Interesting capacity statistics....

[Not Nigel 0]

Til,

I was under the impression that it was £1m + 10% of all profits that the hotel generates.

But if you are honestly saying that we effectively gave away the hotel land for FREE, then that is even worse.

Where would City1st''s argument sit then? We needed money so gave away the land for free?

[Not Nigel 0]

"Where would the money have came from. You are still unwilling to tell us"

£60m of Sky money should be stay up.

"The land was not sold, it was given on a lease for £1m, Where would that money have come from?"

My point throughout has been that had it not been for the serious financial mismanagement of the club under the Doncaster era we would not have found ourselves in a position where we were desperate for £1m. I thought I''d made that pretty clear. Perhaps you should answer this question: How much debt did Doncaster add through his ill-fated land acquisition, and how much interest have we paid so far on that debt? Doncaster was terrible at business, how else can you explain how we ended up with a piece of land which was in negative equity having been purchased with a whopping great loan with a less than attractive interest rate? Come on City1st, you have read the accounts haven''t you?

"Neil Doncaster did not run the club nor does David McNally it is ran by the board of directors so stop trying to personalise decisions"

Fine. If it wasn''t for the incompetence of Mumby, Doncaster, Smith, and Wynn-Jones, the sale of the the land in the corner of the ground would not have been necessary.

"If as claimed we were close to bankruptcy in 2009, perhaps you might tell us whether you would have been on this forum wobbling your gob off about the empty space between the two stands being more important than the £1m received"

If "as claimed" we were close to bankruptcy in 2009 then the club should consider refunding the News of the World for the financial settlement given after they claimed that we were close to bankruptcy in 2009.

"You would do better next time to have the curtesy towards the rest of the forum to check your facts BEFORE you come spouting off on here"

The only dubious statement made by me thus far is a claim that McNally stated that he wouldn''t have sold the land in the corner. I will acknowledge that I may be wrong about that, subject to me finding the time to hunt for the source.

"as virtually nothing you have posted (even the OP) has been at all accurate"

Rubbish. I''ll say the same to you.

"Guesswork and dubious misinformation that you have had to back pedal from"

What have I backpeddeled from? With the exception of one potentially non-existent but potentially existent McNally quote which doesn''t actually detract from the debate at hand?

[Bill 1,788]

dearie, dearie me

 

has no one ever explained the meaning of the words ''when you are in a hole stop digging'' - it is hard to know where to start with your confused and contradictory twaddle

 

however, starting from the beginning ypur original OP was wrong as the up to date figures show -

http://itv.stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html

you could and should have checked these BEFORE you started ranting on here

 

"If we didn''t have that f''in hotel in the corner we could probably have built a double tier corner holding a good 2500"

We could not, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you. No one would lend us the money. At the time handing over the land on lease (not selling as you erroneously keep claiming) for £1m and taking a 30% stake in the hotel seemed the best deal at the time. The decision was made in light of both the club finances and the attendances then. I suggest you check both.

 

"We spent more money than any other club in the Championship on AGENTS FEES in two consecutive seasons, over half a million one season"

Incorrect as figures from the Agents Fees Report by the Football League will show (check with Google as they are pdf files)

 

"McNally has stated rather firmly that had he have been the CEO he wouldn''t have built a hotel in that corner. With McNally being the one who had to go through the books and bare witness to the wastes of the Green, Roeder, Gunn tenures.... I''ll trust his judgement."

You accept that this is merely a fabrication on your part, as is the consequent speculation about what would have happened had McNally been CEO. This has been the key point for you to hang all the rest of your worthless guff upon.  Decisions were made then as was considered the best option at the time. It is not only innaccurate to claim somekind of benevolent hindsight but also idiotic and an insulting to other fans. 

You further seem unable to grasp the difference between  lease and sale. Just as you had no idea about how we own 30% of the hotel, not receive 10% of the profits. Similarly you post up rubbish about us reciving £60m of Sky money. We don''t. Season 2011/12 we received around £39m from the Premier league in respect of TV rights sold to broadcasting companies - Sky being on of them. We do not know how much we will receive this season, although it is likely to be around £39m not £60m.

