Poll: Stay at Ricoh Or Take Butts stadium? (1 Viewer)

IrishSkyBlue · Nov 13, 2015

Just curious as by reading the threads not sure if some people want stay at ricoh or butts stadium is a good move so making a poll see how turns out, Nick if you want to merge it with another thread or leave it on its own work away!

skybluetony176 · Nov 13, 2015

At 20k with room for expansion I'd take the Butts.

At 12-15k forget it. It doesn't add up and will hold the club back more than renting at the Ricoh ever will.

IrishSkyBlue · Nov 13, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
At 20k with room for expansion I'd take the Butts.

At 12-15k forget it. It doesn't add up and will hold the club back more than renting at the Ricoh ever will.

agree same here unless we get what ricoh has when extending im all for it otherwise if not should stay

Gazolba · Nov 13, 2015

Stay at the Ricoh until we get promoted, so that means no long-term Ricoh deal without a get-out clause. After we get promoted, revisit the issue. No new stadium while we are in L1.

shmmeee · Nov 13, 2015

I dunno, I hear sharing a ground with a rugby club is a really bad idea.

What if stupot can see Cov Rugby logos during a City game?

shmmeee · Nov 13, 2015

Gazolba said:
Stay at the Ricoh until we get promoted, so that means no long-term Ricoh deal without a get-out clause. After we get promoted, revisit the issue. No new stadium while we are in L1.

What if we never get promoted?

RFC · Nov 13, 2015

Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

Otis · Nov 13, 2015

shmmeee said:
I dunno, I hear sharing a ground with a rugby club is a really bad idea.

What if stupot can see Cov Rugby logos during a City game?

Yep, I'm not sure I'll even be able to concentrate on the game for a single second. Too much distraction.

The amount of times I've missed a goal because I am looking at advertising hoardings and logos doesn't bear thinking about.

shepardo01 · Nov 13, 2015

Ricoh.
One of reasons we struggled to recruit while at sixfields was the ground. The fact that it was 30 odd miles from Coventry would have had virtually no bearing on a player saying yes or no.
"Come to sign for us....here is where we play...."
Ricoh.....big draw.
Butts (which would be made up of temporary seats etc if we did go in the short term).... may as well be sixfields in the eyes of a player.

Longer term....Ricoh still for me.
Just don't think Butts is suitable for a stadium of a suitable size and to house suitable facilities to take the club forward. Means nothing that a few fans can walk there from town or whatever.

Otis · Nov 13, 2015

shepardo01 said:
Ricoh.
One of reasons we struggled to recruit while at sixfields was the ground. The fact that it was 30 odd miles from Coventry would have had virtually no bearing on a player saying yes or no.
"Come to sign for us....here is where we play...."
Ricoh.....big draw.
Butts (which would be made up of temporary seats etc if we did go in the short term).... may as well be sixfields in the eyes of a player.

Longer term....Ricoh still for me.
Just don't think Butts is suitable for a stadium of a suitable size and to house suitable facilities to take the club forward. Means nothing that a few fans can walk there from town or whatever.

Butts would be great if it had the infrastructure and the scope and was feasible etc., but it hasn't, especially not since they have been building all around it. If it had been a few years ago, before all the new development, then yes, it would be a definite goer.

12,000 -15,000 is a worry to me too. If I knew we would just be hanging around League One, then fine, but TM has now built a side that has a realistic chance of going up this year. We would get over 20,000 for some Championship games for sure, especially if we were doing well.

When we were struggling and looked possible candidates for relegation, if we had have gone down then I would have said 12,000-15,000 would have been bang on and perfect for us for League Two.

letsallsingtogether · Nov 13, 2015

RFC said:
Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

Utter rubbish at The existing rent we would be better off then most. Forget all the rubbish about pie money it actually adds up to very little, as for none related football income how many grounds are actually used for none football events?
I would love it to be at the Butts if the ground was right and showed ambition if not Ricoh is just cool by me

RegTheDonk · Nov 13, 2015

RFC said:
Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

You'd better have a word with Mr Anderson then RFC and tell him he's got it wrong: ""If Wasps come to me and say 'Stay here for 10 years rent free, give us all the receipts', I'm totally open to that."

letsallsingtogether · Nov 13, 2015

RegTheDonk said:
You'd better have a word with Mr Anderson then RFC and tell him he's got it wrong: ""If Wasps come to me and say 'Stay here for 10 years rent free, give us all the receipts', I'm totally open to that."

As it is looks like we are stuck there for 10 years anyway and paying rent.
So we better not get promoted as we can't survive.
Might as well sack the manager and his staff for taking us in the wrong direction.

Mcbean · Nov 13, 2015

Yup agree above - how attracted if you were a top player ( Armstrong for example) would you be to the Butts - may as well be non league

Jack Griffin · Nov 13, 2015

RFC said:
Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

I'm sure you thought this out all by yourself. No way you are reading from a script. :thinking about:

stupot07 · Nov 13, 2015

shmmeee said:
I dunno, I hear sharing a ground with a rugby club is a really bad idea.

What if stupot can see Cov Rugby logos during a City game?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

stupot07 · Nov 13, 2015

18-20k I'd move to the Butts, if not stay at the Ricoh until better land is found.

Got to stay at the Ricoh for at least 10 years, so it's not really an immediate choice. Just got to accept the financial limitations and lower expectations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

tisza · Nov 13, 2015

RFC said:
Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

what sort of revenue streams is a 12-15k stadium going to produce year round?
Let's forget the F&B income as Fisher told the SCG that the average SPEND was under 2 pounds a head.

FRY-CCFC · Nov 13, 2015

Mcbean said:
Yup agree above - how attracted if you were a top player ( Armstrong for example) would you be to the Butts - may as well be non league

I assume it would be developed pretty heavily.

dadgad · Nov 13, 2015

This is just a boring political distraction. The club needs to be successful on the pitch and cut its cloth accordingly.
All the while fans argue about this shit the team suffer. PRIORITY, be a successful club and the rest will find its level.

IrishSkyBlue · Nov 13, 2015

Otis said:
Butts would be great if it had the infrastructure and the scope and was feasible etc., but it hasn't, especially not since they have been building all around it. If it had been a few years ago, before all the new development, then yes, it would be a definite goer.

12,000 -15,000 is a worry to me too. If I knew we would just be hanging around League One, then fine, but TM has now built a side that has a realistic chance of going up this year. We would get over 20,000 for some Championship games for sure, especially if we were doing well.

When we were struggling and looked possible candidates for relegation, if we had have gone down then I would have said 12,000-15,000 would have been bang on and perfect for us for League Two.

hit the nail on the head all depends what direction club end up in the next 2 years really.

henry the wasp · Nov 13, 2015

I'd go with a joint partnership with cov rugby at the butts.
I know it's not intended but "Or take butts stadium" makes us sound like those wankers from london.

hill83 · Nov 13, 2015

Can't answer this one way or another, there's too many caveats.

Monners · Nov 13, 2015

Neither - back to Sixfields for me

Otis · Nov 13, 2015

stupot07 said:
18-20k I'd move to the Butts, if not stay at the Ricoh until better land is found.

Got to stay at the Ricoh for at least 10 years, so it's not really an immediate choice. Just got to accept the financial limitations and lower expectations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

If we sign up for 10 years that would really give us a chance to sort out a stadium properly, once and for all. Also, land might well be freed up too in the years to come.

Also, the thing in all this is, that maybe by the time we have had 10 years at the Ricoh, the Wasps project will have failed and City might then have a chance for sole ownership. Long shot I know as things stand, but 10 years is a long time and things do change.

chiefdave · Nov 13, 2015

Mcbean said:
Yup agree above - how attracted if you were a top player ( Armstrong for example) would you be to the Butts - may as well be non league

You do realise its not being suggested we move in with the ground as it is now?

tisza said:
what sort of revenue streams is a 12-15k stadium going to produce year round?
Let's forget the F&B income as Fisher told the SCG that the average SPEND was under 2 pounds a head.

The same revenue streams that other teams get. We don't need to replicate the Ricoh and have exhibition halls and hotels. Of course in an ideal world that would be nice but what is more important is to get to the same level everyone else is on.

martcov · Nov 13, 2015

RFC said:
Explore ALL options but ultimately we (CCFC/Owners) must have & own & control ALL revenue streams in the ground 7 days a week 364 days per year. Championship 'Financial Fare Play' controls player budgets & expenditure!
Would not be able to exist in the Championship under our current rental agreement, revenue streams.

CCFC Will never own their own Stadium ( unless someone gives it to them ). The owners have investors ( apparently ) who will finance the stadium. They will then rent the stadium on the OPCO/ Propco system and make a return on their investment. Wasps got a stadium on the cheap and may not need as much rent from us to get a good return. If we get promoted we may well get more sponsorship money and some tv rights. No-one has made an accurate costing and comparison. TF's calculation at Northampton was way out. Let's hope CA can do an accurate calculation. Only then will we have an idea of what we need.

cloughie · Nov 13, 2015

chiefdave said:
You do realise its not being suggested we move in with the ground as it is now?

The same revenue streams that other teams get. We don't need to replicate the Ricoh and have exhibition halls and hotels. Of course in an ideal world that would be nice but what is more important is to get to the same level everyone else is on.

so exactly what is the level of everyone else

Lg 1 Average 4/5 thousand attendance 2 pies and 15 pints and stadium maintenance etc actual FL stats say below 4000

CCFC £100,000 rent

11,000 average attendance amounts to 23 games at home x 5000 extra paying customers at an average of a tenner is 1.15 million

martcov · Nov 13, 2015

chiefdave said:
You do realise its not being suggested we move in with the ground as it is now?

The same revenue streams that other teams get. We don't need to replicate the Ricoh and have exhibition halls and hotels. Of course in an ideal world that would be nice but what is more important is to get to the same level everyone else is on.

Such as? TF talks about 365 days revenue. If we got promoted we get more sponsorship money and higher attendances. We can do that at the Ricoh on a low rent deal without tying ourselves to a stadium financed by investors who want a return. TF wants a stadium, but do we need it now? 10 years should be the time span. Things change, land becomes available and CCFC may be in a higher league with more income. Maybe someone comes along and gives us a stadium or we do join Wasps. We don't know, but we are not yet under pressure to move. I think TF needs a stadium now - not CCFC. He has yet to name one source of revenue ( except pie money which is not a game changer ).

Poll: Stay at Ricoh Or Take Butts stadium? (1 Viewer)

Stay at Ricoh or move to Butts Stadium

Stay At Ricoh

Move To Butts Stadium

Facebook User

Well-Known Member

Facebook User

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Facebook User

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency