City Fan Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 There are just 2 things that City Fans will notice if this goes ahead. 1) Some parts of the stadium will change colour. Who cares what colour the seats are? You wont be able to notice the colour when people are sitting in them. The change in colours on the outside of the stadium will be far more noticeable. 2) City Fans will also notice the amount of money this deal would bring. So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour.....
Leicester_Mad Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 and the pitch will stay in perfect condition will it? bollocks with it, even with this new pitch they are getting! if it doesnt matter about the colours of the seats...why change them?
Guest Daniel Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 and the pitch will stay in perfect condition will it? bollocks with it, even with this new pitch they are getting!if it doesnt matter about the colours of the seats...why change them? 40670[/snapback] Well said. I dont want a green say at the Leicester stadium. Theres only one Leicester...
Ash Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 and the pitch will stay in perfect condition will it? bollocks with it, even with this new pitch they are getting!if it doesnt matter about the colours of the seats...why change them? 40670[/snapback] Well said. I dont want a green say at the Leicester stadium. Theres only one Leicester... 40672[/snapback] Don't forget ......... "You can shove your Rugby ball up your arse "
Bilko Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 and the pitch will stay in perfect condition will it? bollocks with it, even with this new pitch they are getting!if it doesnt matter about the colours of the seats...why change them? 40670[/snapback] Well said. I dont want a green say at the Leicester stadium. Theres only one Leicester... 40672[/snapback] Don't forget ......... "You can shove your Rugby ball up your arse " 40675[/snapback] And you wonder why more and more City fans are starting to twig that this is a good idea, if that's the level of debate you can offer!
Anish Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour..... 40564[/snapback] So once we've merged with Tigers we are automatically gauranteed to become a financially secure premiership team?? Oh right, I wasn't aware that it worked like that
Bilko Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour..... 40564[/snapback] So once we've merged with Tigers we are automatically gauranteed to become a financially secure premiership team?? Oh right, I wasn't aware that it worked like that 40721[/snapback] It doesn't. But halving a multi million £ debt, reducing running costs and providing the manager with much needed funds in the future makes it a better bet. So the Tigers (from Leicester, biggest rugby club in the country, well run and financially secure) play at the stadium when we are not using it, so what! The atmosphere, standard of banter and welcome at Welford Road is better so it's them with more to lose!
Jonbluefox9 Posted 27 November 2004 Posted 27 November 2004 Not everyone is against the groundshare as the title of this thread says and as the small number of fans that protested shows. I'm for the groundshare City Fan.
Teeno Posted 28 November 2004 Posted 28 November 2004 There are just 2 things that City Fans will notice if this goes ahead.1) Some parts of the stadium will change colour. Who cares what colour the seats are? You wont be able to notice the colour when people are sitting in them. The change in colours on the outside of the stadium will be far more noticeable. 2) City Fans will also notice the amount of money this deal would bring. So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour..... 40564[/snapback] I know what I would go for aswell. Couldn't give a flying shit what division we are in, I'd still watch them week in week out, unlike some here would! Pride, identity, our own home and a sence of belonging means a lot lot more to me than a short term small cash boost.
Anish Posted 28 November 2004 Posted 28 November 2004 There are just 2 things that City Fans will notice if this goes ahead.1) Some parts of the stadium will change colour. Who cares what colour the seats are? You wont be able to notice the colour when people are sitting in them. The change in colours on the outside of the stadium will be far more noticeable. 2) City Fans will also notice the amount of money this deal would bring. So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour..... 40564[/snapback] I know what I would go for aswell. Couldn't give a flying shit what division we are in, I'd still watch them week in week out, unlike some here would! Pride, identity, our own home and a sence of belonging means a lot lot more to me than a short term small cash boost. 40780[/snapback] Well said mate
Guest Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 It doesn't. But halving a multi million £ debt, reducing running costs and providing the manager with much needed funds in the future makes it a better bet. 40724[/snapback] Outgoings would be reduced, yes, but income would also go down. If you think the stadium lies empty and unused on non-matchdays, think again. Plus, it has already been stated that any funds the club has will go towards the groundshare, and money for transfers wouldn't be seen in the immediate future.
Little Nicky Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 I'm against this now, I think it will solve a short-term problem in that we need more cash, which the deal will initially provide and the tigers will get the larger capacity they've been searching for, but sooner or later (my guess is on sooner) one club is going to want out of the deal, which will cause a hell of a lot of upheaval! What I don't understand really about this venture is how there is going to be any more money raised for the squad in the long run? Where is the gain, the tigers will get their cut for their games, and we will get ours, there will be no majority rule, so what the club are talkin about is beyond me, I don't think it'll happen, but how we get anyone to stand up and notice us is something I can't figure....perhaps we all get a few beachballs with the words "No Groundshare" put on them and wack them over to the directors box!
Hullfox Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 It doesn't. But halving a multi million £ debt, reducing running costs and providing the manager with much needed funds in the future makes it a better bet. 40724[/snapback] Outgoings would be reduced, yes, but income would also go down. If you think the stadium lies empty and unused on non-matchdays, think again. Plus, it has already been stated that any funds the club has will go towards the groundshare, and money for transfers wouldn't be seen in the immediate future. 41217[/snapback] Please please please will somebody tell me by how much outgoings would reduce, by how much income would reduce and how much more additional income could be generated through the groundshare. Have the no people thought about what would happen if the owners wanted to sell the ground at some stage and city couldn't afford to buy it outright themselves? what might happen then?
Hullfox Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 There are just 2 things that City Fans will notice if this goes ahead.1) Some parts of the stadium will change colour. Who cares what colour the seats are? You wont be able to notice the colour when people are sitting in them. The change in colours on the outside of the stadium will be far more noticeable. 2) City Fans will also notice the amount of money this deal would bring. So what will it be? A financially secure premiership team playing in a blue or green stadium, or a poor championship team playing in a blue stadium? I know what I would go for. I care more about the position the club is in, than some changes in the stadium colour..... 40564[/snapback] I know what I would go for aswell. Couldn't give a flying shit what division we are in, I'd still watch them week in week out, unlike some here would! Pride, identity, our own home and a sence of belonging means a lot lot more to me than a short term small cash boost. 40780[/snapback] Pride - Don't suddenly see that disappearing out the window if the groundshare goes ahead. Identity - Reckon we'll still be Leicester City if it happens. Own Home - It will be more ours than it is at the moment. Sense of Belonging - Don't think i'll not feel part of it if we share the ground. Short Term Small Cash Boost - Don't know what the figures are and am unsure when you feel small becomes worthwhile and short term becomes long term.
Guest Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 I agree more needs to be known about the figures, but they will not let us, the fans, anywhere near this information. I have tried to guess, and every way I look at things, it doesn't add up. The only beneficiaries I can see are the Tigers who will have increased gate receipts, and 50% of a more profitable corporate entertainment business. They will also end up owning half of a 32,000 seater stadium at the cost of £8m. To think of the hardship we went through for this place, it does seem somewhat unfair.
Bilko Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 I agree more needs to be known about the figures, but they will not let us, the fans, anywhere near this information.I have tried to guess, and every way I look at things, it doesn't add up. The only beneficiaries I can see are the Tigers who will have increased gate receipts, and 50% of a more profitable corporate entertainment business. They will also end up owning half of a 32,000 seater stadium at the cost of £8m. To think of the hardship we went through for this place, it does seem somewhat unfair. 41358[/snapback] As l understand it we are paying out a hefty sum to service the stadium loan from Teachers. This would be halved in partnership with the Tigers which would presumably free up funds in the future. In addition the costs of running the stadium, rates, utilities etc would be shared reducing costs. It seems to make commercial sense but perhaps you could ask the Direcrtors on Thursday if this is right? Is it so bad for Tigers fans to be using the stadium, they probably live in the same street as you, drink in the same pub and are as passionate about their club as you are!
Guest Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 I agree more needs to be known about the figures, but they will not let us, the fans, anywhere near this information.I have tried to guess, and every way I look at things, it doesn't add up. The only beneficiaries I can see are the Tigers who will have increased gate receipts, and 50% of a more profitable corporate entertainment business. They will also end up owning half of a 32,000 seater stadium at the cost of £8m. To think of the hardship we went through for this place, it does seem somewhat unfair. 41358[/snapback] As l understand it we are paying out a hefty sum to service the stadium loan from Teachers. This would be halved in partnership with the Tigers which would presumably free up funds in the future. In addition the costs of running the stadium, rates, utilities etc would be shared reducing costs. It seems to make commercial sense but perhaps you could ask the Direcrtors on Thursday if this is right? Is it so bad for Tigers fans to be using the stadium, they probably live in the same street as you, drink in the same pub and are as passionate about their club as you are! 41382[/snapback] How do you know the debt will be halved? I would be surprised if it went down that much to be honest. Besides, it doesn't alter the fact our income from the stadium will be reduced. I always hoped one day the club would buy the ground back, then we would make money from it, but now it seems like we will see only half of that. Also I do think it's bad that the Tigers can come in at this stage. They didn't want to know when the stadium was being built. Perhaps with their 'help' back then we might be in a better financial situation today. Maybe I'm being cynical, but it seems odd they they are happy to do this now.
Bilko Posted 29 November 2004 Posted 29 November 2004 I agree more needs to be known about the figures, but they will not let us, the fans, anywhere near this information.I have tried to guess, and every way I look at things, it doesn't add up. The only beneficiaries I can see are the Tigers who will have increased gate receipts, and 50% of a more profitable corporate entertainment business. They will also end up owning half of a 32,000 seater stadium at the cost of £8m. To think of the hardship we went through for this place, it does seem somewhat unfair. 41358[/snapback] As l understand it we are paying out a hefty sum to service the stadium loan from Teachers. This would be halved in partnership with the Tigers which would presumably free up funds in the future. In addition the costs of running the stadium, rates, utilities etc would be shared reducing costs. It seems to make commercial sense but perhaps you could ask the Direcrtors on Thursday if this is right? Is it so bad for Tigers fans to be using the stadium, they probably live in the same street as you, drink in the same pub and are as passionate about their club as you are! 41382[/snapback] How do you know the debt will be halved? I would be surprised if it went down that much to be honest. Besides, it doesn't alter the fact our income from the stadium will be reduced. I always hoped one day the club would buy the ground back, then we would make money from it, but now it seems like we will see only half of that. Also I do think it's bad that the Tigers can come in at this stage. They didn't want to know when the stadium was being built. Perhaps with their 'help' back then we might be in a better financial situation today. Maybe I'm being cynical, but it seems odd they they are happy to do this now. 41383[/snapback] If l read it right Lisa we will in effect be sharing the debt which is a big burden for our club going forward. For the Tigers they will in effect get a new stadium without having to invest the kind of money required to do it from scratch. Rugby is booming at the moment and Tigers are limited in the potential revenue they can get from Welford Road. They constantly sell out there. Plus the Council own it. They want to expand and be established as the biggest club in the country. As l see it they have more to lose in emotional terms as there is a cracking atmosphere at Welford Road and the history, that we left behind at Filbo.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.