One single significant event that shaped our season ....... (1 Viewer)

[Grendel]

And while we are at it the InterMk Group its main debt you are referring to is with the Clydesdale Bank which it brokered a deal with in 2011 not when the ground was built so it could expand the retail outlets.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

And while we are at it the InterMk Group its main debt you are referring to is with the Clydesdale Bank which it brokered a deal with in 2011 not when the ground was built so it could expand the retail outlets.

You found all that out in 16 minutes. Wow you're a genius. I'll tune in, in another 11 minutes for the next thrilling installment in the point you're not quite sure what it is you're making yet.

 

[Astute]

The ground cost £50 million.

Oh well here we go......

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/nov/27/peter-winkelman-mk-dons-afc-wimbledon

And it includes the cost of the ground and where the money came from....

His deal of a lifetime came together: Asda paid £35m for the land, Ikea £24m. In total, £83m is to be spent building his high-quality stadium to 30,000 seats, filling in the bare concrete of the topmost tier, plus a 5,000-seat indoor arena, and the infrastructure around it.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

This argument is really really boring now, so I'll try to sum it up quickly.

Firstly EVERYONE is aware that whilst under the current ownership, the level of success achievable at this club is limited (This should be an automatic reply to every SISU based thread on here). As things stand they aren't going anywhere and we as fans sadly cannot do anything about this.

Secondly, Pressley was given an ample budget with which to build a squad that should at the very least finish comfortably in mid-table.

His managerial ineptness is the main reason we are where we are.

So it had nothing to do with cost cutting then????
So they let Carl Baker go for free as well as selling everyone else. They then went to the charity shop and begged all our opponents for any good players they had????

We got fucking Nouble got to go down as one of the worst signings we have had in a long long time.

 

[Astute]

We got fucking Nouble got to go down as one of the worst signings we have had in a long long time.

I give the worse signing title to Pressley

 

[letsallsingtogether]

I give the worse signing title to Pressley

No Waggott is worse then him he made most of the player decisions?

 

[phildownunder]

Not going to any games I`m not well qualified to comment on individual players, but bugger it I`m going to anyway this time!

From this distance and with the benefit of hindsight it does seem to me that pushing Carl Baker out of the door was a major blunder which has weakened the team. He had more commitment to the club than most if not all of the present lot and on his day could produce that something special to turn a match and oh how we seem (to me) to have needed someone like that this season.

 

[MatthewWallis]

The 2 goal collapse at Sheff Utd, if we won that we'd be safe, yeah I know you could say that for any game this season, but we really should've won that

 

[Grendel]

Oh well here we go......

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/nov/27/peter-winkelman-mk-dons-afc-wimbledon

And it includes the cost of the ground and where the money came from....

His deal of a lifetime came together: Asda paid £35m for the land, Ikea £24m. In total, £83m is to be spent building his high-quality stadium to 30,000 seats, filling in the bare concrete of the topmost tier, plus a 5,000-seat indoor arena, and the infrastructure around it.

Yes I knew what you did. You hadn't got a clue who built the ground when you made what you thought was a clever statement in response to Daves post. You hit Google in a panic and the first article that pops up is that article.

Unfortunately if you'd actually bothered to do more research you'd find the general belief that the ground itself cost a lot less. Most estimates are £50 million and some as low as £30 million. The holding company and its 5 subsidiaries having nothing like the liabilities they would have if that level of debt had been put in. The article mentions Clydesdale bank doesn't it? But the bank loaned in 2011 which you can see if you look at company data supplied through company check.

The point - to answer Tony - is that the stadium is Ironically proof that it is technically a way you can build a ground and incur minimum debt - not that sisu would ever have the skills and level of chutzpah this guy possesses.

I'm done on this now. I can't be bothered going back on forth with you quoting that one article. Though even that article if you actually could be bothered to read it says the additional spend was not on the ground itself and doesn't even claim it was done at the time the ground was built.

 

[Astute]

Yes I knew what you did. You hadn't got a clue who built the ground when you made what you thought was a clever statement in response to Daves post. You hit Google in a panic and the first article that pops up is that article.

