Jon the Hat Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 The reason why I don't want the ground share at present is because it's a short term fix. Getting some cash in, that the current board and manager would fritter away and then we'd be left permanently screwed. I'd be very concerned if MM wants to raise the groundshare again and i'd want to know his reasons why but with him running the club instead of our current lot, it wouldn't be quite as detrimental. Still not keen on that though. Disagree. The cost savings are there every single season that we share the ground. You would notice it if someone paid half your mortgage until it ran out. This is not a short term measure. I know we would also share the revenue from facilities for non matchday activity, but that is so much less than the costs it is irrelevant.
davieG Posted 15 December 2006 Author Posted 15 December 2006 Disagree. The cost savings are there every single season that we share the ground. You would notice it if someone paid half your mortgage until it ran out. This is not a short term measure. I know we would also share the revenue from facilities for non matchday activity, but that is so much less than the costs it is irrelevant. But it is short term at best, I know it's a big yhing this mortgage but when it is eventually paid off thne the revenues from non match day events will be forever halved. I don't see the expenses being that much reduced either. I'd really like someone to come out and publish some real facts and figures because it all sounds very marginal to me.
Ric Flair Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Disagree. The cost savings are there every single season that we share the ground. You would notice it if someone paid half your mortgage until it ran out. This is not a short term measure. I know we would also share the revenue from facilities for non matchday activity, but that is so much less than the costs it is irrelevant. I am aware of that, but what I was describing as a short term fix was the fact that the board were considering the groundshare last year as it would raise £8 million I think it was that the club could then use to strengthen the team and chellenge for promotion. That in reason sounds ok, £8 million is a lot of money and spent wisely the club could have been in the premiership and everyone's laughing. But with the track record of our board and managers, that money would or could have easily been wasted and then all we've got to show for it is a tenant who's moved in on the limelight and some crap assets decorating the property. As you've said it's like having someone pay half your mortgage, but it also means you don't own your house on your own and there may become conflicts of interest at times. As i've said, under the right ownership, it might not be that bad, but under our current lot the £8 million and saved costs, is a short term fix because that money would be blown and they'd still cause more problems further down the line and be in the shit again. This time without the option of completely owning the ground (subject to paying the mortgage off) and the Tigers could possibly see an opportunity to shaft the club over and kick us out for not paying our way. Leaving us groundless and well and truely up the shitter. All hypothetical of course, but that's my fears with our current board.
Webbo Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 People keep saying increased profits but no one seems to say how or where from. Oh and how do we halve our costs? obviously the 2 clubs would only need 1 set of ground staff, ticket staff, shop , cleaners etc. also though i don't really like rugby, i like to see tigers doing well.
drew Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Do you seriously think a 48er is going to turn round to the rest of the angels and say something like this: 'Er chaps...I've had this briiliant idea. You know all those shares we got in return for stumping up to prevent LCFC going into liquidation? Well why don't you give ALL your shares to moi for say um... half price and I'll chat up a few bank managers to see if they'll give me the funds to pay you? Do you think aforementioned 48er would be dead in his chair before completing that last sentence or do you think he would make good his escape from the boardroom but minus his testicles? Isn't that what Mandaric is doing and he is and outside'er'. Then again what the bid contains when it arrives is all pure speculation. Unless you have inside knowledge into MM's mind, which i doubt. The opportunity is/was there for someone to do the same. It doesn’t seem that the board were adverse to the bid, especially in their current predicament. If MM is here to make money I bloody well hope he does, because I am sure that will mean he has been successful. A lot more successful than our current board, that have presided over a year on year downfall. Carrying on and insinuating that MM is here to asset strip us is not right. How do you know what the board have stipulated? They may of had the training ground put into trust to protect it.
Ric Flair Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 obviously the 2 clubs would only need 1 set of ground staff, ticket staff, shop , cleaners etc. also though i don't really like rugby, i like to see tigers doing well. They might only need 'one' set of each staff but they'll need more staff employed as the business will increase by double. So that's not strictly true is it?
Ric Flair Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Isn't that what Mandaric is doing and he is and outside'er'. Then again what the bid contains when it arrives is all pure speculation. Unless you have inside knowledge into MM's mind, which i doubt. The opportunity is/was there for someone to do the same. It doesn’t seem that the board were adverse to the bid, especially in their current predicament. If MM is here to make money I bloody well hope he does, because I am sure that will mean he has been successful. A lot more successful than our current board, that have presided over a year on year downfall. Carrying on and insinuating that MM is here to asset strip us is not right. How do you know what the board have stipulated? They may of had the training ground put into trust to protect it. Yes, but there isn't any shareholder that has more than a small percentage of shares to do this. The option was for them to put more money in to raise cash. It still meant the set-up was the same. I also don't think Chandler is making out he's here to asset strip, but he see's that he can get a club with excellent facilities for a pittance and he obviously thinks he can steer us in to the premiership for not a lot of money and then get his hands on £50 million per year. Although it sounds like gluttony, i'm more than happy for him to do it if it brings us success. He's shrewd and very, very clever.