 

As shown above, throughtout this thread you have posted up absurd and false claims along with innaccutae figures. To what end ? Not an accurate appraisal of past events but merely a wish to attack the club as was then.

 

Might I conclude with my own story. Not long after the last war my grandparents sold a small plot of land on the outskirts of our village (as was then). In the mid 80''s a number of houses were built on that and another bit of land. I can only imagine the amount of money this generated for the then owner of that land. What should I do. Visit the grave of my grandparents and stamp my little foot and shriek in self pitying rage at their headstone ? Or should I spend my time claiming that my grandfather defrauded the family and spend the money at races and on fast cars and that is the reason I am not a millionaire now (I''m fairly certain though I can imagine the tale you would be spinning were it to be you) ?

 

[Rolf Harris 31]

[Rolf Harris 31]

11/12 we received 45mil 12/13 we are on course to receive 40mil 13/14 bottom place will give us 60mil then 4years of parachute of 60mill split.

[Bill 1,788]

"11/12 we received 45mil 12/13 we are on course to receive 40mil 13/14 bottom place will give us 60mil then 4years of parachute of 60mill split."

 

Incorrect

 

£6,795,000 is merit money (where we finish) not TV money

 

We do not know if we will be in the Premier League in 2013/14 either, so no money can be assumed there

 

The parachute payments are not £60m, they are £16m the first two years and £8m the next two years - £48m

 

 

[Rolf Harris 31]

[quote user="City1st"]

"11/12 we received 45mil 12/13 we are on course to receive 40mil 13/14 bottom place will give us 60mil then 4years of parachute of 60mill split."

 

Incorrect

 

£6,795,000 is merit money (where we finish) not TV money

 

We do not know if we will be in the Premier League in 2013/14 either, so no money can be assumed there

The parachute payments are not £60m, they are £16m the first two years and £8m the next two years - £48m

 

 

[/quote]No you are wrong like all the time before. In total from the premier league we received 45million at the end of last season at the end of this season we will receive either the same or a less amount, ranging from 39-45milllion. At the end of the 13/14 bottom place would get us 60million.

[Rolf Harris 31]

[quote user="City1st"]

"11/12 we received 45mil 12/13 we are on course to receive 40mil 13/14 bottom place will give us 60mil then 4years of parachute of 60mill split."

 

Incorrect

 

£6,795,000 is merit money (where we finish) not TV money

 

We do not know if we will be in the Premier League in 2013/14 either, so no money can be assumed there

 

The parachute payments are not £60m, they are £16m the first two years and £8m the next two years - £48m

 

 

[/quote]And to be honest you are implying we our to be relegated this season, if we get relegated this season we are entitled to 3 years of parachute payments if we are relegated in the 13/14 season we our entitled to 4 years.

[Bill 1,788]

And to be honest you are implying we our to be relegated this season, if we get relegated this season we are entitled to 3 years of parachute payments if we are relegated in the 13/14 season we our entitled to 4 years.

 

ye gods !

you post up a table yet don''t even bother to read it correctly - or the rest of the contents

so here is the relevant point -

Q5: Will parachute payments change with the new TV deals.

A5: Probably, yes. They have tended to grow as the overall pot has grown. As things stand, relegated clubs get £16m in their first season ‘down’, then £16m the next season, then £8m and £8m for a total of £48m over four seasons.

This is expected to grow when the deals grow but no firm decisions will be made for a while yet.

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2012/06/19/premier-league-tv-rights-qa-including-where-the-money-goes-and-what-next-190601/

 

That should be clear enough, even for you !

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

So there we have it £39m in TV rights as I previously stated

 

 

The £60m is of no relevance as we do not know whether we will be in the PL or not. And that is not me assuming or wishing either way. Merely pointing out something that can be summed up using the words ''eggs, chickens and counting.''

 

ps see post above regarding your innaccuracies about the parachute payments. Curiously the figures quoted come from the same source as you list above.

 

 

 

 

[Rolf Harris 31]

[quote user="City1st"]

So there we have it £39m in TV rights as I previously stated

 

 

The £60m is of no relevance as we do not know whether we will be in the PL or not. And that is not me assuming or wishing either way. Merely pointing out something that can be summed up using the words ''eggs, chickens and counting.''

