City Fan Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 But Leicester City fans aren't even thinking about how it will help the club. You lot are just thinking of the disadvantages without realising that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. We will be better off financially, and if we don't go up this season, Levein will no doubt have some dosh to spend to ensure we go up next season. Or if we do go up this season, Levein will have some dosh to spend to try and keep us up.
Vocal-Legend!! Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 get in the real world. the club and tigers will pocket all the money. Levein will see jack. just like o'neill + adams only one manager ever had money and he wasted it. they wont do that again. Sod the money. It will never emerge. ONE TEAM ONE HOME LEICESTER CITY.
Guest Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 City have already said that any money will be tied up in this venture, so no money for Craig regardless of the division.
City Fan Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 As a City Fan, I am FOR the agreement. But as a Tigers Fan, I have mixed emotions because there will be no standing!
Teeno Posted 24 November 2004 Author Posted 24 November 2004 As a City Fan, I am FOR the agreement. 39542[/snapback] Just like the board seeing $$ Does Identity, history and independance of the club not mean anything to you?
bren Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 As a City Fan, I am FOR the agreement. 39542[/snapback] Just like the board seeing $$ Does Identity, history and independance of the club not mean anything to you? 39547[/snapback] Has anyone thought that it is because we are in more trouble financially than a lot of us actually know? Are we struggling to make payments?
City Fan Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Does Identity, history and independance of the club not mean anything to you? 39547[/snapback] Well yeah, but the future means more to me....
Bilko Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Does Identity, history and independance of the club not mean anything to you? 39547[/snapback] Well yeah, but the future means more to me.... 39593[/snapback] Those of you opposed to getting into a financial arrangement and ground share with the Tigers were not manning the barricades when we mortgaged our future to an American financial institution and built the stadium. At least our partners this time will be a LEICESTER club supported by LEICESTER people. If you don't like the fact that our game is now about £'s then you really are living in the days of long shorts and side burns. This is a win, win for the city of Leicester. Why do you think Craig Levein is backing it!
Guest Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Those of you opposed to getting into a financial arrangement and ground share with the Tigers were not manning the barricades when we mortgaged our future to an American financial institution and built the stadium. At least our partners this time will be a LEICESTER club supported by LEICESTER people. If you don't like the fact that our game is now about £'s then you really are living in the days of long shorts and side burns. This is a win, win for the city of Leicester. Why do you think Craig Levein is backing it! 39604[/snapback] A fair point if we were borrowing capital from the Tigers, which I doubt very much. Out of the frying pan, methinks.
Bilko Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Those of you opposed to getting into a financial arrangement and ground share with the Tigers were not manning the barricades when we mortgaged our future to an American financial institution and built the stadium. At least our partners this time will be a LEICESTER club supported by LEICESTER people. If you don't like the fact that our game is now about £'s then you really are living in the days of long shorts and side burns. This is a win, win for the city of Leicester. Why do you think Craig Levein is backing it! 39604[/snapback] A fair point if we were borrowing capital from the Tigers, which I doubt very much. Out of the frying pan, methinks. 39615[/snapback] Fair enough Lisa, but getting together with the Tigers will allow us to re-structure the loan and as l understand it we will be more finanically secure as a result. We will also have more potential on the revenue side. I agree there are a lot of questions to be asked but if it is a good deal for the City we should not reject it because it means sharing the stadium. I would take the point if it was Forest or Derby we were sharing with this but it's the Tigers. It will be Leicester people with their bums on the seats, should it matter if they have a blue shirt or a green one?
Guest Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Those of you opposed to getting into a financial arrangement and ground share with the Tigers were not manning the barricades when we mortgaged our future to an American financial institution and built the stadium. At least our partners this time will be a LEICESTER club supported by LEICESTER people. If you don't like the fact that our game is now about £'s then you really are living in the days of long shorts and side burns. This is a win, win for the city of Leicester. Why do you think Craig Levein is backing it! 39604[/snapback] A fair point if we were borrowing capital from the Tigers, which I doubt very much. Out of the frying pan, methinks. 39615[/snapback] Fair enough Lisa, but getting together with the Tigers will allow us to re-structure the loan and as l understand it we will be more finanically secure as a result. We will also have more potential on the revenue side. I agree there are a lot of questions to be asked but if it is a good deal for the City we should not reject it because it means sharing the stadium. I would take the point if it was Forest or Derby we were sharing with this but it's the Tigers. It will be Leicester people with their bums on the seats, should it matter if they have a blue shirt or a green one? 39620[/snapback] Until I see evidence backing this notion, I will remain unconvinced. At the moment, I can see positives for the Tigers only.