Strokes Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Is he here yet? errr no, expected time of arrival........... 4.30pm.
Ric Flair Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Is he here yet? When I saw your name as the last poster in this thread I thought you'd found some interesting news, you often do. To my disappointment you've not Hahaaa. Oh well, let's hope The Mercury have some news for us later.
Louise Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 When I saw your name as the last poster in this thread I thought you'd found some interesting news, you often do. To my disappointment you've not Hahaaa. Oh well, let's hope The Mercury have some news for us later. Sorry Ric. For you: 5 Live are reporting that we should hear something today. (although I don't know if they're doing that because they know something or because they just remember the date MM gave)
Ric Flair Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Sorry Ric. For you: 5 Live are reporting that we should hear something today. (although I don't know if they're doing that because they know something or because they just remember the date MM gave) I'll cling on to it being that they know something!
davieG Posted 15 December 2006 Author Posted 15 December 2006 obviously the 2 clubs would only need 1 set of ground staff, ticket staff, shop , cleaners etc. also though i don't really like rugby, i like to see tigers doing well. Actually that's not true as there will be twice as much of everything to do. The pitch willrequire more time and more intensive treatment. There would need to be 2 shops, the cleaners will be needed after both sets of matches, the ticket office can't cope with the football tickets, so that's patently not true.
Steven Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Rumours on other sites about a "Press Conference" today.
Chandler Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Isn't that what Mandaric is doing and he is and outside'er'. Then again what the bid contains when it arrives is all pure speculation. Unless you have inside knowledge into MM's mind, which i doubt. The opportunity is/was there for someone to do the same. It doesn’t seem that the board were adverse to the bid, especially in their current predicament. If MM is here to make money I bloody well hope he does, because I am sure that will mean he has been successful. A lot more successful than our current board, that have presided over a year on year downfall. Carrying on and insinuating that MM is here to asset strip us is not right. How do you know what the board have stipulated? They may of had the training ground put into trust to protect it. may have Where did I say that MM was an asset stripper? I said he was picking up the club for a song (a 'blowback' opportunity resulting from administration). LCFC has few assets to strip. But it can offer a massive return on investment if it makes it to The Premiership. Normally you have to pay through the nose for that type of opportunity. That's why the deal is going to go through (but don't be surprised if a few convenient accounting quibbles allow MM to beat the 48ers down further). Note to Foxes Trust - For LCFC's 'existing reserves' read 'overdraft.'
drew Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Didn't the original board get the club for a song then? They have had their chance. You are insinuating that he wll pocket the premiership money (if we get there) by calling it ROI.
Brummie-FOX Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Rumours on other sites about a "Press Conference" today. Oohaaaa which sites!?!?
Chandler Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Didn't the original board get the club for a song then? They have had their chance. You are insinuating that he wll pocket the premiership money (if we get there) by calling it ROI. Will you stop second guessing my view on MM? You're becoming a reet pain. Show me where I've stated that I opposed his bid.
Webbo Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Will you stop second guessing my view on MM? You're becoming a reet pain. Show me where I've stated that I opposed his bid. i think a lot of what you say is guess work, how ever i think your probably on the right lines.
Babylon Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 Oohaaaa which sites!?!? It was a joke so don't get too excited.
Chrysalis Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 if we shared the ground we'd halve our costs and increase profits. apart from the state of the pitch, this would be a win win situation. its a short term fix and the stadium lose what identitiy it has, would all the seats be blue? would we have tigers pictures etc.? would there be a rugby sports shop? and of course the state of the pitch? do we share revenue from off field events? have to get permission of them for further development of ground in future?
Webbo Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 its a short term fix and the stadium lose what identitiy it has, would all the seats be blue? would we have tigers pictures etc.? would there be a rugby sports shop? and of course the state of the pitch? do we share revenue from off field events? have to get permission of them for further development of ground in future? does it really matter what colour the seats are? all the off field events that happen at welford rd would happen here. any ground development would be in their interest too.
mancunianfox Posted 15 December 2006 Posted 15 December 2006 does it really matter what colour the seats are? Yes.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.