 

ps see post above regarding your innaccuracies about the parachute payments. Curiously the figures quoted come from the same source as you list above.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]No you''re still wrong

[Bill 1,788]

I am wrong for posting up figures that you quote ! ! !

 

dearie, dear me

 

 

ps please tell us who is correct, you or the PL figures and perhaps show us all where

 

 

[Not Nigel 0]

No, dearie dearie ME,

"however, starting from the beginning ypur original OP was wrong as the up to date figures show -

http://itv.stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html you could and should have checked these BEFORE you started ranting on here"

Well thanks for presenting a source which incorrectly states our capacity at 26034 and claims that our attendances average 102% of capacity, quite how using a source with such a glaring inaccuracy would benefit the thread is beyond me. If it were even legal and practically possible for us to operate at 102% capacity, with us being top of the list of clubs in most need of a ground expansion as a result, that would no nothing but support an argument for expansion and further damage your anti-expansion agenda.

"We could not, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you. No one would lend us the money."

I think it''s a bit bloody rich for you to call people dim when it requires three or possibly even four explanations of something this simple, but I am willing to try again: Nobody at any point in this thread has suggested that the club should have expanded the stadium in 2008 or 2009. I''ve said this several times now and either you work in politics, the media, or as a lawyer, or you really are too stupid to appreciate the fact that my argument is not that we should have built a corner stand between the Barclay and the Jarrold Stand whilst in the Championship or League One but that we shouldn''t have built a hotel in that corner to allow the possibility of affordable expansion should we have needed to expand in the future. Now that we are in the future, we would no doubt have taken the opportunity to build that corner stand had there not been a hotel sitting on it. How many times are you going to ask me the same irrelevant and completely off-topic question about how we would have financed a corner stand in 2008 when I am in fact pointing out that the non-existance of a hotel would have allowed us the opportunity to build a corner stand in 2013 or 2014.

"Incorrect as figures from the Agents Fees Report by the Football League will show (check with Google as they are pdf files)"

I''ve just read the agents report for 2008/2009 and it shows that we spent over half a million pounds on agent fees in our relegation season, the third biggest in the division - my mistake - but still the third most and over half a million nonetheless. You are claiming that we were close to bankruptcy and needed £1m to stay afloat. I am saying that Doncaster & Co grossly mismanaged this club financially and that agents fees and wages for mercenaries played a huge part in that. A willingness to spend over half a million in one season on agents fees whilst on the other hand needing £1m to stay afloat? The hotel money went straight into the hands of greasy greedy agents, whether directly or indirectly. Here are you saying that we desperately needed £1m to pay off a creditor.

"You accept that this is merely a fabrication on your part, as is the consequent speculation about what would have happened had McNally been CEO"

No I do not accept that as merely fabrication but rather a genuine mistaken belief that he had said that, and not one that I have entirely discounted as being potentially true. I''ve attempted to search this forum, feel free to see for yourself how many search results there are for "hotel" or for "holiday inn", it would take me literally an entire day to wade through them to find the reference and discussion that I believe I have once seen on this board in relation to that statement.

"This has been the key point for you to hang all the rest of your worthless guff upon"

Actually it is you who is persevering with attempting to extract guffs from my asshole and in the process you have spun an entirely legitimate thread about healthy Premier League attendances into one in which you simply wish to further your anti-expansion agenda despite the fact that nobody actually gives a shiny sh*t about what you have to say on the subject. By continuing to converse with me you are providing yourself with a platform from which you secretly hope somebody, somewhere, will be watching and reading, adding a small smidgeon of importance to your otherwise futile existence and a job in which nobody listens to a word that you say, on anything.

"You further seem unable to grasp the difference between lease and sale"

That''s interesting because I''ve worked in property for almost a decade and live in a leasehold property. Pure semantics. You sell a lease, you sell land. Both are a sale.

"Insulting to other fans"

I''m sure that other fans are extremely grateful that you have chosen to become insulted on their behalf, it saves them the time required to express the hurt and anguish that my words have caused them and instead allows them to channel their anger into more productive things, like doing the washing up, or changing the channel on the TV.

