lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
You must have a right arm like Arnold Scwarzenegger.
SBS76....
But never on the point in question, just "Digs" at me or whoever you don't like at that time!:jerkit:
There's another pound
@ ajsccfc....I prefer to go along with the "Good old Oxford English Dictionary" way of spelling.
MMM-The bottom line is that if the club were successful and pulling in crowds bigger than (at best) half the ground capacity, the discussion of rent would likely still not have reared its head. As it is, the club's own dire mismanagement has landed it in a lower division with crowds barely averaging 11k, giving it the premise now to argue that income is not sufficient to meet rental payments. At no point during SISU's Championship tenure was this deemed a problem which would lead most people to conclude that since Plan A of recouping investors' money (promotion to the top flight) failed, the new plan is to force acquisition of the Ricoh lease from ACL. ACL finds itself going toe to toe with a hedge fund that's been calling its bluff for the last 9 months-if the club is evicted, can 30-40 matches worth of revenue from the club per year be matched by alternate sports events? Personally I can't see it, which is the crux of Grendel's argument.
Grendel-As stated above and by yourself, the likely agenda TF has is ultimately to force ACL into a position of financial weakness which will enhance SISU's prospects of recouping more money through acquisition of the Ricoh lease. With this in mind, they also at least overtly have to be seen to be acting in the interests of the club-and whilst ACL's ability to replace lost money from booting out CCFC is in doubt, there is no doubt at all that CCFC has no long term future outside of the stadium. As such, playing hard ball by the club (and calling ACL's bluff), is at best an empty threat and at worst is gambling with its own survival.
I can see the merits in both sides here but really, if the club had been properly run from the get go we would not be having this discussion at all.
I'm obviously not going to argue with much of what you offer, as there's sense it in. ACL argue that they are viable, or best part viable without the football club. If that's the case, and they evicted the club and had free hand to hold more concerts, or host the occassional sporting event, then a status of marginal profitability would be solved. Now, that may or may not be the example I've shown with rugby games. It could be tumbling chimps for all I care. Point being that if the club were evicted - which they lawfully could be - and increased freedom to exploit the venue gives rise to ACL's profitability, then what next.
What Grendel can't or won't answer is 'what if'? He loves Fisher, but won't acknowledge that SISU's stance is putting the club's very viability and existence on the line. And can't, or won't answer what happens if their gamble with our club goes wrong?!?
You must have a right arm like Arnold Scwarzenegger.
I'm obviously not going to argue with much of what you offer, as there's sense it in. ACL argue that they are viable, or best part viable without the football club. If that's the case, and they evicted the club and had free hand to hold more concerts, or host the occassional sporting event, then a status of marginal profitability would be solved. Now, that may or may not be the example I've shown with rugby games. It could be tumbling chimps for all I care. Point being that if the club were evicted - which they lawfully could be - and increased freedom to exploit the venue gives rise to ACL's profitability, then what next.
What Grendel can't or won't answer is 'what if'? He loves Fisher, but won't acknowledge that SISU's stance is putting the club's very viability and existence on the line. And can't, or won't answer what happens if their gamble with our club goes wrong?!?
It's like asking what would happen to our views of SISU if we were PL champions come 2015. It's so unlikely that in his view it's not worth contemplating.
Again, I'm not going to argue with that. But that stance follows on to acknowledge that here we have a 'negotiation' between one party that's got every right to evict and could have viability after doing so; and another who's lawfully in the wrong, and wouldn't have a home in which to fulfill their obligations - yet at the time time can reject offers of reconciliation or compromise.
I used to work in Japan - for the best part of 10 years. The company I worked for had a guiding mantra which translated to 'profit through fraud', or 'fraud through profit'. It doesn't translate exactly but both iterations work. In essence, it states that it's wholly reprehensible to use an unfair negotiating stance to the detriment of one's opponent. They meant by means of building a machine with bespoke components, then overcharging for spares when the customer has bought the machine and is over-a-barrel.
I think such a instance prevails here
The thing is, ACL can't just evict City and then say "Oh, I think we'll host some high profile rugby matches" or an FA Cup semi final or two. Even if the Ricoh was granted such "attractions" as rugby then it wouldn't be immediate it wouldn't be for a least two or three years and there's really nothing that ACL could feasibly fill the green bit with 52 weeks a year.
I used to work in Japan - for the best part of 10 years. The company I worked for had a guiding mantra which translated to 'profit through fraud', or 'fraud through profit'. It doesn't translate exactly but both iterations work. In essence, it states that it's wholly reprehensible to use an unfair negotiating stance to the detriment of one's opponent. They meant by means of building a machine with bespoke components, then overcharging for spares when the customer has bought the machine and is over-a-barrel.
I think such a instance prevails here
@ ajsccfc...
I've criticised someone for trying to take the piss, by trying to be clever with words not usually used in everyday spoken English. He thought he was being "Holier than thou" but fell flat on his face....Anything else?
According to ACL it doesn't need to. One or two rugby matches, or the Rugby World Cup 2015, plus additional concerts would probably do it. And if it did, and they don't need the club; and they get so brassed-off with SISU's stance; what next? What if they took the view: we'll hold back on the winding-up order, but we'll evict on the grounds of non-payment of rent?!?
