Collymore Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Some questions Would us gaining promotion be a key in this issue? Surely if we get promotion we will have more revenue to run the stadium also it's more important to have our own branding and identity playing on the big stage. Also If we did join with Tigers, Would we be in a binding contract where we would have to be with them for certain number of years. Would we ever be able to kick them out? Would we ever be able to build another stadium? Seems to me that Tigers are getting the most out of this, and even most of their fans are dead against it!
Ric Flair Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 1. With this supposed super stadium taking place, will there be actions taken to improve the acoustics in the ground as the atmosphere is shocking. 2. Will this proposal and advertisement of it give Craig any money to bring some players in over the next few months? 3. Can you tell Craig Levein that he's a legend and we'd like him to tell us his plans fro Stephen Dawson and Richard Stearman. Thankyou.
Hullfox Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 http://www.petitiononline.com/WSKS2004/petition.htmltell him to look at these people who have signed the petition. a mixed bag of tigers and city who DO NOT want this. 39409[/snapback] The petition currently stands at 557, thats less than 2% of regular match goers.
Ric Flair Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 http://www.petitiononline.com/WSKS2004/petition.htmltell him to look at these people who have signed the petition. a mixed bag of tigers and city who DO NOT want this. 39409[/snapback] The petition currently stands at 557, thats less than 2% of regular match goers. 39429[/snapback] I wonder what percenatge it is of people that are aware of this petition or have access to the internet. That would be interesting.
Hullfox Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 http://www.petitiononline.com/WSKS2004/petition.htmltell him to look at these people who have signed the petition. a mixed bag of tigers and city who DO NOT want this. 39409[/snapback] The petition currently stands at 557, thats less than 2% of regular match goers. 39429[/snapback] I wonder what percenatge it is of people that are aware of this petition or have access to the internet. That would be interesting. 39439[/snapback] Fair point hoofy. Think that the only way of getting a true reflection is to ask people to vote when all the info is out and restrict the vote to those people who attend matches.
breadandcheese Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Ask how a 50/50 split in ownership of the stadium would work in a day-to-day practical setting. I.e. if the stadium needed maintenance and improvement inline with a ruling by say, the football authorities, would the Tigers be expected to pay their half toward the improvements? How would the issue of freeloading be tackled?
King Kyle lcfc Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Q is the groundshare planned for the lifetime of the walkers stadium or do the Tigers have plans to find their own stadium when they can afford to and we can afford to fully buy back the walkers stadium Q Roughly how many jobs will be lost Q Do you plan to integrate changing Rooms and club shops etc
Ikon_Klow Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Tell him that its a great idea because it is based on both commercial reality and common sense. Football is a business, deal with it. Some of you can't have your cake and eat it. I think there are some very decent questions posted and some very stupid ones as well. Tim Davies is no puppet of Paul Mace, if anything I would say that it is the other way around. Tim Davies has a very prudent commercial brain and has no intention of allowing the club to slip into the financial crapper again. In his time, he has steadied the ship and appointed what I believe to be a class manager. I personally am proud of what the Tigers have achieved and have no problems with the groundshare providing the terms are fair and reasonable and in the best commercial interests of the football club. In relation to funding, I believe that the JV company will be able to apply for grants from both the RFU and the FA. Remember, the Tigers are the Manchester United of Rugby and a joint venture could help raise the profile of the football club internationally as well. Regards Ikon
King Kyle lcfc Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 The Tigers are no were near as well known as man utd are go out to japan or the phillipines and ask them if they known leicester Tigers and many wouldn't have and i believe more would of heard of city as football is much more of a commercial sport than rugby
Vocal-Legend!! Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 the Tigers are the Manchester United of Rugby and a joint venture could help raise the profile of the football club internationally as well.Regards Ikon 39470[/snapback] Tigers raise OUR profile. Yeah Right.
Jonesy_rules Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 What will happen to Welford Road? Like a lot of Leicesters historic buildings, e.g. Flibert Street, The Liberty Building, etc will it be knocked down to make room for housing? Personally it shouldn't be, maybe it should be left and turned into somewhere for both reserve teams to play
Cobbo Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Student flats. No way it will be left up... Only recently built that Alliance and Leicester stand too.....a bit like us with the Carling stand, multi million pound stand, less than 10 years old.....let's knock it down and move...