Unfortunately if you'd actually bothered to do more research you'd find the general belief that the ground itself cost a lot less. Most estimates are £50 million and some as low as £30 million. The holding company and its 5 subsidiaries having nothing like the liabilities they would have if that level of debt had been put in. The article mentions Clydesdale bank doesn't it? But the bank loaned in 2011 which you can see if you look at company data supplied through company check.

The point - to answer Tony - is that the stadium is Ironically proof that it is technically a way you can build a ground and incur minimum debt - not that sisu would ever have the skills and level of chutzpah this guy possesses.

I'm done on this now. I can't be bothered going back on forth with you quoting that one article. Though even that article if you actually could be bothered to read it says the additional spend was not on the ground itself and doesn't even claim it was done at the time the ground was built.

What a fookin idiot you are. Your normal way of trying to change subject when proved wrong is what we have seen so many times before. I might be pissed. But you are still an idiot. You can't read and understand when it goes against what you have said. You make accusations when the evidence is there in front of you.

This started after I said that the MK owner was willing to build a stadium and pay money. You said he didn't. Still waiting for the proof you was going to come out with. Yes he did a decent deal to help with paying for it. I said that straight away. But you pretended that you couldn't read it.

It is quite well known who built the stadium.......and paid for it. David Conn......a respected award winning journalist.....did the article. You didn't try to discredit him I see. And now instead of you coming out with your proof that doesn't exist you say you are done with it now. What a shock. Well done again. Good boy. Trot along now.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Not very different to Mowbray's assessment of Saturday.
Still think Pressley was absolutely right on this.

It's been a malaise for a while. McAllister tried to change it, but tried too much too soon. Everyone since has struggled (only Adams getting a side playing for him for more than half a season?).

I dunno, maybe a clean slate is the way forward after all.

 

[Hobo]

Not very different to Mowbray's assessment of Saturday.
Still think Pressley was absolutely right on this.

Exactly, he just said it as he saw it and it needed saying. Unfortunately his detractors for weeks had been saying he stuck up for the players too much...used this to say he shoul have stuck up for them and protected them.

there is a lot wrong with the basic structure of the club and the professionalism around standards and what is acceptable. It has been a holiday camp for the work shy for a long long time.

 

[Grendel]

What a fookin idiot you are. Your normal way of trying to change subject when proved wrong is what we have seen so many times before. I might be pissed. But you are still an idiot. You can't read and understand when it goes against what you have said. You make accusations when the evidence is there in front of you.

This started after I said that the MK owner was willing to build a stadium and pay money. You said he didn't. Still waiting for the proof you was going to come out with. Yes he did a decent deal to help with paying for it. I said that straight away. But you pretended that you couldn't read it.

It is quite well known who built the stadium.......and paid for it. David Conn......a respected award winning journalist.....did the article. You didn't try to discredit him I see. And now instead of you coming out with your proof that doesn't exist you say you are done with it now. What a shock. Well done again. Good boy. Trot along now.

He didn't even say the £83 million was spent on the ground.

As I say and others have as well you can't even read what's in front of you.

You are incapable of intelligent debate as you can't understand the data in front of you.

 

[LB87ccfc]

He didn't even say the £83 million was spent on the ground.

As I say and others have as well you can't even read what's in front of you.

You are incapable of intelligent debate as you can't understand the data in front of you.

Do you and Astute want to get a room as your argument about MK plastic has nothing to do with the one single significant event that shaped our season.

 

[georgehudson]

imho - the one single event that shaped our season, was,
the continued employ of TF & SW
possibly the most reviled board members in the history of CCFC

 

[KG7]

Either
SP switching from 4-4-2 to 3-5-2
or
SP switching from 3-5-2 to 4-4-2

 

[Astute]

He didn't even say the £83 million was spent on the ground.

As I say and others have as well you can't even read what's in front of you.

You are incapable of intelligent debate as you can't understand the data in front of you.

Oh back again?

The 83m was for the build and infrastructure.

The build cost of the arena and infrastructure was 113m. It even included changes made to a train line bridge and decontaminating the land it was built on. The cost of building the arena is said to be 113m. Or are you going to change this?

