The grass doesn't only grow during football season, and the roof doesn't only leak when City are at home, the girders don't paint themselves during football season etc etc etc. Can you give an explanation why the SMC have to pay all FC's police and stewarding bills ? And the huge rate bill for the place doesn't evaporate into thin air because Fc only use it for 7 months either. The lease was drawn up by Sir Adam before he bought Fc and the terms are heavily stacked in favour of the rugby. Not as many as there used to be, thanks to to the Allams, which is what Pearson is whinging about, but they still come out it at the moment paying next to **** all.
"Big Log" My love is in league with the freeway Its passion will ride, as the cities fly by And the taillights dissolve, in the coming of night And the questions in thousands take flight My love is the miles and the waiting The eyes that just stare, and the glance at the clock And the secret that burns, and the pain that won't stop And its fuel is the years Leading me on – leading me down the road Driving beyond – driving me down the road My love is exceeding the limit Red-eyed and fevered with the hum of the miles Distance and longing, my thoughts do collide Should I rest for a while at the side Your love is cradled in knowing Eyes in the mirror, still expecting they'll come Sensing too well when the journey is done There is no turning back – no There is no turning back – on the run My love is in league with the freeway Oh the freeway, and the coming of night-time My love My love is in league with the freeway.
I'm not the one confusing things, but you seem to be agreeing that they should pay their way, and City shouldn't subsidise them. Given that the SMC makes a loss, it seems clear that the rl club are going to have to pay more. If that's unaffordable for them, why is that City's problem, anymore than any other community group not being able to afford it is?
I'd sell them, follow them on Facebook then ban them straight away if they did have either of those in pictures and resell their seats for £1 to kids instead.
I'm agreeing with nothing of the sort. The SMC only makes a loss because of the way City currently structure our accounts.
I don't think you know what you're arguing about, and just doing so for the sake of it. I can't be arsed with that sort of tedium, so I'll leave you to it.
I'm suggesting that the rent they currently pay is fine and suggesting they pay more than they can afford (essentially forcing them out) is counter-productive. Bye.
The SMC pay the stadium costs, because they're the company who manage the stadium. They pay the cost for the staging of all games, of which roughly a third are FC games and two-thirds are our games. At the moment, FC pay roughly a third of the costs and we pay two-thirds, which is right, nobody is subsiding anyone, nor should they.
The amount of rent they pay is structured around the size of crowds they attract. What would you do in FC's position ?
In your opinion. Unfortunately the facts are a little different. Hence the talks they are having at the moment.
How much rent do we pay to the Council for the privilege of playing at the ground out of interest? Perhaps that's something else I have no clue about.
The rates alone are over £2m a year. Our police bill is higher then Arsenals. Fc don't get a police bill.
Wasn't the original arrangement based on paying a percentage, quite a high one, of the ticket sales above the average of the season before they moved into the KC? Our crowds went up far more than FC's and we were playIng more games so were paying far more for most of the seasons since the KC opened.
Most recent article I can find suggested we paid about 850 pound a year in 2010/11 to the Council, so I'm just curious about where the 2m came from. Is it in our accounts somewhere?
