If its all about revenues (1 Viewer)

[bigfatronssba]

Why don't the club buy a piece of land somewhere and build an exhibition centre on it? That would be a lot cheaper than building a new stadium and the team could continue to play at the Ricoh under a rent agreement.

365 days a year income they say is what's needed. So why build a stadium based on an event that happens only 23 days a year?

 

---

[Mr T - Sukka!]

Im very suprised the club didnt buy the rowleys green social club. Right on the Ricoh island.

If they advertised 100% revenues go to the club loads of people including ccfc fans would have used it. They could have sold food and drink.

Everytime i drive past it i think its a major opptunity missed.

Ok its not buying the stadium but it would give everyone a choice to put some money in the coffers and not compass. Just an idea.

 

[chiefdave]

Good point, why does everything need to be in one place. The NEC is up for sale isn't it, if we need non-matchday revenues why not buy that as I'm sure it will make more money than the Fisher Bowl.

 

[Grendel]

Good point, why does everything need to be in one place. The NEC is up for sale isn't it, if we need non-matchday revenues why not buy that as I'm sure it will make more money than the Fisher Bowl.

So when Nick Eastwood said if they had carried on renting at Wycombe they would have gone bust you think he was lying?

 

[chiefdave]

So when Nick Eastwood said if they had carried on renting at Wycombe they would have gone bust you think he was lying?

Not quite sure what that has to do with what's being discussed but renting isn't the problem, getting the right deal is. You could have a deal where you pay £1 a year and get 100% of revenues or you could have a deal where you pay £1.2m a year and get 0% of revenues. Very different things.

The point being made here is if non-matchday revenue is the key why does it have to be tied to a new stadium. If it's conference facilities that generate the income build conference facilities, you can make the profit without the additional expenditure of building a stadium. How much additional income will the stadium itself actually generate and how much will it cost, will that cost per year to cover finance be significantly higher than renting. Not saying there's a right or a wrong way or what SISU are saying is wrong, that is why we need to see a business case from SISU, show us that financing a new stadium with the facilities to generate significant income on non-matchdays is viable.