Butts (1 Viewer)

clint van damme said:

By the library? If so he did me as massive favour once.woke up on Sunday morning with raging toothache. Wad due to fly to Ibiza in the evening.
He was the only dentist on Cov open on a Sunday, rang up, they told me to come straight up, was in and out minus the offending tooth in about 15 minutes and off for a toothache free holiday a few hours later.

Click to expand...

Great story

Kneeza said:

Yep, that's the one.

Click to expand...

Sounds like my Dad! Funny thing was the surgery was in that row with the library, bike shop, police station and the only one that didn't ever get its windows smashed was the dentists as they had more respect for / more scared of the dentist than they had for the police!

mark82 said:

I suspect the extra revenue gained from having CCFC there would dwarf what they'd make from non-matchday revenues on their 4g pitch. From his comments in the past it sounds as though he's been warned off associating with the club (I assume by the council).

As far as we no, there's no current ongoing legal action anymore and still no sign of talks for the Ricoh.

Click to expand...

:/
Not really. Wouldn't the football club want most of their own revenue? There are alternative revenues besides football. And why would CRC want to rattle around in a 20,000 football stadium like London Irish? Why tailor it to Coventry FC needs rather than their own?

mark82 said:

I suspect the extra revenue gained from having CCFC there would dwarf what they'd make from non-matchday revenues on their 4g pitch. From his comments in the past it sounds as though he's been warned off associating with the club (I assume by the council).

As far as we no, there's no current ongoing legal action anymore and still no sign of talks for the Ricoh.

Click to expand...

I think you under estimate Jon Sharpe. His focus is on what is best for CRFC. Yes he has to keep on the right side of the Council but i am not sure he has to try that hard

There are contracts already in place for cov united, cov bears, cov ladies etc for pitch rental. Those would need to be cancelled and compensated. All to buy time for CCFC to build a stadium at Woodlands - what happens then? Or to buy time to convert the stadium on a permanent basis which would ramp up the build costs for CRFC and inevitably include CRFC having to rent somewhere else for a period of time whilst building completed (increased cost for the rugby club)

The main aim of the development is to provide the rugby club with a decent surface to play on, that has multi user possibilities, with a ground worthy of a prospering rugby club and access to 100% of the other incomes that could be developed. That is with a 4G pitch which would not be acceptable in the EFL. The current income streams from the pitch use would not be insignificant and increase with the 4G version.

What would CRFC gain from a deal with CCFC.

They don't need a stadium bigger than 10k seats at the moment or probably for some time, i would suggest even 10k is presently too big and would create costs that are un-necessary to present requirement (eg power usage). No doubt CCFC would pay for their usage but what about the rest of the time?

Ticket sales for a CCFC match would belong to CCFC - no gain for CRFC

CRFC already have healthy amount of advertising (can always do with more of course), CCFC would want all the proceeds from their own advertising

If they are running it right at CRFC ,and i have no reason to think are not, they will already have a lot of the dates filled for the coming season. Events where CRFC get 100% of the income. You have perhaps got to ask why all the extra events CCFC put on are not all already at CRFC

there are other similar incomes that would be lost or no gain

They (CRFC) have researched the needs, put together plans, done the budgets, raised the finance and are just about to sign the contracts. They know it inside out and need it sorted, are confident in it. What they do not need is delay, doubt and a wholesale change of direction, that potentially brings with it new problems outside of CRFC's control

So effectively they would be set to gain a match day rent but lose other rents & incomes because of it, not to mention a chunk of control.

I am not at all sure given the higher build costs, infra structure costs, increased finance charges, what the rugby club actually needs etc it now makes sense for CRFC to partner CCFC at BPA financially

I suspect that Mr Sharp has politely but firmly declined any enquiry from CCFC on the basis it does not fit in with the plans and needs of the thing most important to him, Coventry Rugby Club