skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Yeah. Its still that SISU couldn't afford it.
Thats the straight answer to the straight question. If you didn't want a straight answer you shouldn't have asked straight question.
Were SISU offered the same deal as Wasps, Yes or No? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter skybluetony176
- Start date
Yeah. Its still that SISU couldn't afford it.
Thats the straight answer to the straight question. If you didn't want a straight answer you shouldn't have asked straight question.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
What £5 million I think they could
Grendel
Well-Known Member
4th post down does it for me.
At the end of the day the fact remains that our owners have NEVER MADE ANY OFFER.......get that through your thick skull please. Even the offer to Higgs was "conditional", upon what exactly I have no idea.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
The team nor the club were/are the issue - I think it is more likely the team/club's owners attitude & approach to gaining the deal that is acceptable to them (& bugger anyone else) that is the issue.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well you clearly are really thick. First they never made an offer and then they did.
Make your mind up Perry Mason.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No, you obviously haven't read it properly:
The £27m Liberty Stadium was built in 2005 with the Swans and the Ospreys both playing there.
The clubs pay a peppercorn rent to the Swansea Stadium Management Company (SSMC) - a body running the stadium which is a partnership between the council and the two clubs.
The clubs also contribute over £1m a year to the running costs of the stadium with any profit made being returned to the teams and the local authority.
It quite clearly says "the clubs", ie suggests that between them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Council doesn't do unencumbered freehold as a rule on such developments. Logical really. But they do do long term leases, whereby they keep ultimate control and ownership. Long term leases are good enough for businesses which intend to stay around long term. They told Joy that, but Joy doesn't negotiate as negotiating wastes time ( source: interview with Les Reid ).
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Errrr....?
I think you'll find every single offer is conditional in some way. Conditional in terms of what you are prepared to pay. It seems in the end what Wasps were prepared to pay for the whole package was less than what SISU were.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
That depends on what SISU's conditions were. It may have been that SISU's conditions devalued the price tag offer to the point that it was worth less than the Wasps offer.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Can't be bothered to get in to a stupid argument tonight Grendel. But read it again. The 6m was not profit. It was purchase invoices. A massive difference. But I think you know the difference. Remember Fisher going on about them?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
No I think they wanted the council to have no involvement at all once a deal was done.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Who said it is unencumbered freehold or nothing?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Don't know - got a quote?
Grendel, quick question. Conn says that he asked Tim if he would accepted the same deal as Wasps. He said no, as the loan would have to be repaid. Which amongst other things confirms that Tim also sees the loan as a part of the purchase cost - albeit to be paid from profits over 20 years. What would be the point of offering SISU the same deal as Wasps? They repeated often enough that they were building a stadium and pursuing a JR against the vendors. That comment as, confirmed on Conn's twitter account, proves that SISU aren't interested in the Ricoh at the 19m price tag. Would you see that as the end of the discussion on whether or not the same deal was offered to SISU as they didn't want that deal anyway?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Please in that article show me where he says no and how that quote actually related directly to that question.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I love how when it suits an argument Fisher, who apparently never tells the truth, has his word taken as gospel.
The problem with asking the question now is there's no way he can get the Ricoh on the same deal as Wasps so if he answers yes we would have liked that deal he's basically saying he messed up, how likely is he to admit to that? To truly know if they would have accepted the deal or not they have to have been offered it at a time the deal was possible. That is the question and unless CCC will give an honest answer, or any answer, we aren't going to know.
Not in his article. He was asked about it by someone on here and someone posted the twitter conversation on here ( thread about article ). It relates to the question in as far as it makes the question absolutely pointless.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The question is pointless as its asked after the event. Also fisher remember is a compulsive liar so I assume he would have took the deal surely ?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
It's amazing that a very simple question that just requires a yes / no answer has generated hundreds of posts across various threads from people desperately trying to defend the council without being able say they did actually offer the same deal to CCFC that they offered to Wasps.
I would suggest that if the answer to the question was yes we would have had a statement to that effect long ago from CCC or at the very least they would have got it out via the Telegraph or CWR.
I would suggest that if the answer to the question was yes we would have had a statement to that effect long ago from CCC or at the very least they would have got it out via the Telegraph or CWR.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Exactly the answer is no.
The offer to Higgs was for their share NOT for the Ricoh......idiot
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So Petrocelli are you now saying wasps own the Ricoh and agree with me they have effectively the freehold?
And? Irrelevant as Tim's actions are consistent with that info.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
The Reverend Skyblue
Well-Known Member
FFS lads its Christmas Eve can't we drop this constant tWasps/ACL/Higgs/council/ joy/Anne/ SISU they said this/thar shite for one night
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
I have read it properly my friend....I never said they didn't "Jointly pay"...I quoted you on you saying "Just over £1m" When it says "Over £1m. Which could be anything up to £2mNo, you obviously haven't read it properly: The £27m Liberty Stadium was built in 2005 with the Swans and the Ospreys both playing there. The clubs pay a peppercorn rent to the Swansea Stadium Management Company (SSMC) - a body running the stadium which is a partnership between the council and the two clubs. The clubs also contribute over £1m a year to the running costs of the stadium with any profit made being returned to the teams and the local authority. It quite clearly says "the clubs", ie suggests that between them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Care to look again?
Last edited:
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The buffoon just won't give in.
I know - will you stop next year? Looking forward to the Sale game - I assume you got freebies - if not PM me and you can even get corporate hospitality which to be fair has always been up there with premier league clubs at the Ricoh
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ stupot07......this is your quote.....Originally Posted by stupot07 View Post It's says "the club's contribute just over £1m". I take that to mean between them.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
You assume right, but I prefer to go with friends.
If I had no friends I would take up your offer.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Anyway....F**k this s**t, good night and a very merry Christmas to all CCFC fans