I was using it as an example. And as you know it is true. They always ask for what can be considered too much. Then blame everyone else involved when they don't get it. And some then side with them.The 17 points is for the Ricoh isn't it? Not the academy.
Any long term deal would likely have a breakout clause, as the swimming pool is part of the city wide strategy and the swimming association have the money now, I'm fairly certain the higgs centre would have been serving notice on the academy even if they had a 10 year deal.Most likely yes. But not until our ten year contract is up. Which gives the club time to make alternative arrangements. We were never going to get time to do anything on a rolling one year commitment. I would have thought that was obvious so why did we return under that agreement if the academy is so important to the long term future of the club?
What are the 17 points then?I was using it as an example. And as you know it is true. They always ask for what can be considered too much. Then blame everyone else involved when they don't get it. And some then side with them.
And some even try to say that anyone that SISU have dealt with would have put in clauses to stop any agreements mid term.
I was using it as an example. And as you know it is true. They always ask for what can be considered too much. Then blame everyone else involved when they don't get it. And some then side with them.
And some even try to say that anyone that SISU have dealt with would have put in clauses to stop any agreements mid term.
It would be easier to get planning where the existing building is, plus it needs to connect to the building so that is the only logical place for it to go, you couldn't go into the carpark as thats already very small.Surely it would be more economical to build it stand alone than convert an existing lightweight building into a swimming pool?
And the pitch has just been relaid I think?It would be easier to get planning where the existing building is, plus it needs to connect to the building so that is the only logical place for it to go, you couldn't go into the carpark as thats already very small.
There must be good reasons why they are saying replace the pitch, as regardless of whether the academy is there nor not, thats the only true all weather indoor 4G football facility in the city.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
And you know for sure that each one of them should be given as SISU would never ask for too much.What are the 17 points then?
It has.And the pitch has just been relaid I think?
All SISU contracts have break clauses, usually a year or 2. Nothing but harmful short termism.The contract would have had a break clause. The council have acted disgracefully over this but as always the apologists unite.
Sounds better than agreeing to 40+ years at 1.2m.All SISU contracts have break clauses, usually a year or 2. Nothing but harmful short termism.
... or a sliding scale just in case we drop down to D1 ?Sounds better than agreeing to 40+ years at 1.2m.
Yeah £75k they spent on it.And the pitch has just been relaid I think?
Sounds better than agreeing to 40+ years at 1.2m.
What would it actually take for somebody to see this as the higgs fault?
(As in what would the scenario have to be)
Which one was that?Wasn't strictly true was it Nick. It was negotiated 400k by fisher for league 1 until sisu changed their strategy.
... or a sliding scale just in case we drop down to D1 ?
Wasn't strictly true was it Nick. It was negotiated 400k by fisher for league 1 until sisu changed their strategy.
You always ask for proof but can never provide any when stating things like you have here. What a surprise.
the way we're going it won't matter soon will it?Oh yes and back to £1.2 million two years later. Sounds like a plan.
Oh really? How much would that have been?
Oh yes and back to £1.2 million two years later. Sounds like a plan.
Which one was that?
I thought it was reverting back but negotiable?Before we went to Northampton it's well document fisher got us a rent of 400k upon relegation to league 1. Now Grendel says it went back up to 1.2m after 2 years but that's not strictly true either. He has a point as it was temporary but I think and I will try and find the quote along the lines of it would of gone to a league based proportion for the rent.
Anyway it's irrelevant really as we know what happened sisu changed their tactics and moved to Northampton to destress ACL. ("Judges words") wasps struck a deal with ccc and Higgs and here we are 3 years later arguing over a 15k butts stadium. Funny old world.
I thought it was reverting back but negotiable?
It was expensive for match day only with no revenue wasn't it?Yes exactly right Nick. That's how I understood it also. So probably between 400k and 1.2m not an immediate revert back to 1.2m.
Irrelevant I know but the point about the rent was it wasn't the problem. In the championship 1.2m is not cheap but it's not expensive. Much bigger 32k than most even in the championship today and championship brings in 5-6m more money into the club than league 1. The rent wasn't the problem.
What are the 17 points then?
Doesn't 17 points condititons sound rather a lot ?
If i was a cynical person I would say it was purposely a way of not getting a deal done!
It's wasps who don't want a deal done on terms acceptable to the club.
Still let's keep our head firmly in the sisu out sandpit. It's far more relevant.
I take it you know what the 17 points conditions are then ?
Surely if Sisu HQ really wanted a deal they would publish the 17 points conditions so that the fans can sympathise and support them ?
My personal oppinion based on history and court cases is that Sisu are Masters at not getting a deal done !
I
Well they got a deal to move the club to Northampton and got the league to agree it.
Wasps could easily have said to the club publish it and don't bother knocking again,
Odd your not interested in what wasps counter proposals are - why not insist they publish what they want the club to shun up to?
Why don't you insist that SISU publish the 17 points that they said they want? Then there is a slight chance that we could agree with you and say that they are not taking the piss for once.I
Well they got a deal to move the club to Northampton and got the league to agree it.
Wasps could easily have said to the club publish it and don't bother knocking again,
Odd your not interested in what wasps counter proposals are - why not insist they publish what they want the club to shun up to?
I
Well they got a deal to move the club to Northampton and got the league to agree it.
By giving bullshit saying that we were getting kicked out of the arena and that they were in the process of building a stadium. That was why they were given 3 years in Northampton and maybe another 2 years depending on how the build was going.
By giving bullshit saying that we were getting kicked out of the arena and that they were in the process of building a stadium. That was why they were given 3 years in Northampton and maybe another 2 years depending on how the build was going.
We all know the only reason for leaving the Ricoh and it was nothing to do with benefitting CCFC. It was all about bumping up the level of compensation Sisu have been trying to get through the JR.
I have no doubt the club were threatened with expulsion from the stadium, standard business practice in any way of life when you stop paying your rent.
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?