Louise Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 In no particular order (some petty, some angry, some positive): 1. Why were fans not consulted about this proposed merger, even organisations such as the Foxes Trust who as shareholders would have not been allowed to tell people but would perhaps have managed to offer idea to what the supporter reaction would be. 2. What does a City fan get out of this: is Davies guaranteeing that we'll get into the Premiership sooner if this takes place?; will ticket prices come down?; will Davies offer reduced tickets to ST holders that will want to move when their part of the ground is changed? 3. What does Davies think will happen when Tigers do become 'the Man U of Rugby' and decide they don't want to share a stadium with a football team? 4. Will Davies accept that fans do not want green seats in the stadium, so some neutral colour will have to be chosen...which would mean the whole stadium would have to be re-seated as Tigers would not want blue seats. Will the outside of the stadium also be drastically changed as per the pictures from the Mercury, that looks more like a Tigers stadium. 5. Will the stadium have to be drastically redressed for each match, in regards to sponsorship and branding…for example is this the end of the banner on the roof of the stadium showing our history? Will the LCFC logo have to be removed from the stadium for Tigers games and vice versa? 6. Can Davies promise that no Tigers/Foxes merchandise will be made (eg both club logos on shirts and keyrings), and also that the next away shirt will not be a ‘tribute’ to the Tigers by being green. 7. Is this the same special pitch that was until recently forbidden for being 'dangerous'? 8. Where has the money come from for this? Are we spending our 6 million parachute payment from next season? Have we been hording money rather than spending it on the team? Or has some outside investor offered money only if the merger goes ahead? 9. Can the club account for its hypocrisy in trying on one hand to promote the tradition of the club (History DVD, Commemorative Strip, etc.) while simultaneously destroying its individuality? 10. Why does the club now actively look for ways to disrupt the Saturday matchday tradition when previously they have been sympathetic with supporters who could not make it to matches because of changes for Sky/police. 11. Does the club really expect increased attendances on our side of the deal if there are going to be more weekday fixtures? 12. Will the stands be renamed? Will the ticket office be doubled in size to cope with the extra customers? Surely there will be sackings behind the scenes as we will not need all the Tigers staff as well? 13. Will there be other positive changes for the fans, such as will the club make a proper appeal for safe standing as this has been an issue with fans ever since the Walkers opened and would probably soften the blow a lot if achieved. 14. As bills are being split 50/50 what happens when Tigers use the pitch for reserve matches when City is using Kettering/Hinckley? That enough for you Craig?
Highland Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Tim Davies as also E-Mailed me leaving his mobile number,he as also done the same to everybody who E-mailed him on another forum yesterday.
Jonbluefox9 Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Can I just say, if you have something against Mace and Davies keep it until after the game. Both of them will be at Keith Weller's memorial, no doubt, but let's not have any idiots interupt the service with chants aimed at them or anything stupid like that.
Craig Posted 24 November 2004 Author Posted 24 November 2004 I doubt anyone should stoop so low to be honest Jon
Jonbluefox9 Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 I doubt anyone should stoop so low to be honest Jon 39521[/snapback] I know but just making sure because that would make us as bad as the Sunderland fans were.
City Fan Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Ask him "How come Nathan Blake is still employed by the club"?
Scow Posted 24 November 2004 Posted 24 November 2004 Some fantastic questions asked by Louise. Let's hope they get answered.
Foxes_Trust Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 I have - and it's very impressive but it's a petition for those against the merger. The Trust person mentioned the club expected to receive a mixed reaction (I don't believe it will be mixed!), I wondered how many people the trust/club have received a positive response from. 39417[/snapback] Too early to judge - we will be sending out a questionnaire to members via e-mail to gain some hard stats. 709 sign a petition - does that mean to say 22k City fans & 16k Tigers fans haven't for instance? Ok not everybody is on the internet, based on our membership about 1/3rd are, so that's still a lot of missing signatures given links are on all the main message boards. The Trust is currently taking a neutral stance while it consults its members & gains more hard facts from the club.
Bedford Fox Posted 25 November 2004 Posted 25 November 2004 Have you spoke to Tim Davies. If so can we have some feedback
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.