Ricoh (The Sponsor) (1 Viewer)

[Grendel]

Yes and Doncaster are leasing the entire stadium 365 days a year which CCFC/SISU aren't. I'm sure if SISU were in control of ACL they'd get all not just a percentage of the naming rights - I just thank God that they're not in control.

I'm not taking about sisu but the general situation. Supporters like you need to get your head out of your backside and realise these issues need resolving or this club is going nowhere.

Under FPP rules where revenue is key its clear we are hugely disadvantaged.

 

---

[Grendel]

<p>

Whether im a supporter or not is irrelevant, it doesn't change what is morally or legally right.

If losses are not important would you be happy for the club to pay £1.3m in rent so long as they got sponsorship money?

Are you for real? The rent is a disgrace. If Haskell or whoever reads posts like yours he'll take his money where its appreciated.

 

[James Smith]

I'm not taking about sisu but the general situation. Supporters like you need to get your head out of your backside and realise these issues need resolving or this club is going nowhere.

Under FPP rules where revenue is key its clear we are hugely disadvantaged.

So let's get new owners in who can agree a deal (they won't go back on) for control of ACL and sort it out. Simple.

 

[bigfatronssba]

<p>

Are you for real? The rent is a disgrace. If Haskell or whoever reads posts like yours he'll take his money where its appreciated.

Lol, I'm sure I've just blown this multi million takeover by my comments!

So it isn't all about ffp then?

 

[psgm1]

<p>

Lol, I'm sure I've just blown this multi million takeover by my comments!

So it isn't all about ffp then?

I wouldn't worry too much about Grendel - he's like a creationist. Put ANY amount of facts before him, no doubt he will find some way to tell you the error of your ways.

Sometimes you just have to give up - when they are rabid about the mouth you just need to give a wide berth, They will NEVER admit they are wrong!

 

[James Smith]

I wouldn't worry too much about Grendel - he's like a creationist. Put ANY amount of facts before him, no doubt he will find some way to tell you the error of your ways.

Sometimes you just have to give up - when they are rabid about the mouth you just need to give a wide berth, They will NEVER admit they are wrong!

To be fair he did manage to back one of his claims up in another thread, just the one out of many but it's a start.

Oh I'm bored with this;

www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-261212-559871.aspx

I think I need a lie down, that is actually a link to a source And you've copied it perfectly - thank you.

One down several to go

So about your claims in post #46 any luck on those yet?

 

[Grendel]

I wouldn't worry too much about Grendel - he's like a creationist. Put ANY amount of facts before him, no doubt he will find some way to tell you the error of your ways.

Sometimes you just have to give up - when they are rabid about the mouth you just need to give a wide berth, They will NEVER admit they are wrong!

Always reassuring that an idiot like you takes the other side of an argument. Proof alone I am right.

By the way got a quote for a roof yet.

 

[James Smith]

Oh and as Doncaster came up again, there has been no suggestion by the council that any of the tenants of the Keepmoat stadium were responsible for the losses made by the stadium management company before the stadium was leased to Rovers under the current deal.

It should be noted that there should be no criticism of any of the stadium users in relation to the financial position that the SMC faces. The users have almost always paid what has been agreed with them in a timely manner and it certainly not their fault that the stadium is running as a loss.

Source:https://www.doncaster.gov.uk/db/chamber/.%5Creports%5C5%20smc%20update.doc

 

[rupert_bear]

Doncasters keepmoat sponsorship naming rights is extracted of the annual rent over the next ten years. It's an outrage the club do not get a percentage of the sponsorship deal.

How do you know they don't ?

 

[Grendel]

How do you know they don't ?

Are you saying that they do?

 

[rupert_bear]

Are you saying that they do?

How do you know they don't ? or didn't when the initial deal was struck. Which was in the McGinnity days.

 

[Grendel]

How do you know they don't ? or didn't when the initial deal was struck. Which was in the McGinnity days.

Because it has been documented they do not. They only get matchday sponsorship monies.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm not taking about sisu but the general situation. Supporters like you need to get your head out of your backside and realise these issues need resolving or this club is going nowhere.

Under FPP rules where revenue is key its clear we are hugely disadvantaged.

In League One yes. In the Championship it's only about how much you lose being propped up by the owners. If only that bald idiot hadn't been manager.

 

[gally9]

I'm sure, if the worst comes to worst and were not playing at the Ricoh next year the sponsors will all have something to say about it.. Ricoh will not be paying a million a year for a venue that is not used for 20 odd football matches a season, neither will compass be happy they are only being used for 2 concerts and the odd rugby match a year.

SISU know this, and for this reason they have the trump card. I'm not saying that this stance is right, and I want SISU gone as much as the next man.. But although they have made mistakes, when it comes to a bargaining position over the rent they are in a position of strength here.. TFs posturing is just building up the panic in ACL.

 

[James Smith]

I'm sure, if the worst comes to worst and were not playing at the Ricoh next year the sponsors will all have something to say about it.. Ricoh will not be paying a million a year for a venue that is not used for 20 odd football matches a season, neither will compass be happy they are only being used for 2 concerts and the odd rugby match a year.

SISU know this, and for this reason they have the trump card. I'm not saying that this stance is right, and I want SISU gone as much as the next man.. But although they have made mistakes, when it comes to a bargaining position over the rent they are in a position of strength here.. TFs posturing is just building up the panic in ACL.

Ricoh were happy to be missing during the Olympics and have signed up till 2025 as sponsors. Source: www.coventryobserver.co.uk/2012/04/11/news-No-gripes-with-Olympic-name-snub,-insist-Ricoh-34881.html Are they going to be happy that CCFC might not be playing there - who knows, they certainly get a lot of press out of it as evidenced on this thread.

I personally don't think ACL are panicking but at the same time SISU launching all these court cases is going to be time consuming for ACL and not very helpful. It goes without saying that there will also be lawyers fees that will be costing a bit but then that's something that's got to be hurting SISU too. We have yet to see if the Administrator and/or Tim F can actually find somewhere else for the team to play next season. My money is still on us playing at the Ricoh for 2013-2014 and beyond.

 

[theferret]

I posted a couple of months ago that someone I know who works at Ricoh UK told me that this had been discussed at board level and there is a lot of concern about the prospect of the club moving. His reading was that Ricoh would try to renegotiate the terms of the agreement should the club leave.

Ultimately, a naming rights deal is about name/brand awareness, and currently almost all of the exposure they get, in all types of media (tv national and local, radio national and local, newspapers, football related publications, online and in general conversation), is in association with the football club or other football clubs playing fixtures there. Remove that, and much of the national exposure would stop, so it stands to reason they would review their position.

That said, they must be very happy with current brand exposure and as I suspect we will almost certainly be playing at the Ricoh next season, then all this is academic.

 

[rupert_bear]

Because it has been documented they do not. They only get matchday sponsorship monies.

But the deal wash negotiated nearly 10 years ago, before sisu or before ACL and was probably spent the day after we got it. I do agree though that any incoming sponsorship momey, which is basically extra finance should be spent on the football team