote to a paper from Sisu top management.
Talk about clutching at straws.
Bite your tongue and say the words "Sisu cocked up and CCC had little choice"
Grendel got it wrong.
But I also find it strange that someone on a football site has nothing to do with football. For all Grendels faults he does go to home games and must have CCFC as his best interest.
Ha, I think most people stopped listening to you trying to preach to them after you were on here demanding they all support SISU. There's no point trying to tell people what to say / think now.
Yes, stuff that happened directly between them is more important than PR crap. For example when Lucas was saying she will meet with Seppalla and go down on the train away from the glare of the media. What we didn't know is that she got a letter saying "yes lets meet and sort it, away from the press, it must be confidential" and then it was in the telegraph. We then know there is a letter saying how disappointed that it had to go through the media.
I don't doubt for a second both / all sides were being dicks behind the scenes, but that's more important than a pr statement.
Both sides ? So Sisu as well ?
Yes, I quite clearly work for them.
Aren't 1 and 3 facts? 2 was a question.
Loose facts but the timing and detail is critical.
It's like saying Sisu made an offer to Higgs but in reality it was an offer that the conditions could never be met. But hey forget the details.
1 and 3 fall into that category and 2 was a loaded question.
Try some facts about Sisu instead. See if you can be critical about them !!
It seems that when Sisu make a statement it is put over by the few as a negotiating tactic.
.
Do you work for Sisu ?
Three statements that could have come from the mouth of Tim Fisher.
You mean like when CCC put over a statement it is put over by the few as a negotiating tactic and so forth.
You cant have it both ways.
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?