Wasps billing CCFC for pitch repairs after Wycombe game (10 Viewers)

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

If it got damaged then fair enough.
Does Les Reid have the actual details that matter ?
What damage and what cost ? Are there details in the rent agreement about this kind of thing? Do CCFC agree they should pay it ?
Seems he has information about a pitch cost and has made the article a regurgitation of every other CCFC issue going.
Hate to see everybody get upset for a non story.

duffer · Mar 7, 2017

pastythegreat said:
Surely IF it was an illegal sale it has to be reversed!
If you bought a phone in the pub and it turns out it was stolen, would the old bill allow you to keep it?!?! Why should something like this be different?

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

As I understand it this is not an illegal sale in the same way as selling goods that don't belong to you. There's no dispute over the ownership of the freehold or the ability to grant a lease to Wasps; the council clearly had those rights.

I believe the JR will be about whether the council followed a proper process in selling the lease to Wasps. The threat here is solely to the council and the possiblity of damages against them if they are shown to have acted unfairly - unless anyone here knows different there is no possiblity of the deal itself being unwound or Wasps suffering any kind of financial penalty.

However it's clearly in Wasps interests to stay close to the council. There are their current and future planning developments, plus lots of free PR of course. That's why they're pushing the club to drop the action, imho, I can see no other reason.

duffer · Mar 7, 2017

Joy Division said:
Do we know if this is actually true or is this based on a Les Reid story?

Are you saying he's printed a lie somewhere? If so, links please, and evidence other than your opinion as to the truth.

If you can't come up with that then what you've just said is just another ill-informed libel hidden behnd a cloak of anonymity.

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
If it got damaged then fair enough.

I thought you went to home games? You would see how damaged it was before the game kicked off.

It was damaged before the game hence their press releases about it.

duffer · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
If it got damaged then fair enough.
Does Les Reid have the actual details that matter ?
What damage and what cost ? Are there details in the rent agreement about this kind of thing? Do CCFC agree they should pay it ?
Seems he has information about a pitch cost and has made the article a regurgitation of every other CCFC issue going.
Hate to see everybody get upset for a non story.

Yeah, I hate to see someone who claims to be a 'fan' pimping himself out for a few quid too. It's embarassing.

If you could arsed to read the article I think it answers a lot of those questions, but you're fully paid for and just here to add a bit of spin.

You've sold your right to comment on Wasps as a neutral, they own you mate. Enjoy the cash, and stop with the adverts unless you want to pay Nick the going rate.

Joy Division · Mar 7, 2017

duffer said:
Are you saying he's printed a lie somewhere? If so, links please, and evidence other than your opinion as to the truth.

If you can't come up with that then what you've just said is just another ill-informed libel hidden behnd a cloak of anonymity.

What are the facts of the charges Wasps have made to CCFC regarding the pitch? When will the grow lamps begin to be used?

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

Joy Division said:
What are the facts of the charges Wasps have made to CCFC regarding the pitch? When will the grow lamps begin to be used?

They are already being used aren't they? Andy Turner went and took pictures of them for an article

Joy Division · Mar 7, 2017

They've been using them for months

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

Nick said:
I thought you went to home games? You would see how damaged it was before the game kicked off.

It was damaged before the game hence their press releases about it.

I'm on about additional damage that we are evidently being charged for above the damage already put down to matches.

Ian1779 · Mar 7, 2017

I think we should actually claim for a reduction in the rent seeing as the playing surface is not up to an acceptable or agreed standard.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

duffer said:
Yeah, I hate to see someone who claims to be a 'fan' pimping himself out for a few quid too. It's embarassing.

If you could arsed to read the article I think it answers a lot of those questions, but you're fully paid for and just here to add a bit of spin.

You've sold your right to comment on Wasps as a neutral, they own you mate. Enjoy the cash, and stop with the adverts unless you want to pay Nick the going rate.

I have read the article and it says absolutely nothing about the damage inflicted or the costs charged.
I have as much right as anybody to comment on CCFC your just a plebe like me in these matters.
I can see it from both sides and would prefer to have some facts before I start going to my wardrobe and putting on my hair shirt.
Keep itching, but enjoying.