Would you think that unfair? And I don't want an investigation into ACL's finances here as we all know we're not party to the latest figures; but assume what they say is true and they're almost or are sustainable without football. What would you think of their actions in eviction given the current stand-off?
Which is countered by his argument that the rent is extortionate which justifies the action-and hence is the source of the disagreement. Personally I disagree with Grendel on the club's conduct as well and have argued it a few times myself.
I wish someone would tell HP that then what with the price of their ink carts.
Yeah, but he didn't because the word you chose to pick out is actually fine. Criticising people for 'trying to be clever' or posts that aren't in layman's terms speaks volumes.
Let's do away with typing all together and record ourselves grunting and scratching.
'Extortionate'? Okay, interesting word. Let's say you went to a restaurant five times and you could afford it. You lose your job and your financial circumstances change, and you go back to the same place, with the same price list and suddenly it's extortionate? Nope; it's the same price it's always been.
In the normal world, you'd go somewhere else; more in-line with your pocket. In a football stadium, that's impossible; or best part thereof....
I'm more interested in the moral debate. In other words, the club's position - which you agree - to pay nothing is reprehensible. To then openly question finances even worse. So, what if the Ricoh simply evicted the club. Didn't execute the winding up order; just showed them the door; held more concerts, occasional rugby game, juggling pigs, I don't care. What would you then think of ACL?
Lets say that you go to a restaurant 5 times, you pay the expensive prices, you then lose your job and your income goes down considerably, you can't now afford the expensive prices.
The restaurant keeps the prices at it's previous high level despite the only other customer it has coming in once every other Sunday, and you are no longer going to the restaurant, so it is now receiving a fraction of it's previous income.
The restaurant would adjust it's pricing to reflect the market it finds itself in if it can find nobody else to pay it's high prices.
25-50% of something is still better than a 100% of nothing.
Name 1 single venue that is similar to the Ricoh without a permenant tenant that is viable.
I don't know how you have the temerity to use the word 'selective', when you're still popping up here like Carol Vorderman on daytime TV, yet have dodged a direct question three times now. In fact, do you have any idea what 'selective' means!?!
Did you ask any real ones, or just shout at the troubled voices in your head? As the real ones would probably know they've already played games at the Ricoh and Milton Keynes......
So now answer my question. Name one venue that has an outdoor football or other facility that prospers without a permanent club as a major tenant. Name one.
Well at least Carol Vorderman knows something about statistics. I have answered the question -- you have just chosen to ignore the answer -- I'll be leaving Oxford soon. I did pass a rugby pitch on the way in and did go into the clubhouse -- they fancy paying at the Ricoh -- seemed a bit put off by the price though.
ACL need our money so it won't come to thatHmmm.... no. My question - for the fourth time; of fifth if you look above now was quite explicit.
So, let me ask you again. Say they can. And they evict CCFC for non-payment of rent. How would you then explain away SISU's stance you so admire
What you've offered:
'As I have repeatedly stated I believe the club has been resoundingly ripped off for years. This from what I can see is the most undesirable arrangement any club has other than Walsall. We are the main tenant. ACL by offering a reduction of such a huge scale are admitting as such and the club has restricted access to other commercial benefits the venue attracts. If you really want my view the whole thing stinks. We have over-paid already by millions of pounds.'
That, I think we can all see, does not - my friend - address the question
ACL need our money so it won't come to that
Not just our rent but I guess they would lose a lot in sponsorship deals and I think the sponsorship for the name ends in a few years, I doubt that would be renewed without a sports club playing there every week
Hmmm.... no. My question - for the fourth time; of fifth if you look above now was quite explicit.
So, let me ask you again. Say they can. And they evict CCFC for non-payment of rent. How would you then explain away SISU's stance you so admire
What you've offered:
'As I have repeatedly stated I believe the club has been resoundingly ripped off for years. This from what I can see is the most undesirable arrangement any club has other than Walsall. We are the main tenant. ACL by offering a reduction of such a huge scale are admitting as such and the club has restricted access to other commercial benefits the venue attracts. If you really want my view the whole thing stinks. We have over-paid already by millions of pounds.'
That, I think we can all see, does not - my friend - address the question
SBK, psgm's nonsense at least comes without a flood of exclamation marks and smilies. Quit insulting other users and add something constructive.
Grendal to support this stance by SISU
You are effectively endorsing the eviction or winding up of CCFC.
If you are true fan of CCFC and only care about them as you claim to you should not care about who has shafted who. What is morally right.
You should just care about the quickest solution for us the fans.
That is a compromise from SISU
He adds a lot of "likes" to MMM's posts
Probably admires the medieval thesaurus type language.
At least MMM offers fresh pastry along with his retorts. SBK take note: I'm peckish.
But doesl MMM deliver the pastry?
But doesl MMM deliver the pastry?
Funny thing is that Fisher has repeatedly stated a supposed respect for the fact that ACL's own financial obligations have to be taken into account in agreeing a compromise rent figure.
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?