New boy wants to share his playground!

[Real Sharapova]

Who really cares about seat colours - when people are sitting down you can't see the feckers anyway.

 

[Lako42]

first time around i was against it ..this time as I know what deep shit we are in i would welcome the merge .

but we arnt in deep shit, as he said he's happy with the club finances.

im against this for many reasons that i cant be arsed to go into. mainly emotional and that is purley because i support leicester city for emotional reasons and not for financial reasons. i have grown up with this club having limited money and being an underdog that has done better without money than with, and that is why i love the club. I dont need Leicester to be financially superior due to a groundshare. i need leicester city to be competitive on a budget, thats the excitment for me. Leicesters ground is Leicesters ground, the lineker, walsh, birch banners that drape around that stadium are their because its our stadium and because thats who we are. a club that plays in its own ground because one day we will be back where we belong and money raised off a groundshare will be forgoten.

i urge leicester to keep what bit of individualism and culture that is left. dont dilute it by halfing what we have, lets build on what weve got and become a club that has a nationally renowned character again.

 

[MKFox]

We saw a few tigers fans carrying their own green cushions to their game last saturday....bless....

 

[fcukcov]

We saw a few tigers fans carrying their own green cushions to their game last saturday....bless....

thats because they had been to a roasting party the night before....

 

[leicester_til_i_die]

In all honesty not that bothered by it, it makes sense, if they do end up building a new stadium/developing what they have, it will add more competion to the walkers non match day functions, which we could do with out.

Sharing a ground works for many other clubs so it will work for us.

We sold our individuality when we moved from filbert street IMO, there wasn't a ground like it, now we have a generic ground that most clubs when they move grounds have just different colour and different size. Take the blue and leicester stuff away and it's same as Southamptons, Middlesboro, Derby and many others.

 

[bocadillo]

but we arnt in deep shit, as he said he's happy with the club finances.

im against this for many reasons that i cant be arsed to go into. mainly emotional and that is purley because i support leicester city for emotional reasons and not for financial reasons. i have grown up with this club having limited money and being an underdog that has done better without money than with, and that is why i love the club. I dont need Leicester to be financially superior due to a groundshare. i need leicester city to be competitive on a budget, thats the excitment for me. Leicesters ground is Leicesters ground, the lineker, walsh, birch banners that drape around that stadium are their because its our stadium and because thats who we are. a club that plays in its own ground because one day we will be back where we belong and money raised off a groundshare will be forgoten.

i urge leicester to keep what bit of individualism and culture that is left. dont dilute it by halfing what we have, lets build on what weve got and become a club that has a nationally renowned character again.

I couldn't have put it better myself. To think otherwise is to be like a Chelsea fan.

 

[webmaster]

Who really cares about seat colours - when people are sitting down you can't see the feckers anyway.

And we had red and orange seats at Filbert Street, no one ever complained about them!

 

[1966]

I realise their are many issues that need consideration when deciding on an idea like this but in reality I think the issues boil down to one thing.

Which option will provide us with the most money on a consistent log term basis, because unless you can compete financially off the pitch you cannot compete on it.

 

[Lako42]

That is certainly not true. are you saying that martin oneil was able to compete financially when he was incharge.
i remember about 10 years ago when everyone was beggining to moan about the influence that money has in the game and that a football club wasnt about money. well now these same fans are the ones trying to sell out their own club for some short sighted 8 million quid. how the tables turn and how some people forget about the important things and why we support our team in the first place.

No thanks

 

[Leesoh]

Sharing a ground works for many other clubs so it will work for us.

Barring Wigan (where both the football and the rugby clubs are owned by the same bloke), other rugby clubs rent from the football clubs, they don't share in the way proposed here.

 

[Chuck T Masala]

I have some sympathy with the emotial view, the stadium is the home of Leicester City FC, not as spiritually entrenched as Filbo yet, but that will come.

However, despite what we think personally about the commercial aspects within football, the club does need to ensure that we maintain long term financial security. I never want our club to be in Administration again.

Looking at it dispassionatly, football clubs are one of the very few organisations that have a HQ site that is only used for one afternoon every fortnight? Its a bit of liability at the moment, but could become an asset. (I know its used most days for something, but I mean Primary purpose etc).

I'd rather we didnt have to do it, but I can live with it if we get real tangible and usable benefit.

We could also sign all the players from both sides on dual contracts, then when we play Cov again we can bring in Tuilagi to mark Dennis Wise. :icon_lol:

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

I have some sympathy with the emotial view, the stadium is the home of Leicester City FC, not as spiritually entrenched as Filbo yet, but that will come.

However, despite what we think personally about the commercial aspects within football, the club does need to ensure that we maintain long term financial security. I never want our club to be in Administration again.