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Do you believe Wasps have not paid lawyers to review what implications this legal action has for them?
Do you believe that there are no remedy options available to the Judge if SISU won that could adversely affect them?

They want have paid a thing yet no. How can they there is no action yet

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

pastythegreat said:
Well, I think that's easy nick surely! IF......... big IF, SISU are actually successful in the court cases that CCC illegally sold the ricoh to the outsiders, not only would CCC be in for a whipping, but where does that leave the owners of the stadium? Still owners? Surely not as it was ill gotten gains! (IF they're successful)!

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

Not quite as extreme as that but a modification of terms and conditions of the lease that would adversely affect Wasps.

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

If they do kick the club out let's hope someone digs the fucking pitch up

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Not quite as extreme as that but a modification of terms and conditions of the lease that would adversely affect Wasps.

Only if there was wrong doing.

oldskyblue58 · Mar 7, 2017

just to be a little argumentative, having read the article and given everything else going on I do wonder how long it will be before we see a headline of "CCFC forced out of the Ricoh"

Seems to be an undertow of things heading that way, forced or otherwise, it wont be the owners fault of course it will all be down to Wasps, CCC, etc

Given the restrictions coming on income cant help thinking that it might suit

Terry Gibson's perm · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
If they do kick the club out let's hope someone digs the fucking pitch up

The council would probably say poor old Wasps and offer to pay for it, either that or they will look for a sponsor

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

Terry Gibson's perm said:
The council would probably say poor old Wasps and offer to pay for it, either that or they will look for a sponsor

They've been looking for a sponsor and have got precisely nowhere.

Terry Gibson's perm · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
They've been looking for a sponsor and have got precisely nowhere.

Sorry I meant for the pitch alone, it is obvious they are struggling to get a main sponsor as I said earlier nobody wants to be the second stadium sponsor it always gets called by the first one.

oldfiver · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
If it got damaged then fair enough.
Does Les Reid have the actual details that matter ?
What damage and what cost ? Are there details in the rent agreement about this kind of thing? Do CCFC agree they should pay it ?
Seems he has information about a pitch cost and has made the article a regurgitation of every other CCFC issue going.
Hate to see everybody get upset for a non story.

As it was on SKY I assume there are clips of the pitch at start of play, through the game and after?

Warwickhunt · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
If they do kick the club out let's hope someone digs the fucking pitch up

I think they will have to dig the fucker up when the season ends anyway and start again if I were the WASPS I would start legal action against the company who installed it cos it's not doing the job it was bought for if you ask me.

oldfiver · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
They want have paid a thing yet no. How can they there is no action yet

But I thought WASPS were not talking to CCFC because of the legal action against them

Nick · Mar 7, 2017

oldskyblue58 said:
just to be a little argumentative, having read the article and given everything else going on I do wonder how long it will be before we see a headline of "CCFC forced out of the Ricoh"

Seems to be an undertow of things heading that way, forced or otherwise, it wont be the owners fault of course it will all be down to Wasps, CCC, etc

Given the restrictions coming on income cant help thinking that it might suit

In which case Wasps play into it with the "we refuse to talk" line...

Grendel · Mar 7, 2017

Terry Gibson's perm said:
Sorry I meant for the pitch alone, it is obvious they are struggling to get a main sponsor as I said earlier nobody wants to be the second stadium sponsor it always gets called by the first one.

The amount they want is hilarious. It's worth about 10% of their valuation.

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

Grendel said:
They want have paid a thing yet no. How can they there is no action yet

Of course they would
Notice has been served that the legal action is planned.
Wasps will have sort legal advice on how it impacts them to be named as an interested party.
They would have also sought legal actions on the possible outcomes.
Separately they will have divised a plan of action for dealing with each possible outcome.
They will have also devised a plan to mitigate the risk at source.
However you already know this as you are not that niece to not think it possible.

Nick said:
Or just do what they want and say SISU loud enough = no bad press or backlash.

Why do they not want CCFC as a tenant if they are earning money from it?

oldfiver · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Of course they would
Notice has been served that the legal action is planned.
Wasps will have sort legal advice on how it impacts them to be named as an interested party.
They would have also sought legal actions on the possible outcomes.
Separately they will have divised a plan of action for dealing with each possible outcome.
They will have also devised a plan to mitigate the risk at source.
However you already know this as you are not that niece to not think it possible.