 

[Grendel]

Oh back again?

The 83m was for the build and infrastructure.

The build cost of the arena and infrastructure was 113m. It even included changes made to a train line bridge and decontaminating the land it was built on. The cost of building the arena is said to be 113m. Or are you going to change this?

Do you understand the difference between past tense and present tense and indeed future tense?

 

[Astute]

Do you understand the difference between past tense and present tense and indeed future tense?

Do you understand the difference between the truth and saying whatever you can to not have to admit you are wrong? Because you are certainly wrong here.

 

[Grendel]

Do you understand the difference between the truth and saying whatever you can to not have to admit you are wrong? Because you are certainly wrong here.

When was the article you quoted written?

 

[Astute]

When was the article you quoted written?

Are you failing to read as well now?

End of 2012 IIRC. So what sort of excuse are you going to come out with for yourself now?

 

[Grendel]

Oh back again?

The 83m was for the build and infrastructure.

Are you failing to read as well now?

End of 2012 IIRC. So what sort of excuse are you going to come out with for yourself now?

Why then (see above) did you misquote what Conn actually said. He didn't say the cost WAS £83 million at all did he? What did he say?

 

[Astute]

Why then (see above) did you misquote what Conn actually said. He didn't say the cost WAS £83 million at all did he? What did he say?

You are an absolute joke. All this just because you are wrong and won't admit it.

So when did I say that Conn actually said that the build cost 83m? I said that the article was done by a proper award winning investigative journalist in Conn. He has written the article in other words and has put it in print. But of course it would be the MK owner that said it to him.

But there again how would you know what a proper investigative journalist does and how would you know what a clubs owner that is happy to talk and answer all types of questions to one is like as we don't have either that are unbiased.

 

[Grendel]

Oh back again?

The 83m was for the build and infrastructure.

The build cost of the arena and infrastructure was 113m. It even included changes made to a train line bridge and decontaminating the land it was built on. The cost of building the arena is said to be 113m. Or are you going to change this?

You are an absolute joke. All this just because you are wrong and won't admit it.

So when did I say that Conn actually said that the build cost 83m? I said that the article was done by a proper award winning investigative journalist in Conn. He has written the article in other words and has put it in print. But of course it would be the MK owner that said it to him.

But there again how would you know what a proper investigative journalist does and how would you know what a clubs owner that is happy to talk and answer all types of questions to one is like as we don't have either that are unbiased.

So you didn't say the build cost was £83 million?

 

[Astute]

So you didn't say the build cost was £83 million?

Do you really want me to play your twattish games all night?

Why then (see above) did you misquote what Conn actually said. He didn't say the cost WAS £83 million at all did he? What did he say?

once you were shown to be wrong again became

So you didn't say the build cost was £83 million?

And from the original article http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/nov/27/peter-winkelman-mk-dons-afc-wimbledon Comes the quote

His deal of a lifetime came together: Asda paid £35m for the land, Ikea £24m. In total, £83m is to be spent building his high-quality stadium to 30,000 seats, filling in the bare concrete of the topmost tier, plus a 5,000-seat indoor arena, and the infrastructure around it.


Or are you saying that it was me that said it cost 83m?

I have had enough of your pathetic games. You have nothing to back up what you said. All you have tried to do is play with words. Just go and play with yourself. Suits the sort of person you are.

 

[Gazolba]

[h=2]One single significant event that shaped our season[/h]

You could say any one game we should have won but drew or lost, or any of the many penalty misses because if we had won or scored, we would be safe now.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Do you really want me to play your twattish games all night? Why then (see above) did you misquote what Conn actually said. He didn't say the cost WAS £83 million at all did he? What did he say? once you were shown to be wrong again became So you didn't say the build cost was £83 million? And from the original article http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2012/nov/27/peter-winkelman-mk-dons-afc-wimbledon Comes the quote His deal of a lifetime came together: Asda paid £35m for the land, Ikea £24m. In total, £83m is to be spent building his high-quality stadium to 30,000 seats, filling in the bare concrete of the topmost tier, plus a 5,000-seat indoor arena, and the infrastructure around it. Or are you saying that it was me that said it cost 83m? I have had enough of your pathetic games. You have nothing to back up what you said. All you have tried to do is play with words. Just go and play with yourself. Suits the sort of person you are.

I think the word you're looking for mate is.....Wankah

 

[Grendel]

I think the word you're looking for mate is.....Wankah

Wonderful. Now the posee has arrived.

Perhaps you can explain to your friend why he is wrong.

The only article he can find quotes from is one some 6 years after the initial stadium was constructed. The initial stadium cost was not £83 million at all. The article admits some 5 to 6 years after the opening that the spend figure was not even completed. Of course he's backtracked and added words like "development" but that development includes a hotel and cinema - nothing to do with the ground.

The build cost in stadia directory.com is suggested at £30 million. Foorballgroundguide.com suggests £50 million.

Astute seems to put a lot of emphasis on what winkleman says but as the excellent Mahir Bose puts it in an interview in November 2012 "it's very difficult to get a straight answer from a simple question out of him" Indeed his suggestion that he did it partly to help Wimbledon fans from travelling to Dublin and his laughable excuses in the interview I'm sure provided inspiration to Mr Eastwood with some of his equally amusing one liners.


Inter Mk has 5 subsidiaries. The negative balances are £11 million against the club but the hotel and the mk properties show healthy balances. Net worth of the holding company shows negative £4 million - the loan from Clydesdale is shown clearly in one company in 2011 but the net liabilities oddly duck again a year later. Certainly there accounts suggest nothing like the £30 million deficit but to be fair to Conn he didn't say there was.

Bottom line - it didn't cost to build the ground.

Still astute will say I've provided now evidence when he's given us so much detail it's taking hours to pour through.

 

[Astute]

Next you will be saying that the stadium was completed when only half of the seats were fitted

So you have suggestions on how much the costs were but nothing else. And this was from well before the ground was completed. Over 24 hours just to find that.

Bottom line is you have come up with nothing. Normal day I see.

One more thing. You just said that there is a negative balance of 11m to the club. Show it us then as the debts from the move and build are not owed by the club.

 

[skybluetony176]

Next you will be saying that the stadium was completed when only half of the seats were fitted

So you have suggestions on how much the costs were but nothing else. And this was from well before the ground was completed. Over 24 hours just to find that.

Bottom line is you have come up with nothing. Normal day I see.

One more thing. You just said that there is a negative balance of 11m to the club. Show it us then as the debts from the move and build are not owed by the club.

What ate you on about. It's not like it was only fully opened last season. Oh, wait...

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Why not continue the argument about MK on another thread away from Coventry City . This is CCFC .

 

[Grendel]

What ate you on about. It's not like it was only fully opened last season. Oh, wait...

I ate on about anything Tony. At least you agree with me that the stadium when built cost the owner nothing. Well done.

 

[Grendel]

Why not continue the argument about MK on another thread away from Coventry City . This is CCFC .

I do agree with you but find it irritating when people are presented with fact after fact still lie and deny.

I guess at least I know astute can link articles - I used to assume he didn't know how.

He's always accused me of supporting Sisu. I've always told him to supply one post where I said I did. Never has. Never can.

Still he's got "wot an award winnin jornist sed" up his armoury I suppose.

But your right - I've given links galore to prove my point compared to his one paragraph - and he has Tony and SBK on his side.

I admit it's over. I'm done for.

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

I have an interest in the fortunes of the old Wimbledon and as to why they left Plough Lane etc so was tempted to join in but you two seem to going at it full on so decided not to put my head above the parapet ! Used to live close to the ground and see Bobby Gould going in to work on a Sunday there. The old stadium remained empty for years before it was finally bulldozed. Anyway, don't get me started !!

 

[Grendel]

I suggest the mods delete the mk posts or close the thread.

It's pointless and as AdM says irrelevant.

. There will be more nonsense coming back especially now the 3 of them are at it and I will just end up quoting more and more facts at them which will be "twisting my words" or some other crap

Close it. I only raised the issue as I knew the smart Alec remark was wrong - which it was and let's remember the same poster once said the Oystens were "good owners"