Why would we be any different (1 Viewer)

ccfckeano · Apr 4, 2019

One thing I can't seem to understand is the assumption that without Ccfc, wasps will struggle to hold onto the Ricoh, but Ccfc at the Ricoh without wasps will mean we can thrive with access to our own revenue etc.

Wasps have on average higher attendances (granted a lot of free tickets) but have access to 100% food and drink at their games. Even if we match attendances if we were to own the ground, we will only have the same access to food and drink revenue that wasps currently have.

In summary, why do wasps need Ccfc playing at the Ricoh, yet we seem to think that Ccfc in the ground alone would be fine?

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

Liquid Gold · Apr 4, 2019

What was the point in yous signing up in 2008 if you didn't want to post? Swatting another one.

In answer to your loaded question, that you don't really deserve, the Ricoh has always run at a loss because it has always had debt attached to it. Taking it without servicing debt would lead to it running at a profit, this would also mean you have access to the valuable casino, F&B, hotel revenues and those generated by events. This is what would have happened if the council went through with the agreed HoT signed with sisu before instead of stringing them along with the intention of bringing London Wasps here.

Ashdown · Apr 4, 2019

Not sure Wasps cannot survive without us........but they received a hell of a good wedge from the 'Compass group' I think it was, so they can have all of their F & B concessions in at the Ricoh. You're talking of footfall of over a 1/4 million people per season disappearing. Surely they could be in breach of this contract.

chiefdave · Apr 4, 2019

Its very simple. ACL was unable to operate profitably with a £14m loan to service. Wasps have come in and more than doubled the debt that is required to be serviced.

Should Wasps / ACL go bust that debt will do with them and the new owner of the lease will be able to run the company without a need to service huge debts.

Captain Dart · Apr 4, 2019

Ashdown said:
Not sure Wasps cannot survive without us........but they received a hell of a good wedge from the 'Compass group' I think it was, so they can have all of their F & B concessions in at the Ricoh. You're talking of footfall of over a 1/4 million people per season disappearing. Surely they could be in breach of this contract.

That contract was terminated last year.
£195m Ricoh Arena hospitality deal ends 12 years early

Nick · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
One thing I can't seem to understand is the assumption that without Ccfc, wasps will struggle to hold onto the Ricoh, but Ccfc at the Ricoh without wasps will mean we can thrive with access to our own revenue etc.

Wasps have on average higher attendances (granted a lot of free tickets) but have access to 100% food and drink at their games. Even if we match attendances if we were to own the ground, we will only have the same access to food and drink revenue that wasps currently have.

In summary, why do wasps need Ccfc playing at the Ricoh, yet we seem to think that Ccfc in the ground alone would be fine?

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

And another one haha

Weber shandwick got the call again?

ccfckeano · Apr 4, 2019

Liquid Gold said:
What was the point in yous signing up in 2008 if you didn't want to post? Swatting another one.

In answer to your loaded question, that you don't really deserve, the Ricoh has always run at a loss because it has always had debt attached to it. Taking it without servicing debt would lead to it running at a profit, this would also mean you have access to the valuable casino, F&B, hotel revenues and those generated by events. This is what would have happened if the council went through with the agreed HoT signed with sisu before instead of stringing them along with the intention of bringing London Wasps here.

Could have just engaged in debate without being a wanker about it mate. I thought forums were where fans can come and discuss different ideas. Not trying to probe a point.

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

ccfckeano · Apr 4, 2019

Nick said:
And another one hahha

Wanker

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

Nick · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
Wanker

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

Try not to be so blatant next time. Put some effort into it.

Liquid Gold · Apr 4, 2019

Nick said:
Try not to be so blatant next time. Put some effort into it.

How quickly are you harvesting them at the moment?

covcity4life · Apr 4, 2019

council c**t

chiefdave · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
Could have just engaged in debate without being a wanker about it mate. I thought forums were where fans can come and discuss different ideas. Not trying to probe a point.

Must just be a coincidence all these posters suddenly appearing to defend the council who created their accounts years ago but have never bothered to post.

covcity4life · Apr 4, 2019

is it like john wick where they get activated

be careful you dont become excommunicado

SkyBlueDom26 · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
One thing I can't seem to understand is the assumption that without Ccfc, wasps will struggle to hold onto the Ricoh, but Ccfc at the Ricoh without wasps will mean we can thrive with access to our own revenue etc.

Wasps have on average higher attendances (granted a lot of free tickets) but have access to 100% food and drink at their games. Even if we match attendances if we were to own the ground, we will only have the same access to food and drink revenue that wasps currently have.

In summary, why do wasps need Ccfc playing at the Ricoh, yet we seem to think that Ccfc in the ground alone would be fine?

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

How come you haven't posted for all these years?

Joy Division · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
One thing I can't seem to understand is the assumption that without Ccfc, wasps will struggle to hold onto the Ricoh, but Ccfc at the Ricoh without wasps will mean we can thrive with access to our own revenue etc.

Wasps have on average higher attendances (granted a lot of free tickets) but have access to 100% food and drink at their games. Even if we match attendances if we were to own the ground, we will only have the same access to food and drink revenue that wasps currently have.

In summary, why do wasps need Ccfc playing at the Ricoh, yet we seem to think that Ccfc in the ground alone would be fine?