"Similarly you post up rubbish about us reciving £60m of Sky money"

Again, you know precisely what I meant. Next season, should we stay up, would be worth £60m to us. I''m sure that you could appreciate, what with you having such in-depth property development knowledge and experience, that should there not have been a hotel in that corner - which there is - we wouldn''t exactly be able to build on it tomorrow. If the club decided tomorrow to expand the stadium they would need to employ architects to draw plans, gain planning and building regulations approvals, probably a process which would take months of consultation, and the process from decision to the first mound of earth being excavated would take us well into next season, probably into the season after that. You know that of course, you are just lonely and want to argue every point, because you know that I''m the only person listening to you and your boring marriage and unrewarding job isn''t mentally stimulating enough.

"Not long after the last war my grandparents"

Please, spare me the life story.

"I can imagine the tale you would be spinning were it to be you"

That''s bloody rich, Alistair.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="singupcarrowroad"]No I''ve attempted to search this forum, feel free to see for yourself how many search results there are for "hotel" or for "holiday inn", it would take me literally an entire day to wade through them to find the reference and discussion that I believe I have once seen on this board in relation to that statement.[/quote]

 

Big mistake buddy. Claims made on this forum are even more unreliable than Wiki. I was interested in this because I''d never heard it or read it. Not because I didn''t believe you. I personally doubt McNally had said it. I also doubt whether a corner infil there would ever have been viable. The cost per seat would be huge. The realistic and I believe the only way being considered is a rebuild of the main stand.

 

 

[Not Nigel 0]

City1st,

If being the person who gets the final word is the way in which you judge yourself to have achieved ''victory'' in your prolonged assault, then I wish it to be known that I will grant you your ''victory'' by not replying to your response. Just so long as you know that I have no desire to play your game, and therefore certainly don''t consider it to be a ''defeat''.

There is a big Alistair Campbell sized hole to be filled in the Labour Party, by the way, he went part-time around the time of the Hutton inquiry. You should really consider putting yourself forward to assist the Miliband election campaign.

[Not Nigel 0]

Nutty Nigel,

There are three very establish long-standing members of the forum stating that they hadn''t heard that claim, so I duly retract it. I genuinely believed that McNally had said that though, and am not prepared to accept City1st''s claim that I purposely fabricated it to further an argument.

There is a big difference between being wrong and being a liar. I will accept being wrong.

As for whether the corner infill would have been viable, I have no idea. I''ve seen some pretty convincing arguments on here on the past which suggest that the cost per seat would be massive, but we managed to build the other three didn''t we? Due to the size of the Barclay and the Jarrold it would also have had the potential to have been a very large corner (the Snakepit and whatever the other one is called were severely restricted in size by the height of the City stand).

As for a rebuild of the main stand.... I''m all for it. Why not? It would cause inconvenience to those who currently sit in that stand for a year or so, but I''m sure that there are ways to compensate them. I believe I''m correct in saying that we actually own the road behind stand? If that is the case then it could be quite some stand.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

I''m still not saying you''re wrong buddy. I just hadn''t seen or heard the quote. But it''s a bit pointless looking for anything on here because unless it refers to a direct link then it''s a posters view.

 

I think a corner infill there would be more expensive not just because of the nature of not building in a straight line but also because I assume it would have to incorporate access for the emergency services.

 

I think an impressive new main stand is the answer but I do have concerns. I think it''s more likely than unlikely that we will be relegated at some point during the next few seasons. That''s not being defeatist just an acceptance of where we are in the bigger picture. Taking money away from the football team would make that more likely. Fresh debt could make any relegation more of a catastrophe. It''s a gamble that if we were custodians of the club we''d also not be too keen to take.

 

 

[Not Nigel 0]

Yes it is certainly a conundrum Nigel, I guess we just have to trust McNally & Co''s judgement and hope for the best.

It goes without saying that we need to stay up this year, and probably again next year, for his stadium expansion plans to become viable and a reality, one year at a time.... let''s just stay up first and I''m sure expansion will become a hot topic again.

Cheers.

[Bill 1,788]

oh yes, silly old me

 

quoting from official sources

 

still well done for trying

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh, and thanks for reading, most others don''t

 

 

[Monty13 2,231]

I was literally commenting on those words.

i.e.. The inaccuracy of your spelling while making a point about accuracy.

Come on City1st, what happened to the light hearted version of you before you went away!?