Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but weren't you all in to the idea of RB Coventry at some stage? That's worse in my opinion.
Apologies if I have you confused.
I'm sorry but weren't you all in to the idea of RB Coventry at some stage? That's worse in my opinion.We can always aim higher than an exploitative scumbag who shows no consideration for a club's heritage, identity, and who is no progression on the in it for the finance nonsense we have now.
Was your fucking mouth out!!!I'm sorry but weren't you all in to the idea of RB Coventry at some stage?
He may do things differently here, we're a totally different type of club to NewcastleWe can always aim higher than an exploitative scumbag who shows no consideration for a club's heritage, identity, and who is no progression on the in it for the finance nonsense we have now.
Because the sensible thing to do is watch how somebody runs their businesses, and assume they'll do the total opposite elsewhere.He may do things differently here,
I guess not then.Was your fucking mouth out!!!
Find me any clue in this thread where I think Red Bull would be a good owner(!)I guess not then.
I'm sure we had a fairly big difference of opinion on something though. Maybe a phoenix??
Now he's so rich he doesn't have people around him telling him what he's doing is absolutely mad.
Plus I think he clearly comes across as high functioning autistic. I've no doubt he's incredibly intelligent, but at the same time he seems to have almost no understanding of empathy or human behaviour, so he has very low emotional intelligence. So IMO the reason he has all this crazy shit is because he doesn't factor in the human element and cost involved. It's not important to him.
I may get shouted down but if Ashley just wanted the stadium and not the teams that would be great. It would be in the stadium's interest to have two successful teams there so he may 'invest' in the clubs but not own them.
Why would he invest money in businesses that he doesn't own, and that don't make any money?I may get shouted down but if Ashley just wanted the stadium and not the teams that would be great. It would be in the stadium's interest to have two successful teams there so he may 'invest' in the clubs but not own them.
He's renowned for being a massive mug.Why would he invest money in businesses that he doesn't own, and that don't make any money?
I've got a feeling that's not what made him rich.
Literally .He's renowned for being a massive mug.
He will I'm sure. Who wouldn't if they could afford it ?I always thought Newcastle United owned St James park . But it does not its Newcastle council does. Makes me wonder if he will be interested in buying the Sky Blues or would he just be interested in renting to us.
I hope he does buy us and bring the club and stadium together but not holding my breath.
Why wouldn't Ashley just raise the rent to point that we couldn't pay forcing the sale of the club at a discount? He's a hard-nosed bastard after all! I just see this leading to further stand-offs and unpleasant circumstances.
Yep exactly this. Sisu will be pissed if they don't get the stadium as they will finally realize they will never get it. Ashley will raise the rent to try and force Sisu to sell and they will probably play hardball again and we'll be sharing with Walsall this time. I really can't see this ending well if Ashley only buys the stadium. I think the EFL will eventually say enough is enough aswell.Why wouldn't Ashley just raise the rent to point that we couldn't pay forcing the sale of the club at a discount? He's a hard-nosed bastard after all! I just see this leading to further stand-offs and unpleasant circumstances.
Why wouldn't Ashley just raise the rent to point that we couldn't pay forcing the sale of the club at a discount? He's a hard-nosed bastard after all! I just see this leading to further stand-offs and unpleasant circumstances.
By which point we're moving into our Warwick University stadium anywayHe'd have to wait another 8 years.
Ashley or any new owner can’t raise the rent.
Why's that then? The business has tanked and failed so any current agreement is likely dead in the water with it. I think all bets are off around what might or might not happen next. Maybe the freehold dictates that the stadium remains but who knows that for sure...
No it hasn’t. It’s being sold as a going concern. The lease still stands as an asset unless the council claw it back, which they’ve said they’re not doing.
There’s a law in place that stops landlords raising rents (beyond a reasonable amount such as inflation) to settled businesses.No it hasn’t. It’s being sold as a going concern. The lease still stands as an asset unless the council claw it back, which they’ve said they’re not doing.
There’s a law in place that stops landlords raising rents (beyond a reasonable amount such as inflation) to settled businesses.
Even after 8 years the Landlord has to have a good reason to inflate rent above “reasonable”
The Landlord in this case would be the 250 year leaseholder.
But the landlord can’t just throw any figure in, hence the 54 act.No we have a agreed lease fixed for a set period - if it expires it’s re-negotiated
But the landlord can’t just throw any figure in, hence the 54 act.
I’ve no idea if the sublease has a ‘54 exemption - otherwise it’s down to security of Tenure. Not easy to evicthe doesn’t have to renew!
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?