Bilko Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Those of you opposed to getting into a financial arrangement and ground share with the Tigers were not manning the barricades when we mortgaged our future to an American financial institution and built the stadium. At least our partners this time will be a LEICESTER club supported by LEICESTER people. If you don't like the fact that our game is now about £'s then you really are living in the days of long shorts and side burns. This is a win, win for the city of Leicester. Why do you think Craig Levein is backing it! 39604[/snapback] A fair point if we were borrowing capital from the Tigers, which I doubt very much. Out of the frying pan, methinks. 39615[/snapback] Fair enough Lisa, but getting together with the Tigers will allow us to re-structure the loan and as l understand it we will be more finanically secure as a result. We will also have more potential on the revenue side. I agree there are a lot of questions to be asked but if it is a good deal for the City we should not reject it because it means sharing the stadium. I would take the point if it was Forest or Derby we were sharing with this but it's the Tigers. It will be Leicester people with their bums on the seats, should it matter if they have a blue shirt or a green one? 39620[/snapback] Until I see evidence backing this notion, I will remain unconvinced. At the moment, I can see positives for the Tigers only. 39622[/snapback] I feel it will be a good thing but you are right to want to find out more. You'll have to keep me informed as l live in a remote village in Cumbria!
Jordan Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 Foxes trust do your job your meant to be here for the fans and its obvious the fans dont want a ground share so tell the club to re consider 39130[/snapback] With say 22,000 City Fans & 16,000 Tigers, so far 298 have signed the petition. It is too early to declare that 'all fans' oppose it. The Trust will not come out with a knee jerk reaction We will continue to gather opinion over the next few days & will also be asking the club some searching questions on the benefits to LCFC prior to making any public stance 39146[/snapback] From what I've read, FT has arranged for an open meeting between the club and fans which will take place in the near future. This is a very passionate issue, but I have to say well done to FT for keeping cool and trying to making sure both sides will get to express their opinions in a civil manner/
Guest Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 I feel it will be a good thing but you are right to want to find out more. You'll have to keep me informed as l live in a remote village in Cumbria! 39628[/snapback] Thank goodness for the Internet, eh?
Dunc Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 Has anyone read Craig's post? Matchday money will be given to the team who is playing, all other profits are split 50/50. This coupled with 50% lower running costs will be a significant increase over time for CL. Its not rocket science is it?
Louise Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 Has anyone read Craig's post? Matchday money will be given to the team who is playing, all other profits are split 50/50.This coupled with 50% lower running costs will be a significant increase over time for CL. Its not rocket science is it? 39846[/snapback] How will it be 50% lower running costs? It will be used twice as much..
Steven Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 Has anyone read Craig's post? Matchday money will be given to the team who is playing, all other profits are split 50/50.This coupled with 50% lower running costs will be a significant increase over time for CL. Its not rocket science is it? 39846[/snapback] How will it be 50% lower running costs? It will be used twice as much.. 39868[/snapback] Not quite. For re-occuring running costs it will be a 50% saving (gas, leccy and alike) but for costs associated with an individual game, I would expect the side playing that game to bear those costs. B) On the other hand I do think there will be additional costs that both Clubs will have to bear because extra games have been played. There will be savings, but not 50%.
Louise Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 How will there be a 50% saving on electricity when its going to be used twice as much? Surely we'll just be paying the same amount..?
shen Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 How will there be a 50% saving on electricity when its going to be used twice as much? Surely we'll just be paying the same amount..? 39891[/snapback] well, no, as the Tigers will take over half of the costs... it wont be used twice as much either. Its not like they shut off the electricity on weekdays! So the amount thats paid in all is only slightly more (I assume). We might save around 35-40% of such costs...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.