If they have done nothing "wrong" they having nothing to worry about - have they?
Also the legal action is not against them is it?

shmmeee · Mar 7, 2017

duffer said:
Yeah, I hate to see someone who claims to be a 'fan' pimping himself out for a few quid too. It's embarassing.

If you could arsed to read the article I think it answers a lot of those questions, but you're fully paid for and just here to add a bit of spin.

You've sold your right to comment on Wasps as a neutral, they own you mate. Enjoy the cash, and stop with the adverts unless you want to pay Nick the going rate.

Why is it your side of the argument always resorts to "you've been paid"?

You sound like Donald Trump. Some people have different opinions to the mod sanctioned ones on here.

oldfiver · Mar 7, 2017

dongonzalos said:
Why do they not want CCFC as a tenant if they are earning money from it?

If they have factored CCFC in as a future income stream that also affects the Arena Valuation

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

oldfiver said:
I think nothing would happen to the WASPS purchase if it can be shown CCC were "at fault"
Unless it can be shown that WASPS were in some form of agreement with CCC that faciltated the "fault"

By law it can happen. If the decision by a public entity was unlawful. The judge has it in his power as a remedy to reverse the decision.
However I also believe that us the most unlikely option. He could reverse the lease extension though.
Then I imagine Wasps and SISU would be suing the Government for compensation.

dongonzalos · Mar 7, 2017

oldfiver said:
If they have factored CCFC in as a future income stream that also affects the Arena Valuation

So why do they not want them as a tenant?

Moff · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
If it got damaged then fair enough.
Does Les Reid have the actual details that matter ?
What damage and what cost ? Are there details in the rent agreement about this kind of thing? Do CCFC agree they should pay it ?
Seems he has information about a pitch cost and has made the article a regurgitation of every other CCFC issue going.
Hate to see everybody get upset for a non story.

Took you a while to get the Wasps PR'athon going.

Did you not notice the pitch was shite before the game? I thought fans going on the pitch patting down the damage those useless lumps of lard at Wasps do, would be cause for a reward not a bill.

Hopeless attempts at profiteering from a club with its own financial issues.

Moff · Mar 7, 2017

shmmeee said:
Why is it your side of the argument always resorts to "you've been paid"?

You sound like Donald Trump. Some people have different opinions to the mod sanctioned ones on here.

I know you are firing this at Duffer, but I will put in an argument why he may make this accusation.

It might be because Italia has sounded off about how Wasps being here are in his business interests and how much cash he makes etc. (not all the time but he has on occasion) He also suggests that he has close links to the hierarchy of the club, and intimate knowledge of future business deals, suggesting he has some close personal business links to the club. It might be bollocks but if he puts it out there he is going to receive such accusations. I think the words playing with fire and getting burnt come to mind.

Deleted member 5849 · Mar 7, 2017

Moff said:
I know you are firing this at Duffer, but I will put in an argument why he may make this accusation.

It might be because Italia has sounded off about how Wasps being here are in his business interests and how much cash he makes etc. (not all the time but he has on occasion) He also suggests that he has close links to the hierarchy of the club, and intimate knowledge of future business deals, suggesting he has some close personal business links to the club. It might be bollocks but if he puts it out there he is going to receive such accusations. I think the words playing with fire and getting burnt come to mind.

Yeah it's basically only italia it's aimed at, and he claimes to like the 'banter' anyway.

italiahorse · Mar 7, 2017

Moff said:
Took you a while to get the Wasps PR'athon going.

Did you not notice the pitch was shite before the game? I thought fans going on the pitch patting down the damage those useless lumps of lard at Wasps do, would be cause for a reward not a bill.

Hopeless attempts at profiteering from a club with its own financial issues.

So the facts that you are getting uptight about are .................. ?

Moff · Mar 7, 2017

italiahorse said:
So the facts that you are getting uptight about are .................. ?

Sorry where does it say I am uptight. I like writing facts its fun.

Making stuff up as usual are we.

Wasps billing CCFC for pitch repairs after Wycombe game (10 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

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

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency