You know we're not. Give it a rest can you? :facepalm:
Because the agreement has not made, so is still at the higher level...so, no.
According to jan the agreed rent is £400,000 less food revenues so its £300,000 this included all march day costs which are about £10,000 per game.
Given we have had I believe at least 7 home cup games this season we will pay £300,000.
So we are now paying the rent aren't we?
i thought that matchday costs of £10k were in addition to the rent, not part of it?
I might be wrong on this though.
That's my assumption but according to Jan no -- so this is my point.
No we are not.
Rent can only be paid as rent.
Are SISU claiming we are paying the rent?
Couple of questions for you personaly
Do you believe Sisu have CCFC's long term interest at heart? I believe if you are cast adrift on a lifeboat and even if the lifeboat has holes in it you are best to stay in the boat as it has a better chance of reaching land especially if you cannot swim. They are the only game in town.
Do you believe that SISU are doing a good job at running the club? If so what evidence do you have to support this? No I don't. Then again neither did Joe Elliot and his useless crew (worse - almost nankrupted us) and certainly were no worse than Richardson, McGinnity et al. I think it is difficult to make a case for any positive ownership experiences in 40 years.
Do you believe that SISU have always been open and honest with all their statements to the supporters? No about the same as the above mentioned. Did you believe everything Bryan Richardson said just because he did not have an office in Mayfair?
Do you believe that ACL - a not for profit organisation - (the owners of which are governed by legislation and charity commission rules)- would lie and decieve the people of Coventry? And if so what is their motive? The initial agreement was commercially unworkable for the club, uncompetitive and unjustifiable. The current situation arises out of this consequence as they took deliberate advantage of an institution in severe difficulties. The Treaty of Versailles was not intended to create the rise in Fasciscm and World War Two but this without argument was its consequence
Either have the balls to deal with OSB58's response - which is significantly more candid than your childish intentions deserve - or cease this folly.
Put up. Shut up. Please
Grendel are you also sb07jon ?
If Sisu were paying match day costs of 10k per game would TF not be shouting it from the roof tops?
I think TF has stated this in the past, although in way as to imply that CCFC is paying "something" - even though it is in the agreement anyway.
Answered........
The rent that has been agreed as would be acceptable we are told by both ACL and TF is £400k. It hasnt been written into contract as yet.
The F&B's are not actually part of the lease so do not write down the acceptable rent of £400k at all. If the club made no sales of F&B's in a season then the rent would be £400k. Similarly if it made £200k profit then the rent would still be £400k.
Currently the original lease stands and included in that lease are elements that are incurred on a match to match basis. Ordinarily part of the overall Lease and Licence charge. Rent is set at a figure, with amounts and dates of payment stipulated...... if those precise terms not met then legally any other payments made are not rent. Both ACL and TF refer to them as matchday costs not rent so we surely should accept their description? From what I understand those payments made will be taken into account when settlement of back rent is made.
All the time the rent is either not paid or the settlement not made the debt just gets bigger and quite likely incurrs interest at an amount well above high street bank rate
Councillors, others etc who mix up rent with others sources going the other way are helping no one understand what is there. The net effect of things in total may well be substantially lower but the proposed base L1 rent is £400k
Correct - as I and others have argued many times, SISU's only chance of salvaging their investment is to get the Ricoh onthe cheap and sell it at a big profit - hence they are trying to bankrupt ACL and pick the Ricoh up out of liquidation. The rent dispute is just a pretext to do that.
FFS Enough already!!! What difference does it make really... there is no deal as yet - it will come and the bloody egos of all those involved will come out and say what great guys they are and how great a deal they've done etc etc until then can we PLEASE stop banging on about every minute detail - truth is we don't know and we won't know for a while so lets just concentrate on the team and the next few games
90% of threads are discussing such things.
I know pal but we're just going round in bloody circles here - isn't it driving you up the wall?
Says the man who when he cannot answer your questions starts quoting types of sausage at you.
But that will never happen as Mutton has said SISU will never get any part of the Ricoh, so like it or you're stuck with them.
Well if ACL stick to their guns and effectively force SISU out, then SISU will be gone - if they don't buckle on the rent etc and stare down SISU, then SISU will have a choice of either accepting a big loss now or having to accept a big loss later - they will have to cut their losses and leave.
So.what's going on? :S
Cba to read thru
Grendel's Mrs has gone out to do the shopping, the ITV2 re-runs of Jeramy Kyle have finished; so bored, he's decided to bang the same old, tired drum.
That's it really
Are you spying on me?
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?