Looking at it dispassionatly, football clubs are one of the very few organisations that have a HQ site that is only used for one afternoon every fortnight? Its a bit of liability at the moment, but could become an asset. (I know its used most days for something, but I mean Primary purpose etc).

I'd rather we didnt have to do it, but I can live with it if we get real tangible and usable benefit.

We could also sign all the players from both sides on dual contracts, then when we play Cov again we can bring in Tuilagi to mark Dennis Wise. :icon_lol:

Great post, Chuck, especially the bit concerning Dennis Wise :icon_bigg

 

[SilverFox]

So we are back to this again!

I am not going to dig up the old posts again, but needless to say this is simply a quick fix solution. The new chairman has said that the books look okay, so we are in no danger of going under. The only problem is that we want more money to strengthen now in the short term.

This is good, but lacks the long term vision. Once the ground belongs to both clubs that will be it. There is no going back!

If we hang in there and slowly grow again following our rocky financial patch, we will get there on our own, with our own ground, as our own masters, with no outside conflicting interests or sharing of revenue generated by the stadium. It WILL take longer to get there, and we may be in this league FOR LONGER, but when we are stable and competative again it will be worth it.

But I guess the new chairman has a reputation for this type of thing...fast food and quick fixes...


NEITHER ARE GOOD FOR YOU IN THE LONG TERM!

 

[1966]

As the last 3-4 years of the Deloitte and Touche financial league table shows the clubs with the most money nearly always finish higher than those without.

IMO all football clubs realise this and are constantly trying to raise new finance to either improve their position or simply survive at their current level.

Without embracing an idea like this I fear that we will not only push promotion to an extremely distant possibility but we will also condem ourselves to perpetual mid table championship mediocrity at best.

 

[bocadillo]

As the last 3-4 years of the Deloitte and Touche financial league table shows the clubs with the most money nearly always finish higher than those without.

IMO all football clubs realise this and are constantly trying to raise new finance to either improve their position or simply survive at their current level.

Without embracing an idea like this I fear that we will not only push promotion to an extremely distant possibility but we will also condem ourselves to perpetual mid table championship mediocrity at best.

That is not to say though that a ground-share is the only or best way of obtaining the money.

 

[Real Sharapova]

As the last 3-4 years of the Deloitte and Touche financial league table shows the clubs with the most money nearly always finish higher than those without.

IMO all football clubs realise this and are constantly trying to raise new finance to either improve their position or simply survive at their current level.

Without embracing an idea like this I fear that we will not only push promotion to an extremely distant possibility but we will also condem ourselves to perpetual mid table championship mediocrity at best.

You are 100% right I'm afraid. At the moment we are not even covering the interest on the Teacher's hire purchase on the ground, so the liability is increasing year on year. Also, as I have mentioned earlier, if the Tiggers do redevelop their ground they are likely to take a substantial amount of the conference and other non-match day income we generate. I would prefer us if possible to go it alone, but I don't think that is financially sustainable in the long term. Also, it is not just about the upfront payment the Tiggers would pay us, for me the most important element is the halving of much of our fixed expenditure.

 

[SilverFox]

You are 100% right I'm afraid. At the moment we are not even covering the interest on the Teacher's hire purchase on the ground, so the liability is increasing year on year. Also, as I have mentioned earlier, if the Tiggers do redevelop their ground they are likely to take a substantial amount of the conference and other non-match day income we generate. I would prefer us if possible to go it alone, but I don't think that is financially sustainable in the long term. Also, it is not just about the upfront payment the Tiggers would pay us, for me the most important element is the halving of much of our fixed expenditure.

Please god noooooo! Not the tiggers:icon_roll :icon_lol:

 

[SilverFox]

That is not to say though that a ground-share is the only or best way of obtaining the money.

Thats because it is just a quick fix.

As I said of our new chairman - fast food and quick fixes, can anyone see the pattern...neither are good for you (sorry for repeating myself)

 

[Real Sharapova]

Please god noooooo! Not the tiggers:icon_roll :icon_lol:

Preferable to the tigers, methinks.

 

[bocadillo]

... if the Tiggers do redevelop their ground they are likely to take a substantial amount of the conference and other non-match day income we generate.

That would only be relevant if the need for conferencing and other facilities was finite and fully met. Leicester already has other such facilities which compete with those of the Walkers; why should one more make such a horrendous difference.

Hotels offer conferencing facilities but nobody has ever suggested the need to equip the Stadium with beds in order to compete. There are conference facilities out at Oadby so why didn't we head off that development by having horses running around the perimeter of the pitch.

So the rugby lot might get some improved facilities. What's wrong wit a bit of competition in what seems to be a developing market?