Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:03 am  

Danger_mouse wrote:

For clarity, perhaps there should have been a comma between 'slur' and 'and' - I wasn't accusing HJ of making the slur in my direction. I was just pointing out that I'll not have posted for weeks and then HJ will say something like 'cue DM' as if I'd been hunched over my keyboard waiting for the slightest opportunity to post. It's like you're more obsessed with me than I am with the Shay. I think you need that holiday, HJ - send me a postcard!

Off to France Sunday, don't expect a post card.
Would have preferred a win last night tho,

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:23 am  

Fax4Life wrote:

Er this was a question about the RENT not Reactiv Group trying to purchase the ground, again Halifax RLFC have never bad mouthed the football club it is CMBC they have a grievance with, put the boot on the other foot and how would town fans feel about paying more???

Thanks for the clarification, but I'm more confused. What do you expect the Town BOD to say?

Both clubs signed a rental contract. One club payed it, one club (whatever the reasons) refused to. Are you expecting the club that did pay to come out with statements of support for the one that didn't? The refusal to pay inflated the costs of running the stadium, giving CMBC more of a reason to sell it, putting the home of the football club in jeopardy - why would they support that stance?

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:26 am  

halifaxjohn wrote:

Off to France Sunday, don't expect a post card.
Would have preferred a win last night tho,

A PM of "glad you're not here" will do!

I'll be rooting for you on Sunday.

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:20 pm  

Surely a fixed cost per game per stand open should be applied to a council owned facility for its joint tenants, make the tariff public and crack on guys.

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:30 pm  

Bubba wrote:

Did you read the article on theshay.org? Pitch usage the same. Cant compare this seasons football or rugby as neither seasons are yet completed.

I am not even sure your club are wanting to pay the same as Town any with regards rent given that Steele keeps coming out with the ridiculous line "FCHT use the pitch more than us". Accept it. You use a greater amount of the facilities and therefore, quite rightly, pay more rent.

This argument falls flat when you start analysing how much each club costs CMBC to run the stadium such as because Town play football the grass has to be cut much shorter so consequently more regular and stewarding for football is tighter due to the threat of trouble etc.. Why is it ridiculous to say Town use the pitch more so should pay more???
Again to stop all this nonsense charge both the bl**dy same, I also ask again would Town fans be happy if this situation was the other way around???
I think not, in fact I know not!

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Thu Sep 18, 2014 9:55 am  

Town's u19s are playing at shay this season,they have used Brighouse in past.

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Thu Sep 18, 2014 10:42 am  

Fax4Life wrote:

This argument falls flat when you start analysing how much each club costs CMBC to run the stadium such as because Town play football the grass has to be cut much shorter so consequently more regular and stewarding for football is tighter due to the threat of trouble etc.. Why is it ridiculous to say Town use the pitch more so should pay more???
Again to stop all this nonsense charge both the bl**dy same, I also ask again would Town fans be happy if this situation was the other way around???
I think not, in fact I know not!

As usual, a lack of understanding. Groundstaff are required all year round to maintain the pitch. Whether the grass needs cutting twice a week or four times a week is irrelevant - fulltime groundstaff are still required. The football club also pays for their stewarding so thats irrelevant to this debate.

And I am not surprised you want both clubs to be charged the same because it would clearly work in HRLFC favour. I would accuse you of being deliberately daft but I just think you are blinkered.

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:56 am  

The logical way would be to split the payments down to a Pay per Play for the match day facilities and the another rent payment for the additional facilities ( offices etc. ).
But it's the local government so doubt there will be any logic involved.

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:31 pm  

Norman Bates wrote:

The logical way would be to split the payments down to a Pay per Play for the match day facilities and the another rent payment for the additional facilities ( offices etc. ).
But it's the local government so doubt there will be any logic involved.

Isnt that pretty much what happens now? Similar amount of games yet Fax have more facilities hence the more rent that they pay

Re: Fax TV - The a Directors Speak : Thu Sep 18, 2014 7:08 pm  

Couldn't we just agree to disagree, put this thing to bed, let the clubs sort it out, let the Luddites return to their forum and leave us in peace?
We will never agree, let it go.