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

How many home games do Wasps play compared to CCFC home games?

chiefdave · Apr 4, 2019

Joy Division said:
How many home games do Wasps play compared to CCFC home games?

I'm also interested in how the companies contracted for catering are making any money if they are handing 100% of food and drink over to Wasps.

Liquid Gold · Apr 4, 2019

chiefdave said:
I'm also interested in how the companies contracted for catering are making any money if they are handing 100% of food and drink over to Wasps.

Sisu did it

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Apr 4, 2019

They can’t. That’s why letting ACL going bust and starting again was the better idea

MalcSB · Apr 4, 2019

Ccfc would attract bigger stadium naming deal than wasps. By the way, hasn’t the deal with Ricoh expired and a new one not agreed? I wonder what impact the possibility of no football at a stadium has on naming rights value?

bawtryneal · Apr 4, 2019

Liquid Gold said:
How quickly are you harvesting them at the moment?

Will not be many left to post on here soon

Drive away everybody with a different opinion and rule the roost with "only my opinion counts"

Nick · Apr 4, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Will not be many left to post on here soon

Drive away everybody with a different opinion and rule the roost with "only my opinion counts"

You mean the 3 obvious ones since yesterday who have appeared? Plenty others with different opinions.

Liquid Gold · Apr 4, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Will not be many left to post on here soon

Drive away everybody with a different opinion and rule the roost with "only my opinion counts"

Not really, have you not noticed people arguing on here all the time about everything. It's just when people turn up that obviously have no interest in City it's pretty obvious. We've moved on, it isn't 2014.

bawtryneal · Apr 4, 2019

Nick said:
You mean the 3 obvious ones since yesterday who have appeared? Plenty others with different opinions.

Why does it matter Nick

If you don`t like there style or opinion then just ignore.

Whilst there may be some WUMs,it doesn`t apply to everybody

Lots of people prefer not to post than be ridiculed

Nick · Apr 4, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Why does it matter Nick

If you don`t like there style or opinion then just ignore.

Whilst there may be some WUMs,it doesn`t apply to everybody

Lots of people prefer not to post than be ridiculed

Are you being naive enough to think it's just wumming?

Its not about style or opinion, it's about how blatant it is

Skybluefaz · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
Wanker

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

Rumbled

chiefdave · Apr 4, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Why does it matter Nick

It matters because we know from documents shown in court that a PR company has been engaged to deceive fans in favour of ACL and the council.

Why should we just accept that?

Liquid Gold · Apr 4, 2019

Skybluefaz said:
Rumbled

He doesn't know that nobody who supports coventry city has used that word since the wanker incident in 2008

Nick · Apr 4, 2019

chiefdave said:
It matters because we know from documents shown in court that a PR company has been engaged to deceive fans in favour of ACL and the council.

Why should we just accept that?

The 3 in the last 2 days are just co incidence again!

Skybluefaz · Apr 4, 2019

Liquid Gold said:
He doesn't know that nobody who supports coventry city has used that word since the wanker incident in 2008

Imagine not knowing that!

vow · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
Wanker

Skybluefaz said:
Rumbled

hmmm, he's got a point though......

vow · Apr 4, 2019

@block16 Just tried to like your post, but it disapeared?

Did you delete it?

Fergusons_Beard · Apr 4, 2019

bawtryneal said:
Why does it matter Nick

If you don`t like there style or opinion then just ignore.

Whilst there may be some WUMs,it doesn`t apply to everybody

Lots of people prefer not to post than be ridiculed

Neil-it’s just not as simple as that anymore.

This place has space for lots of opinions and fair debate. In fact from what I see it’s actively encouraged and never shut down.

What the space has a problem with is folks purporting to be City fans trying to sway the argument by posting shit. When they haven’t posted in 3 years than I can see why it gets called out.

You are an intelligent bloke and a true city fan-surely you can see past the herd and notice when posts look a little bit dodgy?

#PUSB

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

CanadianCCFC · Apr 4, 2019

ccfckeano said:
One thing I can't seem to understand is the assumption that without Ccfc, wasps will struggle to hold onto the Ricoh, but Ccfc at the Ricoh without wasps will mean we can thrive with access to our own revenue etc.

Wasps have on average higher attendances (granted a lot of free tickets) but have access to 100% food and drink at their games. Even if we match attendances if we were to own the ground, we will only have the same access to food and drink revenue that wasps currently have.

In summary, why do wasps need Ccfc playing at the Ricoh, yet we seem to think that Ccfc in the ground alone would be fine?

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk

S*** on the wasps

hopesprings · Apr 4, 2019

As an aside I do know that a few years back the "spend" per head on food and and beverages at rugby matches and football matches was massively different. I remember reading that Watford fans on average spent around £3 per visit (did say a few years back) whilst Saracens fans spent nearer £11 and it was similar at Madjeski for Reading and London Irish. Biggest difference I guess is that you can drink in the stands at rugby matches !

Skybluefaz · Apr 4, 2019

vow said:
hmmm, he's got a point though......

I'm not sure he does. I personally do not know what or how we would do financially were we the owner of the ricoh with access to all the revenues etc. I do know that it can't be worse than trying to operate with an arm tied behind our back as we do at the moment.

Why would we be any different (1 Viewer)

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

New Member

New 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

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency