Diehard Si
New Member
If they were offered a fair package I bet they would, end the nightmare.
Although I'm not a gambling man, if SISU were to "Do one" and another investor stepped in, I bet ACL and the Council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:
although i'm not a gambling man, if sisu were to "do one" and another investor stepped in, i bet acl and the council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....acl are not anti ccfc......but they most definately are anti sisu.:blue:
If. If. If. If.
It's an estimated fact - or pie in the sky.
If they were offered a fair package I bet they would, end the nightmare.
Is your sole purpose on here now just be the court jester? Are you ever going to post anything remotely sensible.QUOTE]
Something about glass houses springs to mind..
One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:
There is no pattern. You constantly berate and rubbish the football club sneer at people who try and defend it.
Not once have you ever suggested anything that would improve the situation or any potential alternatives. I can only therefore conclude you either lack intellect for a sensible debate or are only on here for provocation and have no real interest in the subject being discussed.
Can they be separated though? We never really talked about the club in terms of ownership pre-SISU - it was just 'the club', even though the previous board was more inept and did greater damage.
Although I'm not a gambling man, if SISU were to "Do one" and another investor stepped in, I bet ACL and the Council would sell their ownership of the stadium.
One other thing....ACL are NOT anti CCFC......but they most definately are anti SISU.:blue:
I don't understand how someone could side with, and praise the statement that hell will freeze over before the club get a share in the stadium.
It is essential that the club gain some sort of share/the generated revenue from food & beverage sales, as without this no one would ever be interested in buying the club off sisu. Without this, we are in serious trouble.
I think that is becoming more likely by the minute.
Somebody may "encourage" sisu to leave the building.
MMM probably made it up. As soon as it's posted on here it becomes a fact.
But for the millionth time, WHO would take over? That's the question that no one has the answer to. What is so attractive about CCFC that would make someone invest in us?
It's weird. There have been a few posts today - and lots over the season where someone has written something along the lines of "bloody SISU not bringing in any players again" when since the beginning of the season we've had 16/17 come in by my reckoning.
ACL are "demanding" that the club accept a ridiculously generous two thirds cut in rent....stop pretending that it's not SISU who is being unreasonable.
I really don't see what else ACL can do.
My use of the £10K offer for McGoldrick was to highlight the perversity of the position some were adopting on here.
On one hand quoting we had offered McGoldrick £10K a week. And at the same time stating that FFP was preventing us from offering class-leading wages to make us competitive
I highlighted the perversity of trying to preach both gospels. I'm sorry I bothered bringing the fragility of the perverse juxtaposition to everyone's attention.
You need to do better than that dear chap
You mean SISU. Stop being such a WUM. You need telling this fairly regularly, but SISU does not = CCFC. By your logic, anyone who criticised Richardson when he was here was a traitor to the club, right?
I almost never bother to listen to these things, none of the interviewers ever actually manage to ask the questions properly or encourage another answer after a spin responce. How about when he blames ACL they ask was it their fault for the last 2 years as well? how about asking why they cant budget useing the best offer they have been given and release the accounts based on that? if they manage a better deal they will simply have more to spend.
I've got to take this back at least for this occasion, other than not calling Fisher out on the £800k "rent" they have paid. Shane did a really good job. Fisher came across very poorly
Only respond to attacks not initiate them Moff. From the first time I made a post I've been attacked by Torchy,Grenduffy, Then Summerisle stuck his oar in, passing comment on my education. I don't talk like I've got a plum stuck up my arse like those 3 do.Try talking in words that EVERYONE can understand. The 3 of them come over(Not only to me) thinking they and their posts are superior to all others....Why don't you join in with posts on subjects, rather than pick holes in posters comments. Come up with something to let others make comments on?:facepalm:
My use of the £10K offer for McGoldrick was to highlight the perversity of the position some were adopting on here.
On one hand quoting we had offered McGoldrick £10K a week. And at the same time stating that FFP was preventing us from offering class-leading wages to make us competitive
I highlighted the perversity of trying to preach both gospels. I'm sorry I bothered bringing the fragility of the perverse juxtaposition to everyone's attention.
You need to do better than that dear chap
I wonder how many minutes/hours we've all put in combined in debating this merry go round..................enough labour to run a small nations economy over the last month or so !! No-one is exactly right or wrong but rather depressingly the legacy left to the club from past administrations and the current stand off is meaning the club is gradually sinking into the quicksand that its current financial foundations were built on. Every week this debacle carries on, more fans will abandon the club, SISU and ACL will lose more revenue, players and managers will look elsewhere for employment other than CCFC and potential investors will evaporate !
Ah, the old "Posting something stupid in order to expose stupidity" defence.
Not valid of course in this case, which was using a made-up fact to back up your argument as you had no actual facts to do so.
Over and over.
Not at all. I posted two diametrically op posing statements made by the same poster to highlight they couldn't coexist and invited explanation as to how they could do so.
As for the financing issue,it's not made up. I again provided some data. Agree with it or offer something better. Simply discounting it because you don't like it isn't the hardest job in the world to pull off
Not at all. I posted two diametrically op posing statements made by the same poster to highlight they couldn't coexist and invited explanation as to how they could do so.
Robins has far from a secure contract.. He's been given a rolling agreement by Huddersfield.. Things go wrong for him and they can bin him with no pay off
If that is true, it speaks volumes as to how much Robins knows about how much crap SISU must be in!
Not really, didn't the Telegraph say earlier in the week that Robins was on four times his wage at Huddersfield than he was on here?
One year already worth more than his full contract here by quite a sum.
Just a couple of points...
a) So what you are saying is that CET are privvy to what wage Robins not only was on, but is on now?
b)Luwalla states...rolling contract, not what period it is. That could be game to game, could it not?
c) So this means he could be sacked after Huddersfields next game....Maybe even before that.
d) Doesn't that put a different light on the subject?
e) Finally, doesn't that make you as guilty of what you accuse MMM of?:wave:
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?