bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
OK, so please explain how this would have been different if the club owned the Ricoh over then last few years?
Losses would be £55m rather than £70m?
What a success that would be!
With fans who take the approach of the above two we frankly deserve all we get. Unless the attitude changes we will never improve regardless of ownership.
That is why many supporters (not people with my thought processes) have to accept some responsibility for the current plight.
Irrelevant, as I was speaking in general terms summarising the views expressed on this forum, ie many take a Moral stance, others take a practical, it won't work, stance.I think your talking guff about morality because I bet when we played Leon best having knowingly refused to pay his transfer fee you wouldn't have cared less. Would you?
Grendel, this has been explained before.
Some people object on moral grounds to defaulting on a legal debt.
Other people object because they don't see how it can work without lots of trouble.
You disagree, presumably because you think it is moral to break an "unfair" rental agreement AND you think the club can win this fight without killing the club they are custodians of.
Most, I think, disagree with you.
Time will tell.
Grendel, do you think it was morally wrong for Ray Ranson to sell Gary Borrowdale for decent money despite knowing he was rubbish?
OK, so please explain how this would have been different if the club owned the Ricoh over then last few years?
Losses would be £55m rather than £70m?
What a success that would be!
OK, so please explain how this would have been different if the club owned the Ricoh over then last few years?
Losses would be £55m rather than £70m?
What a success that would be!
No it was great business. There was a buyer and a seller. I do anticipate the response to the answer of this curious question by the way.
Why wouldn't it be a success? Debt is irrelevant. Revenue is king.
<p>
Yes debt is irrelevant if it can be serviced. However the debt has grown year on year, and we all know the rent isn't the only reason.
No one is saying it's all about rent, it isn't, but it's certainly important.
<p>
The response being if someone is stupid enough to pay over the odds for something who is at fault?
Yes it was predictable. However it is mystifying. If you out the club first and support the club you should surely be outraged at the fact that we have been royally ripped off. Did he go to QPR? What do you think the fans said? "What did we pay anything for that twat for?" Or "fair play Coventry we paid over the odds but that us our fault?"
<p>
Important yes, but no the one and only problem.
If you believed Tim Fisher we would be in the Champions League by now if it wasn't for the stadium issue.
Its an issue stirred up by sisu to try and deflect criticism of their own failings.
ZzzZzzzzzzzzz.
<p>
I imagine the Qpr fans anger was directed at their own club.
No it is critical and I don't think it should be underestimated. We paid £1.3m p/a in rent over 7 years, that's 9.1m in rent alone, now, add the missed money in revenues to it, take the 100k, about 700k, but, this ranges from 100-300k p/a because we had higher attendances when we first moved in, moving to the RICOH has cost us, without any building costs, c. £10m over the 7 years we paid rent, thats not including the debt we'll pay ACL and the revenue we've missed out on this season - and people wonder why we've had to sell talent like Fox, Dann and Best!? That clearly isn't sustainable whether you like it or not. If we were at HR, that's money we could spend elsewhere (I grant that some this 10m would have to go on maintaining HR etc.)
Worst of all, not one season since we've left HR, we've had an attendance that matches the max capacity of HR! Total waste of time and money!
Tim Fisher via The Guardian said:ACL have been robust in their external statements that they are not in negotiations with us anymore and that negotiations have stopped," Fisher said. "We are at a tipping point and insolvent liquidation cannot be reasonably avoided."They need to re-enter negotiations pronto or we file. We'll have no option because there would not be reasonable probability of avoiding insolvency liquidation. We entered the twilight zone on the 22 February [when ACL said negotiations were off] and the twilight zone will become the dead of night very soon unless negotiations are re-entered. We have to show our lawyers that negotiations are ongoing."
And why we need an Academy
Most important part of any club, although it's particularly neglecting in the English top tier. Barcelona had 6-7 (maybe more?) academy players in the CL winning lineups.
Most important part of any club, although it's particularly neglecting in the English top tier. Barcelona had 6-7 (maybe more?) academy players in the CL winning lineups.
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?